Apple released another version of the security patch it distributed on March 13 to users of its OS X operating system software, in order to address a problem reported with the update. The company said it distributed the new patch, dubbed Update 2006-002 v1.1, in order to fix an issue with Apple’s Safari Web browser that some users observed after installing its 2006-002 security update. According to a post on the company’s Web site, the previous update had caused some Safari users to have problems launching the browser.
Hmm, I see more SecurityFix articles about Apple than MS lately…
Edited 2006-03-19 17:12
“Hmm, I see more SecurityFix articles about Apple than MS lately…”
It seems you should have a look to these pages:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/update/bulletins/200603.ms…
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/
Now the facts:
– The last Windows security fix is MS06-011….
– The last Mac OS X security fix is 2006-002 v1.1 (say the 3rd)
My calculator indicates 3,66666667 times more security fixes on Windows since january 1st 2006…
Mac OS X is an operating system just like any other, it has weaknesses, bugs, security flaws. (again, just like ANY other OSes).
That must not be a reason for not seeing the facts!
Edited 2006-03-19 22:46
My calculator indicates 3,66666667 times more security fixes on Windows since january 1st 2006…
Trying to compare which operating system is more secure is like trying to determine which woman of two is more the virgin by how many times she had sex.
This update only applies to you if you applied the previous update while Safari was *NOT* in the /Applications folder, AFAIK. Apparently the previous update didn’t take into account people who moved Safari into some weird folder, and ended up breaking shortcuts to it or something.
In any case, it doesn’t show up in Software Update for me, presumably because I’m normal and keep Safari where it should be.
Classic
This is in no way apples fault. But it again goes to amaze me how people actively do things to their system that will only cause further problems.
Will people ever learn not to mess with any system files, or default apps and so forth. In doing this you are only begging for something to go horribly wrong on the next update.
Are you serious?
I think I should decide where my applicatons go, not Apple… /Applications is horribly bloated by default, in my opinion.
Are you serious?
I think I should decide where my applicatons go, not Apple… /Applications is horribly bloated by default, in my opinion.
And therefore, if your computer doesn’t work properly, you can run to your bathroom mirror and have a good hard look at yourself.
I used to customise settings and tweak things; but now, I’m Mr Default; I stick with the status quo that the installer offers (in terms of installation location) and let it do the rest – I’ve yet to have a problem with MacOS X or Windows XP yet.
If they’re suggested to install in a certain location – just maybe they’ve got a good bloody reason for installing it in that location! remember kids, they developed the application, so there is an obvious reason for the placement of that application in that location.
That’s sure not how I go about it. I give applications the least amount of privileges possible. This means if I can install something as a normal user into my home directory (Documents and Settings if I’m on Windows), then I do it. If your apps can’t even touch your OS then how are they going to mess it up?
Granted if we’re talking Windows, a lot of developers are idiots (or know just what they’re doing) and their apps require admin privileges, so this won’t work sometimes. In that case you have to just bite the bullet and install them Globally. Or some applications you might want global I spose. Anyway, the point is, the default certainly isn’t always the best. Least that’s my opinion.
Classic
This is in no way apples fault. But it again goes to amaze me how people actively do things to their system that will only cause further problems.
Will people ever learn not to mess with any system files, or default apps and so forth. In doing this you are only begging for something to go horribly wrong on the next update.
That’s just apologistic and naive.
First of all popular exploits often rely around default settings. Poorly written malicious code is often hard-coded to expect default settings. Security consicous users on every platform often change defaults.
Second, browsers on any platform are often the primary vector for remote exploits. Moving your browser to a non-standard location is a simple way to add an extra layer (albeit very minor) level of security.
The phrase “default location” implies that there is a choice of where the app should be located, so why shouldn’t an assumption have been made by Apple that it may have been relocated?
We’re not talking about users hacking their system libraries and breaking their OS here.
Geez, you guys brag about OS X’s superior design and security compared to Windows, yet blame the users when they try and exercise some of that control as if they did something wrong. Even Apple ‘fessed up and admitted it was an error fair and square, so why make excuses?
<whine>
We are feeling a bit like Windows users, patch on top of patches. Exploits out the ying yang.
And still there is no fix for the “File Association Meta Data Shell Script Execution” exploit.
So nice of Secunia to provide a free easy to edit trojan for every budding script kiddie to use.
http://secunia.com/mac_os_x_command_execution_vulnerability_test/
Apple has stumbled quite a bit with Mac OS X security over the years.
Also doing nothing to prevent Windows from running on their hardware?
How long will people put up with dual booting all the time before just giving in to the majority OS?
Well this will most likely be my last purchase of a computer, I’m not going to live in a world where I have to constantly fix it and worry about security issues.
I got years of music on my iPods, once that wears out I’ll switch to the cheaper satellite radio.
</whine>
Thats funny you say there is no fix. I just clicked on the link you provided, then clicked on their test link… and Safari said “”Secunia.mov” may contain an application. The safty of this file cannot be determined. Are you sure you want to download “Seunia.mov”?”
That’s just a temporary warning, it goes away eventually.
Also doing nothing to prevent Windows from running on their hardware?
Wow. You weren’t kidding with the whine tag. Elitist, are we?
They didn’t exactly make it easy to run Windows, but hardwiring it to somehow prevent it could likely have resulted in a phone call from the Justice Department. How exactly would that behavior be different from Microsoft’s past business practices? And what exactly would be the gain for Apple, other than preventing potential incremental sales? It’s not like they’ll lose out on OS X license fees from dual-booting, and in a market where Dell leads the field it’s not likely that users will line up to buy premium Apple hardware strictly for running Windows unsupported.
Besides, they couldn’t even keep OS X from running on other platforms.
Regardless, I can’t see what any of that has to do with security issues.
Doesn’t have to do with security, it has to do with dillution of Mac OS X market share.
Imagine a computer lab full of Mac’s and the order comes down to install AutoCad on the Mac’s.
Well AutoCad doesn’t make a Mac OS X verison.
So instead of using a comparable (and better) Mac OS X CAD package that’s compatible with AutoCAD files a option now exists to install Windows on the Mac’s. (and getting better and easier too)
If you were a IT tech who made their living off of Microsoft, what would you install?
What do you think this does to Mac OS X software developers who can’t count on Mac sales as a direct representation of how many folks are running Mac OS X.
Developers will now say “Just boot Windows”
Apple could have prevented Windows from being run on their hardware and defended their platform, but chose not to.
History will prove the folly of Apple’s mistake if they and/or Microsoft allows it to continue. Either that or Apple intends to become another PC vendor selling Windows and/or Mac OS X on their hardware.
Apple is about selling hardware after all and there are a lot of very expensive stores to pay rent for.
As far as I know using subfolders in the Application folder does not cause any problems. The only limit there is that you should not place any standard OSX app outside the Application folder.