Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th May 2009 22:20 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 364564
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time
by bousozoku on Thu 21st May 2009 00:34
in reply to "RE: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time"
I'm sure they'll fix it after the first Apple machine falls in next year's Pwn2Own.
Seriously though, they probably stuffed the patches in with the next OS release as they've done with proper sandboxing around safari and those other niceties that make breaking osX easy.
(It's a bit of irony to learn that Windows actually has better security mechanisms in place than osX. The security researcher's disagree with the marketing.)
Seriously though, they probably stuffed the patches in with the next OS release as they've done with proper sandboxing around safari and those other niceties that make breaking osX easy.
(It's a bit of irony to learn that Windows actually has better security mechanisms in place than osX. The security researcher's disagree with the marketing.)
I don't like to wait for them. Since Avie Tevanian left the company, they've become far too reckless in their software, as if they're doing it purposely to sell new hardware.
All the security bits in Windows would mean something if Microsoft removed ActiveX, but it's still a security leak by design and no matter how many UAC dialogues appear, you can't change people. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think, as I say.
RE[2]: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time
by Lennie on Thu 21st May 2009 13:10
in reply to "RE: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time"
RE[3]: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time
by macUser on Thu 21st May 2009 18:10
in reply to "RE[2]: Huge molehill or small mountain? - give it time"
What is bad, is Apple base their software partly on Open Source and when Open Source project X fixes something, Apple doesn't ship the fixes to the users.
It would be nice if Apple rolled open source patches into their OS updates at a greater clip and I wonder sometimes how many resources they pour into this.
I think there are signs of the company quietly getting more serious about it's security issues. For instance, they just hired Ivan Krstic who was the director security architecture for OLPC. I guess that one just slipped by...




Member since:
2007-09-06
I'm sure they'll fix it after the first Apple machine falls in next year's Pwn2Own.
Seriously though, they probably stuffed the patches in with the next OS release as they've done with proper sandboxing around safari and those other niceties that make breaking osX easy.
(It's a bit of irony to learn that Windows actually has better security mechanisms in place than osX. The security researcher's disagree with the marketing.)