[smuncky]

MacBook Air hacked in less than 2 minutes


Posted on 29.03.2008 at 11:59 in Tech News by Martin
Mac OS X’s reputation for security was tarnished Thursday when a team of researchers from Independent Security Evaluators (ISE) managed to hack a MacBook Air in two minutes using a zero-day vulnerability in Apple’s Safari 3.1 Web browser. The ISE security researchers — Charlie Miller, Jake Honoroff, and Mark Daniel — were participating in the “PWN to OWN” competition at the CanSecWest security conference, which began Wednesday in Vancouver, British Columbia. “Pwn” is computer gaming slang for “own,” as in conquer. The “p” typo serves to heighten the humiliation of defeat by emphasizing that the loss came at the hands of a youth who can’t even spell or type correctly. The term has also come to be used in security circles.

Contest participants had their choice of trying to hack an Apple MacBook Air running OS X 10.5.2, a Sony Vaio VGN-TZ37CN running Ubuntu 7.10, or a Fujitsu U810 running Vista Ultimate SP1. During the first day, when attacks were limited to network attacks on the operating system, no one managed to compromise any of the systems. That changed Thursday when attacks on default client-side applications — Web browser, e-mail, IM — were allowed. The ISE team won $10,000 from security firm TippingPoint Technologies for compromising the MacBook Air. The undisclosed vulnerability in Safari 3.1 has been shown to Apple and no further information about it will be revealed until Apple can issue an update, TippingPoint said.

Source: CRN, InfoWeek

More info here

 

[syn]

The point of the matter -- and I'm trying to steer this thread back on topic: Windows Vista's problems -- is that Microsoft is going to lose their monopoly of the consumer operating system market with the failure of Vista unless something radical is done.

This is a curious time for Bill Gates to take off (retire while you're still on top). Microsoft's board of directors needs to kick Steve Balmer off his nutcase path and hire somebody with a cool mind and a better sense of what consumers want.

I'm not presumptions to argue that I would make a good CEO, but if I were in charge of MS, I'd take the horse by the reigns and start a new OS division separate from the Windows division.
Microsoft has the assets to design a new OS from the ground up. The major problem with Windows is all the legacy stuff that adds unnecessary bulk to the OS. Old concepts that date back to DOS are still in use in Vista.

I'd put the people responsible for X BOX on a committee for the UI and take key engineers responsible for the successful parts of Windows and have them design the core engine of this new OS.

We're nearly at a crossroads equivalent to the introduction of the Mouse to the consumer PC in 1984. Touch interfaces are upon us and the mouse will go the way of the floppy in five years or less. This is an opportunity for Microsoft to branch off a new OS not backward compatible and shed off all their legacy code.

Continue developing Windows Vista to make it stable for current users and then release a new OS (it can keep the Windows moniker or go with something new to mark its "brand-newness") and don't sell it as an OS that you can install on your current system. Make it only available to PC manufacturers to preinstall on their new computers (with the necessary requirements to run it flawlessly). Release it for DIY PC builders after it's become established and polished.

Only like this will Windows be able to take its current dominance and come above all this Windows Vista mess.

Otherwise, it's becoming clear that the future is about custom OS's for each manufacturer (ex: Asus IEEE PC) which run online apps compatible with any OS because they're run in a browser that complies to standards (Googles online apps and now Adobe's Photoshop express run on any OS that can run a browser).

I see Sony -- usually the less Microsoft-like of the major brands -- becoming a pioneer in this. I fully expect them to release their own custom brand of Linux pre-installed on their machines shortly before this whole Vista bondoggle blows up in Microsoft's face.

We'll probably see several OS's pre-installed on mainstream computers in the coming years. Off the top of my head: Windows, Mac OS, Asus Linux, Google OS (there's real evidence that they're developing an experimental OS), Sony Linux and probably Dell and HP Linux flavors. They'll all be able to run each other's apps because those apps will increasingly migrate online (The Solution to software piracy) and run with a browser as the engine.

... and that's my bold prediction folks. Hopefully this post will still be here when it all unfolds.

I can't see Microsoft losing their monopoly for a while. People aren't too keen on changing and learning a whole new OS, even if their current one isn't quite up to the task. Look at many of the people who aren't pleased with Vista - did they go and get a new OS? No. They've just kept XP or had it installed on their new system.

I remember people had similar complaints about XP when it was released, but after a few SPs it's one of their more stable OSes ever.

As for touch interfaces, I think both Apple and MS are on the ball on that one. Remember, MS has been doing OS work for touch interfaces for years. Tablet PCs have been around for quite a while and MS has been making versions of Windows for mobile devices for a long, long time.

As for the swtich away from mouses, I think 5 years might be pushing it. Apple got rid of the floppy quickly on the Imac and the DVD and the Macbook Air but those weren't exactly good design moves.

I can only see companies embracing their own OSes for their computers when the mass market is comfortable enough with computers to be willing to try anything. I think that won't come for a while. If we were there at this point people would just install Linux instead of Vista or waste their money on an Apple.

 

[syn]

The UNIX nature of the OS does that for them.

