Computer code that exploits a flaw in Apple's Mac OS X was released over the weekend. The code takes advantage of a weakness in core parts of Mac OS X and could let a user gain additional privileges. Apple provided a fix for the error-handling mechanism of the kernel last week, but the exploit appears to have been authored before then. "It appears to have been written well before the vulnerability was fixed," said Dino Dai Zovi, a researcher with Matasano Security who was credited by Apple with discovering the flaw when the patch was released. Obviously anything but spectacular (since it's fixed), but it does raise the age old question: will the growing popularity of both Linux and OS X lead to more of these exploits-- possibly one that does get released 'in time'?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Apple has nowhere near the marketshare, particularly with businesses running critical applications, that MS does. If MS abruptly breaks compatibility, many customers will not move forward. Apple has lost much of the business market because of frequent breaks and lack of roadmap.
You will see increased reliance on virtualization going forward, at the system and application levels. Those plans have already been laid out or hinted at publicly, but compatibility itself isn't as big of a problem as many make it out to be. In most cases it isn't the same old code running in Windows, but support for routing the old API calls through new APIs or virtualization layers.
Most of the problems with running games as standard user on current versions of Windows can be fixed by modifying permissions on certain directories (like the app directory in Program Files) rather than having to run full time as admin. You can also use RunAs for running specific applications as admin (unless it's been updated, some games that use SafeDisc or similar require running as admin for instance).
Member since:
2006-01-03
[JoeBuck said]: Many Windows XP users have administrator privileges because they need to run some software that won't run otherwise. This is particularly likely to be true if they run an older program that goes back to the Windows 98 days.
Example: my daughter was given a computer game for her birthday. We usually run Linux at home, but can dual-boot one machine to XP if we really need to. Sure enough, to get the game to work, I had to make my six-year-old an administrator.
It's not user stupidity when you have to turn off security to get your work done.[endquote]
I strongly disagree. This can be the case with some older programs and a few relatively new ones too, but this isn't the real reason most users run with admin rights. I should be eliminated as an easy option.
(There are better options. Since VirtualPC is free MS or any user could easily implement a virtual machine for these "special cases")
[JoeBuck sys]: To be fair to Microsoft, they are handicapped by legacy: every boneheaded mistake they ever made that's visible by some ABI has to be preserved forever.[End Quote]
I 100% agree. MS is at a a crossroads after Vista. Its time they scrap the legacy stuff and build a solid base for future development. They use the argument that they need to maintain compatability for users, but each release always has add problems anyways, and if Apple can do it, I'm sure Microsoft can too.
Edited 2006-10-03 17:57