Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Mar 2009 13:51 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
Privacy, Security, Encryption Fresh from winning the PWN2OWN contest yesterday, Charlie Miller has been interviewed by ZDNet. He talks about how Mac OS X is a very simple operating system to exploit due to the lack of any form of anti-exploit features. He also explains that the underlying operating system is much more important in creating a successful exploit than the bowser, why Chrome is so hard to hack, and many other things.
Thread beginning with comment 354128
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by sadyc
by wanderingk88 on Fri 20th Mar 2009 15:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by sadyc"
wanderingk88
Member since:
2008-06-26

A web browser is not just its rendering engine.

If it was, Chrome would have the same vulnerabilities as Safari.

Please learn to shut up when you don't know what you're talking about.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by sadyc
by Vanders on Fri 20th Mar 2009 16:33 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sadyc"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Depends on what the vulnerability is. If you can find a way to use a bug in the way that a CSS file is parsed (As an example) you'll probably find you could craft an exploit that would work on most of the browsers that use that Webkit.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sadyc
by tyrione on Fri 20th Mar 2009 18:13 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sadyc"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

A web browser is not just its rendering engine.

If it was, Chrome would have the same vulnerabilities as Safari.

Please learn to shut up when you don't know what you're talking about.


Chrome runs on Windows. The hacker was citing/implying that the randomization support in Windows is the reason Chrome gains that security.

Chrome on OS X would have that vulnerability, until 10.6 arrives.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[5]: Comment by sadyc
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 20th Mar 2009 18:15 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sadyc"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Chrome runs on Windows. The hacker was citing/implying that the randomization support in Windows is the reason Chrome gains that security.

Chrome on OS X would have that vulnerability, until 10.6 arrives.


You are wrong. The reason Chrome specifically is so secure is because of the sandboxing.

Edited 2009-03-20 18:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by sadyc
by segedunum on Sun 22nd Mar 2009 01:27 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sadyc"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Chrome runs on Windows. The hacker was citing/implying that the randomization support in Windows is the reason Chrome gains that security.

That's one of the reasons, but as I'd indicated elsewhere in the other article it isn't just about the OS itself. This is a quote from Miller:

There are bugs in Chrome but they’re very hard to exploit. I have a Chrome vulnerability right now but I don’t know how to exploit it. It’s really hard. The’ve got that sandbox model that’s hard to get out of./


Chrome on OS X would have that vulnerability, until 10.6 arrives.

Not necessarily I'm afraid, although OS X itself might make it easier on another level. As Miller says, finding a potential entry is one thing. Turning it into something you can actually 'exploit' is a different ballgame.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by sadyc
by MamiyaOtaru on Sun 22nd Mar 2009 04:20 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sadyc"
MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

Incredible post.

1: you were willing to backstab your buddy Apple by claiming Safari was compromised while Chrome wasn't only because it runs on OSX instead of Windows

2: you were wrong.

Massive footbullet.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sadyc
by bousozoku on Sat 21st Mar 2009 06:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sadyc"
bousozoku Member since:
2006-01-23

A web browser is not just its rendering engine.

If it was, Chrome would have the same vulnerabilities as Safari.

Please learn to shut up when you don't know what you're talking about.


If a vulnerability lies in WebKit, what about open source would say that Google didn't modify WebKit?

You're right that Safari isn't totally open source but that doesn't mean that the vulnerabilities aren't in the open source portions.

I don't use Safari on either platform because I don't trust Apple since they don't seem to care. Mozilla's Firefox developers care more but there are still plenty of vulnerabilities and it's completely open source and users still get hosed.

Reply Parent Score: 2