PDA

View Full Version : Jaguar Permission Vulnerabilities Update: Apple may not prov...


MacBytes
Oct 29, 2003, 03:14 PM
Category: Mac OS X
Link: Jaguar Permission Vulnerabilities Update: Apple may not provide Jaguar update to patch holes. (http://news.com.com/2100-7355_3-5098688.html?tag=nefd_top)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

latergator116
Oct 29, 2003, 03:40 PM
Cheap B*******. Shame on Apple.

Mudbug
Oct 29, 2003, 04:19 PM
I think a key part of the title of this link is "may not" - it's kinda speculative, and Apple has a rather good track record of providing patches in a timely fashion, even to obsolete items when required - see the iPod 1.3.1 updater for Gen 1 & 2 iPods)

JereIC
Oct 29, 2003, 04:24 PM
I'm sorry, I know Apple can't support every version of Mac OS with security updates, but I think there are a large number of servicable Macs out there that can't run Panther (such as the Wall Street behind me), and have been left exposed by this. If Apple can patch these critical flaws in Jaguar, there's no reason for it not to; it can still sell Panther on its cool new features alone.

latergator116
Oct 29, 2003, 04:29 PM
I think a key part of the title of this link is "may not" - it's kinda speculative, and Apple has a rather good track record of providing patches in a timely fashion, even to obsolete items when required - see the iPod 1.3.1 updater for Gen 1 & 2 iPods)

Well, I hope that this ISNT true. That waould be very disapointing

1macker1
Oct 29, 2003, 04:43 PM
I thought they just go sued for not supplying proper support for OS 9. How can you not provide support for your own OS.

fraeone
Oct 29, 2003, 04:53 PM
Nowhere in the article does it say that Apple has commented on the situation at all. The guy who published the vulnerabilities said he thought Apple wouldn't support it.

I'm sure Apple will offer some patches.

1macker1
Oct 29, 2003, 04:57 PM
"In my initial conversations with them, they said they weren't going to fix 10.2, but I wouldn't be surprised if they change that," he said

He doesn't sound to sure of what apple is going to do.

ALoLA
Oct 29, 2003, 06:53 PM
Longhorn pre-beta preview. Articles on obscure, difficult to exploit security issues with Jaguar and Panther. And now this speculative article. The FUD machine is working overtime trying to squash Apple's momentum from the G5, iPods, Powerbooks, iTunes, iBooks, and Panther. Instead of speculating, why doesn't this hack report on the multitude of security issues that are known and have not been addressed by Micros**t. Oh wait... is it because @stake was providing the info? It figures that Bill's bootlickers would be involved in this... I wonder why the DOJ turns a blind eye to this "influence"? :mad:

Lancetx
Oct 29, 2003, 06:54 PM
This is awfully speculative for them to even be reporting anything yet at this point. They specifically say that Apple doesn't intend to ever patch older versions of OS X, yet they have no official comment from Apple on this at all. So how do they know this?!? That's quite a bold statement to be making when you've not received any kind of official comment from Apple at all on it don't you think?

They seem awfully eager to throw mud Apple's way on this though, but coming from @Stake which just had the Microsoft influenced Dan Geer firing fiasco recently, this isn't a surprise. This is rather shotty journalism to say the least if you ask me. Sounds like CNET/ZDNET and @Stake has an agenda against Apple...

Giaguara
Oct 29, 2003, 07:04 PM
That article was dumb.

What vulerabilities? If there were some, why didn;t me mention which ones?

To whom had he talked with apple about it?

Or he simply got a Dell laptop as a prize for wrting that article. :rolleyes:

MacBandit
Oct 30, 2003, 12:56 AM
Does anyone here realize that the security issue is with permissions and that the person breaching the security actually has to be using your computer. This isn't a huge gaping hole that a train could waltz through over the internet like the security holes in XP.

Lancetx
Oct 31, 2003, 12:08 PM
Obviously it was all just (wishful?) speculation afterall on the part of @Stake, CNET, et all, that Apple wasn't going to fix these issues...

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/31/jaguarfix/index.php

MacBandit
Oct 31, 2003, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Lancetx
Obviously it was all just (wishful?) speculation afterall on the part of @Stake, CNET, et all, that Apple wasn't going to fix these issues...

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/31/jaguarfix/index.php

People have really been trying hard lately to counter Apple good publicity. The true Wintelites have been coming out of the wood work and bashing Apple for problems that don't exist. I would expect Apple to still fix security flaws in OS9 if they existed.

Rower_CPU
Oct 31, 2003, 01:07 PM
Yeah, someone on our campus security mailing list posted the CNET article that Apple wasn't patching Jaguar and I quickly pointed out that it was FUD until Apple commented.

I can't wait to post this announcement once it gets posted somewhere "neutral".;)