It's suggested (probably as a legal disclaimer) but most Mac users know that buying an anti-virus/anti-spyware application is a complete waste of money.

I've never installed one on my Mac and have never been the least bit worried about getting a virus or spyware... and with reason.

Then why do they sell anti-virus software at the Apple store?

Why did my Mac-using friend have to purchase a copy?

 

[syn]

MacBook Air hacked in less than 2 minutes


Posted on 29.03.2008 at 11:59 in Tech News by Martin
Mac OS X’s reputation for security was tarnished Thursday when a team of researchers from Independent Security Evaluators (ISE) managed to hack a MacBook Air in two minutes using a zero-day vulnerability in Apple’s Safari 3.1 Web browser. The ISE security researchers — Charlie Miller, Jake Honoroff, and Mark Daniel — were participating in the “PWN to OWN” competition at the CanSecWest security conference, which began Wednesday in Vancouver, British Columbia. “Pwn” is computer gaming slang for “own,” as in conquer. The “p” typo serves to heighten the humiliation of defeat by emphasizing that the loss came at the hands of a youth who can’t even spell or type correctly. The term has also come to be used in security circles.

Contest participants had their choice of trying to hack an Apple MacBook Air running OS X 10.5.2, a Sony Vaio VGN-TZ37CN running Ubuntu 7.10, or a Fujitsu U810 running Vista Ultimate SP1. During the first day, when attacks were limited to network attacks on the operating system, no one managed to compromise any of the systems. That changed Thursday when attacks on default client-side applications — Web browser, e-mail, IM — were allowed. The ISE team won $10,000 from security firm TippingPoint Technologies for compromising the MacBook Air. The undisclosed vulnerability in Safari 3.1 has been shown to Apple and no further information about it will be revealed until Apple can issue an update, TippingPoint said.

Source: CRN, InfoWeek

More info here

So much for Apple security. One thing I don't like about Apple is the way they handle vulnerabilities - they basically act like they don't exist until they release an update, leaving their customers completely in the dark.

I have no idea why someone would buy a Macbook Air - it's pretty much a novelty.

 

[CDL.TO]

I can't see touch technology causing the death of mice the way that CDs and the internet killed floppies. Touch technology seems inefficient for any device that isn't hand-held. I can move my hand two inches with my mouse and have the pointer move 17 inches across the screen. Would touch technology not require an outstretched arm and everything clickable on the screen to be at least the size of a finger?

Or am I wrong in my understand of the ways that touch technology can be applied?

 

[syn]

I can't see touch technology causing the death of mice the way that CDs and the internet killed floppies. Touch technology seems inefficient for any device that isn't hand-held. I can move my hand two inches with my mouse and have the pointer move 17 inches across the screen. Would touch technology not require an outstretched arm and everything clickable on the screen to be at least the size of a finger?

Or am I wrong in my understand of the ways that touch technology can be applied?

It isn't necessarily just touch screens...but even touch pads. Instead of using your mouse you could just use your actual hands/fingers.

 

[MetroMan]

Then why do they sell anti-virus software at the Apple store?

Why did my Mac-using friend have to purchase a copy?

Have to? Syn, with those comments, you reveal that you know little about the actual experience of using a Mac. That's fine, you don't have to. That disqualifies you however from making some of the comments you seem to make with authority.

There hasn't been a virus for a Mac in... has there ever been a widespread virus for Mac OS X? I sure can't recall. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

When I talk about the UNIX nature of the Mac doing most of the protecting, I'm talking about the way it's designed for security. Banks use UNIX servers for that same reason.
I'm not arguing that UNIX goes out and finds viruses. Of course it doesn't. It's simply a lot more secure against applications attempting to run, duplicate and distribute themselves than Windows is.

 

[syn]

Have to? Syn, with those comments, you reveal that you know little about the actual experience of using a Mac. That's fine, you don't have to. That disqualifies you however from making some of the comments you seem to make with authority.

LOL

You think I made that up?

If that's the case they shouldn't be selling Anti-Virus/Security software in the Apple Store...but they do.

In fact, you can find no less than 7 Anti-Virus/Security software packages at Apple's online store.

http://tinyurl.com/3coyk3

There hasn't been a virus for a Mac in... has there ever been a widespread virus for Mac OS X? I sure can't recall. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

For someone who claims to be an expert you seem pretty uninformed.

OSX.RSPlug.A - that was just a few months ago.
http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=191968025
http://antivirus.about.com/od/macintoshresource/Macintosh_Viruses_and_Mac_Virus_Resources.htm

When I talk about the UNIX nature of the Mac doing most of the protecting, I'm talking about the way it's designed for security. Banks use UNIX servers for that same reason.
I'm not arguing that UNIX goes out and finds viruses. Of course it doesn't. It's simply a lot more secure against applications attempting to run, duplicate and distribute themselves than Windows is.

UNIX is not immune to viruses or spyware. Any system can be compromised. It's certainly better than Windows in that regard, but the relative lack of spyware/viruses on the Mac has to do with the fact that it has such a small user base.

