Does anyone actually know someone whose Mac has been infected by Leap.A? There haven’t been very many sightings of it in the wild.
The media coverage for this event has been out of all proportion to the hazard posed by the malware itself; reports in the daily newspapers, on the TV news. But look closely, and there are two different stories being reported.
The Mac community has spent such a long time talking up the better security in OS X that when something like this comes along - no matter how harmless it turns out to be - the mainstream media is going to bite back hard.
Most news editors (the people in news organisations whose job it is to decide which stories are the most important ones) have very little interest in computer security at the best of times. They certainly know that their readers, viewers or listeners aren’t going to be interested in the finer details of file permissions.
What does grab the attention of a typical news editor is when one of the reporters rushes in saying: “Hey, you know all those smug Mac users? Turns out there is a virus that can hit their machines after all. It’s all over the net, look!”
That’s when something that, technically speaking, doesn’t warrant coverage in anything other than Mac news sites and discussion forums gets coverage from major media outlets. They know their audiences don’t care about the geeky details, so they leave them out or gloss over them.
Which is how we get two kinds of article being published. The first kind is technically accurate, technically detailed, and covers exactly what happens when you get Leap.A on your machine, the circumstances in which that might happen, and how you can deal with it.
The second kind is something along the lines of “Smug Mac users get what’s coming to them.” It’s not an attempt to explain the technicalities, it’s just what news editors see as the more important angle. I’m not condoning nor defending that kind of reporting, merely explaining how it happens.