Security Update 2005-001 for Mac OS X

[goron]

They'd use a slightly different numbering scheme, calling this update 2005-0000001 instead.

Hey, this is M$ and we're almost in Feb. This update would have to be something like 2005-0003741.

 

[sorryiwasdreami]

No problems since installing the security update.

 

[aswitcher]

No problems at this end.

 

[DPazdanISU]

restarting now....kabooom!

 

[Mechcozmo]

I don't feel more secure with these security updates, it makes me just wonder how many more their will be. Before any security updates I assumed that there were no holes. The more updates the more holes I realized were there and it makes me wonder if there have been this many how many more are there? Not saying I am not more secure but it does make me think about it.

There will always be em. There are relatively few holes in the OS-- most updates are for potential holes or for weird theoretical exploits. Patch and relax knowing Apple is working hard on making Antivirus software for the Mac STAY unneeded.

 

[BWhaler]

My system feels snappier and more responsive.

 

[maya]

[*]Number of people who usually post messages like this after any sort of update comes flying through the Software Update tubes.

And you just happen to be one more to add to it all.

 

[Zaty]

Anyone noticed this?

Apparently, Apple has changed certains permissions, Disk Utility now displays the following text:

We are using a special uid for the file or directory ./private/var/at/jobs. New uid is 1
We are using a special uid for the file or directory ./private/var/at/spool. New uid is 1

 

[AmigoMac]

Almost ready ... to be updated (if I come back)
My girl is impressed about the uptime...

Edit: I did survive... Nothing special by now. At least I prefer the Kernel Panic warning than the BSoD.

 

[Nermal]

Apparently, Apple has changed certains permissions, Disk Utility now displays the following text:

We are using a special uid for the file or directory ./private/var/at/jobs. New uid is 1
We are using a special uid for the file or directory ./private/var/at/spool. New uid is 1

According to the release notes, at is one of the things that is updated. So this permission change makes sense.

Component: at commands
Available for: Mac OS X v10.3.7, Mac OS X Server v10.3.7
CVE-ID: CAN-2005-0125
Impact: Updates the "at" commands to address a local privilege escalation vulnerability

 

[virividox]

dl and installed so far so good "

 

[nagromme]

I too am curious whether any of this addresses that recent vulnerability that was reported to various places--but NOT reported to Apple until months later. I think it was C-Net that had the article?

It sounded pretty obscure, but I'm curious.

 

[Windowlicker]

Safari crashed on me after the update.
I hope it was random.

Life is random.

 

[24C]

I too am curious whether any of this addresses that recent vulnerability that was reported to various places--but NOT reported to Apple until months later. I think it was C-Net that had the article?

It sounded pretty obscure, but I'm curious.

I didn't see any credits for that wasn't it, "CIO group"...you know, that well known bunch of security analysts that got a plug on CNET the other day

PS It wasn't CIO

 

[joephish]

Mail.app is completely screwed for me now :-(

Not anything to do with preferences or anything - tried creating a new account and launching Mail.app cleanly from that and it still crashes on startup. The log says that the thread which crashes is doing security stuff to do with looking up passwords...

Looks like it's webmail for me until they fix it!

 

[johnnyjibbs]

I never understand why so many rate negative for security updates. It just shows Apple is keeping on top of things. There are always hackers out there that are trying to find holes in things, even something pretty safe and stable and relatively little used (in terms of the computer community at large) as Mac OS X.

I too like the new numbering system - it fits better with us Brits that get confused by the American date system!

 

[24C]

Mail.app is completely screwed for me now :-(

No probs here with Mail.app Can Send & Receive just fine. Prefs OK, guess you're just unlucky.

 

[ioinc]

hmmm....

It's good to know that the general consensus is that when apple puts out a security update (or lots of security updates) it is a good thing, and we are all glad that apple is keeping up with it, but if M$ puts out too many updates they are idiots.

Strange that everybody wants to hold M$ to the standard of putting out software that requires no updates, but apparently we are thrilled when apple puts out software that needs updates.

 

[Platform]

How important is antivirus on mac's heard that many users don't have but is it anyuse since Virex is given with .mac or is that just to prevent transfering to your PC freinds

 

[ASP272]

The only quirk I had was my DSL connection was unavailable (and unable to load any pages -- including 'launchmodem') until another restart.

That's because it's DSL. For real broadband, get Cable.

No problems here, just sweet Panther bliss!

 

[LinuxGigolo]

Interesting numbering scheme-- if Microsoft did the same think they'd in in the 70s by May....

Microsoft actually does use a scheme like this.. for their security bulletins which are released with the patches. The patches get 6 digit numbers in sequential order while the accompanying security bulletin is like MSYY-###. For example, the patch originally released to prevent something like Blaster from happening (which was released well before Blaster was created.. even though people didn't use it) was 824146 w/ accompanying security bulletin MS03-039. They are very consistent with this, so when I saw apple go to 2005-001, the first thing I thought was.. wow.. Apple's doing it the familiar Microsoft way...kudos.

 

[Palad1]

Still works here.

same for me, but thanks to putty

ssh bender.my-home.com
sudo softwareupdate -i -a 
sudo reboot

I feel safer now, and safari is liek, 100000 times faster now!!!!1

 

[Palad1]

Life is random.

Where did the computer go?

 

[macridah]

Any guesses on what number 2005-??? will be by the end of the year? What will they do for 10.3 updates and the new 10.4?

 

[Palad1]

Any guesses on what number 2005-??? will be by the end of the year? What will they do for 10.3 updates and the new 10.4?

My guess is that we won't see more than seven updates this year with this new naming scheme. It's obvious that after 2005-001, apple will only be able to release
2005-010
2005-011
2005-100
2005-101
2005-110
2005-111

before running out of digits!