Slashdot Mirror
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.
after OS X was released OS 9 was given a final patch 9.2.2 ...
MABASPLOOM!
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.
The problem only appears to apply to Panther. The version of QuickTime in Panther appears to be 6.4. According to this TechNote:
9 34 14
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=
QuickTime 6.4 for Jaguar (10.2) doesn't include QuickTime Java support.
I will make the leap that a) a fix is effectively in place for Jaguar (no support for vulnerable software) and b) the issue doesn't exist in versions of QuickTime's Java support prior to 6.4.
If all of the above is true, this is simply a big, fat FUD piece.
--fp
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
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
Nonsense. If you actually look up bugtraq reports by @stake, you will see all OS X versions 10.2.8 and below are vulnerable. Here, here and here.
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;
I hate to sound rude but that is just pure BS. A shame to slashdot that you could achieve a +5 for that cr*p. Instead of your generalized disinformation here are the facts: Take a look at CAN-2003-0877. To quote:
Now if the vulnerability only existed in 10.3, how come you are supposed to update to 10.3 in order to fix it?
Now take a look at the Apple Security Updates page. Is the fix for CAN-2003-0877 listed under 10.2.8? No. It's only under 10.3.
Take a look at this comment for more links to vulnerabilities that exist under 10.2 but are only fixed for 10.3.
To all the mods who modded the parent up: Shame on you! It contains not one link to any evidence. A statement like "As others have pointed out..." without any further specification is a generalization and stinks of disinformation.