ehenning writes "SecuriTeam has posted a paper on some known vulnerabilities in Mac OS X. It lists methods for developing shellcode based on the PowerPC architecture. They note that there are similar vulnerabilities in Mac OS X and Darwin as in IA32 machines."
I suppose this is something we must live with, but it is extraordinarily annoying to have to accept the security evaluation of a pseudonymous author.
Why does it matter who they are? You don't have to "accept" anything; they provide the code, which can be independently tested to see if their claims are accurate.
-- How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Well what do you expect from a Troll
by
xcarroll
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Not so.
Let's start with the windowing environment, since that's the first thing most OS 9 users noticed when they first moved to OS X. Except they wouldn't have moved if OS X had started with X Windows because X Windows doesn't run OS 9 apps. Oops, there goes the business...
Mach-O is not proprietary to Apple. It came via NextStep from Carnagie Mellon's "Mach" project, and is older than Linux. The Mach project and its executable format is published and is generated by gcc. So in what sense exactly is it not 'open'? Oh, you mean, it's not the same as the one you use?
NetInfo (also inherited from NextStep) does the same thing that NIS+ does on Solaris and yp does on Linux, and for the much the same reasons. Or do you prefer to keep passwords in/etc/passwds where they can be cracked by dictionary attacks?
So I think we can guess that OS X was not so much an answer to 'how do we lock people into a proprietary format' as 'how do you get a solid, compatible replacement for OS 9 out of the door asap given that we happen to have just bought NextStep'?
-- public org.slashdot.Sig getSig() throws NotFunnyEnoughException;
Re:For the Un*x junkies out there
by
zygote
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No sweat. Since I have access to the machine (per your last exploit) I insert the Mac OS X install disk, reboot from the CD, and select "Reset Password" (paraphrasing here) to change the password for the admin accounts
Exactly, if someone already has this kind of access to a machine, then why bother with all the other stuff?
-- the future is here, it is just not evenly distributed
- w. gibson
SecuriTeam has posted a paper on some known vulnerabilities in Mac OS X.
Not true. There are no known vulnerabilities posted in this article. This article is nothing but hacking tools that can be used to search for vulnerabilities and to exploit certain types of vulnerabilities if/when they become known.
-- Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the/. bean counters might report.
Slashdot Mirror
to do things like print messages, run /bin/sh, or reboot the machine. Unimpressive.
/bin/sh as root. Which is very handy for me, since I forgot the admin password on my laptop and need to reset it.
That is, run
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Boot from your OSX install cd. You can change the password there.
Is it still unimpressive when you realize that these turn any remote exploit into a remote root exploit?
Good thing apple is right on top of those patches, or I'd be a bit more worried.
You say
Why does it matter who they are? You don't have to "accept" anything; they provide the code, which can be independently tested to see if their claims are accurate.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Not so.
/etc/passwds where they can be cracked by dictionary attacks?
Let's start with the windowing environment, since that's the first thing most OS 9 users noticed when they first moved to OS X. Except they wouldn't have moved if OS X had started with X Windows because X Windows doesn't run OS 9 apps. Oops, there goes the business...
Mach-O is not proprietary to Apple. It came via NextStep from Carnagie Mellon's "Mach" project, and is older than Linux. The Mach project and its executable format is published and is generated by gcc. So in what sense exactly is it not 'open'? Oh, you mean, it's not the same as the one you use?
NetInfo (also inherited from NextStep) does the same thing that NIS+ does on Solaris and yp does on Linux, and for the much the same reasons. Or do you prefer to keep passwords in
So I think we can guess that OS X was not so much an answer to 'how do we lock people into a proprietary format' as 'how do you get a solid, compatible replacement for OS 9 out of the door asap given that we happen to have just bought NextStep'?
public org.slashdot.Sig getSig() throws NotFunnyEnoughException;
No sweat. Since I have access to the machine (per your last exploit) I insert the Mac OS X install disk, reboot from the CD, and select "Reset Password" (paraphrasing here) to change the password for the admin accounts
Exactly, if someone already has this kind of access to a machine, then why bother with all the other stuff?
the future is here, it is just not evenly distributed - w. gibson
Not true. There are no known vulnerabilities posted in this article. This article is nothing but hacking tools that can be used to search for vulnerabilities and to exploit certain types of vulnerabilities if/when they become known.
Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the