Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Mar 2011 23:28 UTC, submitted by gogothebee
Privacy, Security, Encryption "After successful attacks on Safari and Internet Explorer 8 on Wednesday, the second day of Pwn2Own saw the iPhone 4 and then the BlackBerry Torch 9800 successfully exploited. The annual security competition allows researchers to win any systems that they successfully compromise, and also awards them cash rewards if those security flaws are still present in the latest version of the software."
Order by: Score:
No Geohot eh?
by umccullough on Fri 11th Mar 2011 23:32 UTC
umccullough
Member since:
2006-01-26

Too bad - I figured George Hotz would show up for the windows phone hack - he needs the money for his legal defense ;)

Reply Score: 3

Webkit the new IE6 ?
by dvhh on Sat 12th Mar 2011 13:56 UTC
dvhh
Member since:
2006-03-20

With everybody converging to Webkit based browser and probably creating their own working branch. We should see a lot of exploitable browser in the wild.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Webkit the new IE6 ?
by 1c3d0g on Sat 12th Mar 2011 19:34 UTC in reply to "Webkit the new IE6 ?"
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Not really. With a constant focus on security, implementing new security-related features (sandboxing etc.) and quick patching, a Webkit-based browser can stay quite secure. Google Chrome is an excellent example of this.

Nothing is infallible, but if a company stays vigilant, it can stay on top of most threats coming its way.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Webkit the new IE6 ?
by dvhh on Mon 14th Mar 2011 09:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Webkit the new IE6 ?"
dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

most of the company are usually not vigilant enough, remember that the first iOS got a freetype vulnerability that was patched age ago.

And some embedded device got a TIF lib vulnerability.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Webkit the new IE6 ?
by dvhh on Tue 15th Mar 2011 06:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Webkit the new IE6 ?"
dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

And remember that IE6 was prefered because it "rendered better"

Reply Score: 2