Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Planning New Rapid Security Responses for iPhone, iPad, and Mac to Address Website Loading Issue

frou said:
I at least give them props for not reusing the same version for the fixed fix. Some outfits do that and it's idiotic
Click to expand...
Good grief, yes. This sort of thing drives me bonkers. I'm not going to name names, but there are at least eight distinct versions of a particular piece of software that are all versioned "0.99". The developer didn't want to go to "1.0" while there were still known bugs, but apparently has a dislike for "0.100" and higher...
 
  • Like
Reactions: frou and TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
I am experiencing a battery drain issue since this update on iPhone 14 Plus. The phone is just a few months old and it used ¼ of the battery after the update (in 3 hours) without me really using it.
 
msackey said:
I'm thinking because WebKit is probably not just used by Safari (the program) on macOS but is integral to other parts of its software, perhaps maybe even programs like Map? Not sure, but I doubt that WebKit is only used by Safari on macOS
Click to expand...
Safari for Monterey released the same day has the full WebKit update.

historically, Safari and system WebKit have always been updated in tandem with Safari updates
 
Oh dear, I was having a problem with a website but Firefox also doesn’t load… I wonder if it’s related.
 
I've been a bit surprised that a later fixed update wasn't provided yesterday. In any case, this has given me the opportunity to try out the remove RSR update which I'm currently doing. I wasn't going to do that but yesterday I was having problems with an ActiveSync (Exchange) calendar, a problem I've never had before so I decided to uninstall the RSR. It may well be unrelated though. Today, I'm uninstalling RSR from my iPad and Mac just to see how it works.
 
I don’t understand why it was necessary to change the user agent to reflect the RSR version. Seems like unnecessary information leakage.
 
cuiver said:
Why just not making the Safari updatable via the AppStore? That would make things much simpler...
Click to expand...

Because companies learned the wrong lesson from Microsoft in the 90s about integrating Internet Explorer deeply into the operating system.
 
lartola said:
The issue, for those who did get it, has nothing to do with meta, though. It’s just with Apple’s own Safari browser.
Click to expand...

It does have a little to do with Meta, as they appear to be aggressively blocking access to their sites with any browser not specifically listed as approved. Most websites don’t do that.
 
If we don't get the rapid release (b) this week they might as well wait until 16.6 as it will be out 24th or 25th
 
CarAnalogy said:
It does have a little to do with Meta, as they appear to be aggressively blocking access to their sites with any browser not specifically listed as approved. Most websites don’t do that.
Click to expand...

But other websites were failing to load, not just meta’s. And only for those who installed the rapid security response on monday before Apple pulled it, not for anyone else (meaning they do indeed have Safari listed as an approved browser).
 
lartola said:
But other websites were failing to load, not just meta’s. And only for those who installed the rapid security response on monday before Apple pulled it, not for anyone else (meaning they do indeed have Safari listed as an approved browser).
Click to expand...

I was somewhat wrong in saying not a lot of websites do it. Apparently a lot of websites do. Not like the old days where they just stuck a “best viewed in Netscape Navigator” button on the page and called it a day. Now user agent checking is one of the million other bits of data every website wants to (mis)use.

Both parties were wrong. Apple should not have included the RSR letter in the user agent string, which they have now removed in the re-released update. And website platforms should not be so aggressively reacting to the slightest change in the expected user agent.

It wasn’t just that the number was incremented as usual; the format was changed slightly. That should not have caused any website to have an issue but apparently it did.

Unless there’s something we don’t know and the user agent is just coincidental and it was something else entirely. The user agent is the popular working theory. But Apple won’t say.
 
CarAnalogy said:
I was somewhat wrong in saying not a lot of websites do it. Apparently a lot of websites do. Not like the old days where they just stuck a “best viewed in Netscape Navigator” button on the page and called it a day. Now user agent checking is one of the million other bits of data every website wants to (mis)use.

Both parties were wrong. Apple should not have included the RSR letter in the user agent string, which they have now removed in the re-released update. And website platforms should not be so aggressively reacting to the slightest change in the expected user agent.

It wasn’t just that the number was incremented as usual; the format was changed slightly. That should not have caused any website to have an issue but apparently it did.

Unless there’s something we don’t know and the user agent is just coincidental and it was something else entirely. The user agent is the popular working theory. But Apple won’t say.
Click to expand...

They didn’t remove the letter, they just changed it from (a) to (c).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back