 

[MetroMan]

I can't see touch technology causing the death of mice the way that CDs and the internet killed floppies. Touch technology seems inefficient for any device that isn't hand-held. I can move my hand two inches with my mouse and have the pointer move 17 inches across the screen. Would touch technology not require an outstretched arm and everything clickable on the screen to be at least the size of a finger?

Or am I wrong in my understand of the ways that touch technology can be applied?

Without knowing it, the mouse has become obsolete to me. I'm in an industry where precision is needed, yet I use a touch pad on my MacBook. Somebody asked me last week how I can use it with Photoshop like I do and I was going to answer but couldn't recall when it became just as precise as a mouse...

... So I plugged in a mouse to see the difference and it was so cumbersome and lacked the multi touch capabilities (gestures) that I use on my touch pad that I unplugged the mouse and never looked back.

Both Microsoft (stylus) and Apple (finger) have been banking on touch for some time now and it's beginning to ramp up with the iPhone becoming so popular. Others are following such as the HTC touch and Samsung's own offerings. It's a matter of time before this Touch OS makes it to mainstream computers.

It's not just about making buttons bigger, it's about making the OS simple and straightforward enough as to not need to go through multiple menus to do what you want.

At risk of continuing my pro-Apple argument here, I tried my brother's HTC touch and couldn't get over the fact how inefficient and unintuitive an experience it was. I had no clue how to use certain features that I had seen about the HTC. The menus were too small for my (already small) fingers and it wasn't obvious what was touchable versus what was.
Typing on the not QWERTY touch keyboard was painful.

The iPhone on the other hand was intuitive and straight to the point. Everything is where you expect it to be. There was no need to read a manual. The UI behaves just as you'd expect it to. From flicking a menu and seeing it wizz by to pinching a photo to zoom in. From turning the iPhone on it's side to view your content with a wider frame to wiping an email to delete it. I couldn't imagine the experience being any more intuitive.

I think that once people begin to use gestures on their phones and laptops, they'll want the same for their desktop computers. Either by directly touching the screen or having a large touch pad on your desk, I believe that the near future is about touch. The mouse will never know what hit it..

 

[CDL.TO]

Ah, so simply a trackpad unit on your desk. Gotcha.

 

[Hydrogen]

syn,

if you like Vista, use Vista. No on will stop you. Really.

The endless boring attacks on Macs - and by extension Mac users - are already tedious. Your droning line that Mac users think Apple is god, but the company actually sucks, is dull. I've been using Mac's since 1985 - along with PC's.

Personally, my preference is for the Mac. I find it suits all my needs - software, hardware and otherwise. When using a PC, I have opted to maintain XP because Vista has had, and still has, problems. While XP ain't no charm, and has come with its own mountains of Microsoft stupidity, it sure beats Win98.

Here's the thing: use what suits you and don't worry about what the other guy uses. There are choices. Fortunately. I sure would not want to be stuck with just Mickeysoft.

 

[syn]

syn,

if you like Vista, use Vista. No on will stop you. Really.

The endless boring attacks on Macs - and by extension Mac users - are already tedious. Your droning line that Mac users think Apple is god, but the company actually sucks, is dull. I've been using Mac's since 1985 - along with PC's.

Personally, my preference is for the Mac. I find it suits all my needs - software, hardware and otherwise. When using a PC, I have opted to maintain XP because Vista has had, and still has, problems. While XP ain't no charm, and has come with its own mountains of Microsoft stupidity, it sure beats Win98.

Here's the thing: use what suits you and don't worry about what the other guy uses. There are choices. Fortunately. I sure would not want to be stuck with just Mickeysoft.

I find it pretty funny that one can't criticize Apple without getting lectured for it.

As I said, I have no particular preference. Apple computers (a lot of them anyways) are well designed, attractive and the OS is great. People are seriously fooling themselves if they think they're perfect though.

This thread has ventured off into a few different topics related to Macs and PCs, all of which are being discussed by others as well as myself. If you're expecting a "Buy an Apple" campaign thread then maybe you shouldn't bother with it.

 

[Hydrogen]

As to my expectations, I assumed by the title of this thread that it was about Microsoft Vista and not your trenchant anti-Apple stance. You're the only one here who has related perfection to the Mac OS.

 

[syn]

As to my expectations, I assumed by the title of this thread that it was about Microsoft Vista

You might want to review the thread because I'm not the one who brought up Apple (hint: it's not long after the first post), nor am I the only one who continues to discuss the company and their products.

and not your trenchant anti-Apple stance.

It's actually my pro-reality stance.

You're the only one here who has related perfection to the Mac OS.

Perhaps not perfect is too strong a word. But there is clearly at least one person in this thread providing a pretty unrealistic impression of Macs and the OS (IMO - and I've outlined why). It's a bit silly to lecture me when I'm (mostly) debating with someone else who is even more guilty of discussing Apple than I am.

If you want to discuss Windows Vista then go for it. Complaining about me has nothing to do with Vista.

 

[EnviroTO]

End the bickering. Once Linux lays Windows and Mac to waste in a few years the whole argument will be pointless anyways.