Apple Forcing Panther Upgrade for Security Patch
The Raindog writes "I noticed over at Tech Report that Apple is apparently only offering its latest round of OS X security fixes to Panther users, leaving older versions of OS X out in the cold. " Update: 10/31 by J : But see
the next day's story.
Here are the bugtraq links to the specific vulnerabilities:
Arbitrary File Overwrite via Core Files
Systemic Insecure File Permissions
Long argv[] buffer overflow
If it is going to be Apple's policy to not provide support for previous operating systems from the day the new one comes out it is going to be very, very difficult for them to break into the enterprise world. Even Microsoft provides support for operating systems for a few years after the new one is released. Maybe if enough people submit a bug report Apple will do something about it.
While Apple no longer releases point releases on prior releases of OS X, they DO release Security Releases. I think we all need to give them some time to finish the patch and post the update. Apple has *never* left users out in the dark, especially with recent releases (i.e. 10.2, 10.1). I know several users who are still using 10.1 and have received several security patches.
There you go.
It'd like to think so. To quote the Apple description of the Security Update:
Security Update 2003-10-28 addresses a potential vulnerability in the implementation of QuickTime Java in Mac OS X v10.3 and Mac OS X Server v10.3 that could allow unauthorized access to a system.
Java got a version boost in Panther, so it's not unthinkable that a little error slipped in this version; and doesn't affect the pre-Panther systems in any way.
after OS X was released OS 9 was given a final patch 9.2.2 ...
MABASPLOOM!
the latest flaw is apparently only a 10.3 problem, hence the 10.3 only update.
*** For a better tommorow, change your life today ***
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
"Security Update 2003-10-28 addresses a potential vulnerability in the implementation of QuickTime Java in Mac OS X v10.3 and Mac OS X Server v10.3 that could allow unauthorized access to a system."
So it seems that only Panther is vulnerable, and there is no need to release a patch for 10.2.x and 10.1.x.
not only have there been updates to 10.1 and 10.2, there have historically been updates on 'less-than-newest' MacOS versions.
quick, what was the version of system software immediately before the release of 7.0?
6.0.7. System 7 was released after 6.0.7 and 6.0.8 was released AFTER System 7. When MacOS X came out, how many updates were there to 9.x?
neopets.com
From http://lists.apple.com/archives/security-announce/ 2003/Oct/28/applesa20031028securityu.txt (login: archives password:archives):
>The issue does not exist in earlier versions of Mac OS X or Mac OS X Server.
-- Charles A. Plater
Give it a day or two. Apple has not said that they won't be issuing the patch for Jaguar, they merely haven't released it yet. In all likelyhood, a Jaguar patch will follow.
If memory serves, they continued to issue security patches for 10.1 after Jaguar was released. I see no reason why they'd choose to alienate their customers by not doing the same for Jaguar now that Panther's out in the wild.
Journalistic integrity on Slashdot? Yeah, I'm asking a bit much.
Yeah, those sneaky bastards are about to discontinue support for NT4.0 from 1996. Sounds so very similar to Apple EOLing an OS from August, 2002. Evil, evil Microsoft. They're so evil, they get accused of all the bad things that everyone else does that they don't do. Bad Microsoft! How could you leave OSX.2.x unpatched and force people to upgrade?!?!?! Bastards! Evil bastards!!!! Bad M$, BAD!
This is a 10.3 only problem and the writeup on this topic needs to be fixed. Jesus, look at the people who came out looking for an excuse to bash.
You're a moron.
The 10.3-only security issue Apple just patched has nothing whatsoever to do with what we're talking about, which is three security issues identified by @Stake that do not exist in 10.3. Sure, the summary is stupid, but that's because the article is stupid. They're saying Apple is only making the fixes available in 10.3; the truth is, the problems don't exist in 10.3 and Apple hasn't released a patch for 10.2 yet because @Stake only announced them two days ago.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
As a long-time Mac user, I'm surprised at all the FUD flying around in this discussion. I remember Apple releasing OS 9 updates long after 10.1 was released. I'm still running 10.1.x at work and it's been patched many times since 10.2 came out. Has anyone from Apple actually said anything in the REAL press about not supporting 10.2 anymore? Relax, people! Of course they will patch 10.2, I'm sure a large majority of their guys are still working on 10.3 so it happened first. Breath. Exhale. Repeat.
This article helps put this FUD into perspective. Apple bashers need not read it, since they've already made up their minds.
Most of it only speculates as to Apple's intent. Here is the only part relevant to their actual intent:
Apple declined comment.
Sure, they should have pronounced their intent to fix the problems but they have certainly NOT stated that the intent is to leave 10.2.x unpatched.
The article is a bit misleading, as well. For instance, it fails to note that the @stake advisory in question (core files can be used to overwrite arbitrary files) pertains to a facility that is disabled in all Apple-supplied 10.2 installations.
In short, they should fix it. Soon. They haven't said they won't, though, and it's been *almost* two days. I'm taking a "wait and see" approach on this one.
.sig: file not found
Such a statement, aparently confirmed by Apple, will keep Mac OS X out of any server applications.
Such as statement was obviously taken out of context, carefully edited for maximum anti-Mac (and by implication pro-Microsoft) effect. As others have pointed out, the security flaw is only applicable to OS X 10.3. 10.1 and 10.2 are not vulnerable, so no patch is required.
Let me repeat. OS X 10.1 and 10.2 are not vulnerable, so no patch is required. Saying "Apple isn't going to release patches for 10.2" without pointing out the fact is dishonest, yellow journalism on steroids, and more indicative of a marketing FUD campaign than any serious technical reporting.
Indeed, the spin and dishonesty in the article is so severe, and the pro-Micorosoft bias in the (mis)reporting of the facts so obvious, that I'm surprised even Intel zealots would buy it outright, hook-line-and-sinker, without even a thought to the contrary. The allegation itself should be setting even the most ardent Microsoft zealot's bullshit alarm off.
And I say this as one who does most if his work on an Intel box, ableit running GNU/Linux (though I do enjoy my Apple Powerbook and OS X as well).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Apple has posted a security update for both 10.3 and 10.2.8.
The Seventh Rule: Take others more seriously than yourself, particularly when you are leading them.
I honestly don't think that this will remain a problem, Apple has been pretty good about patching things as they come along, but the point of the article is that 10.2 IS vulnerable, with the only protection/patch being an upgrade to Panther.
Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage. - Anais Nin
Let me repeat. OS X 10.1 and 10.2 are not vulnerable, so no patch is required.
Does ANYONE read the articles? Apple recently released a security patch for a completely unrelated security issue in 10.3 that does not apply to 10.2, and everyone assumes that's what this is about, even though this article is about three COMPLETELY DIFFERENT security issues that @Stake found in 10.2 that do NOT exist in 10.3 that Apple HAS NOT YET released patches for.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;