Slashdot Mirror


Adobe To Patch Flash 0-Day Friday

Trailrunner7 writes "Adobe is planning to patch the recently disclosed Flash Player vulnerability on Friday — just four days after it was disclosed — for users on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux. The vulnerability is being used in targeted attacks right now that use malicious Word documents. Adobe said it plans to push out the Flash Player patch for Google Chrome today, as part of the Chrome release channel, but Reader X users will have to wait till June for a fix."

15 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. They're planning to patch a 0-day? by gazbo · · Score: 2

    Impressive.

    1. Re:They're planning to patch a 0-day? by Riceballsan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This may be one of the few times 0 day was actually used right. 0-day hits without warning, and it has to be patched after the fact, assuming of course there was no warnings by white hats beforehand that were ignored/covered up. That being said, as much as I hate adobe and the ridiculous amounts of security flaws that actually allow these issues to occur, Seriously who the heck would want the ability to use flash in a word document, so they can print animations? That being said, 4 days is actually decent response time. compared to say word itself that will probably have the patch for this itself in a few months.

    2. Re:They're planning to patch a 0-day? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 2

      No, zero-day means that the developer didn't know about it when the attack went live. They'll eventually discover the vulnerability and patch it, but that doesn't change the fact that it was a zero-day attack.

    3. Re:They're planning to patch a 0-day? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It was a zero-day vulnerability. The fact that it's no longer a zero-day vulnerability isn't nearly as important as the fact that it was one, since the very fact that we're discussing it means that it's no longer unknown.

      If you want to be that pedantic, you might as well just throw out the term altogether, because as soon as you find out that a 0-day exists, it ceases to exist.

  2. Keep polishing that turd Adobe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    At least my iPad is still safe.

    1. Re:Keep polishing that turd Adobe by Tackhead · · Score: 2, Informative

      At least my iPad is still safe.

      Not necessarily. Even without Flash support, those things are huge vectors for earworms.

      7 am, waking up in the morning
      Zero-day fresh, gotta get my warez,
      Gotta sign my key, gotta have serials
      Crackin' everything, the time is goin'
      Tickin' on and on, everybody's codin'
      Gotta log on to the Slash - dot
      Gotta slash my dot, I click Refresh...

      PDF for printouts,
      Flash is for online,
      Gotta make my mind up,
      Which code did they break?

      It's Friday, Friday
      Zero-day on Friday,
      Sysadmin's lookin' forward to the weekend, weekend,
      Friday, Friday,
      Patch it up by Friday,
      Sysadmin's lookin' forward to the week-end.

      Updatin', updatin' (Huh?)
      Integration testin' (Damn!)
      Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck,
      Adobe's blown another weekend...

      (We-we-we so excited...)

  3. Re:Via Word ... by ledow · · Score: 2

    HOW MANY MORE TIMES?

    Do NOT open a document that you're not expecting, that isn't from someone you know, etc. Yeah, you could say that this can be passed legitimately from person to person but come on - this is the first rule of virus protection - don't open documents without screening them (not via some magical software that "knows" if it's bad or not, but by using your brain) first.

    The fact that you can even still GET a Word virus whether it executes in macros, integrated Flash or some other ActiveX-based crap, tells you that Microsoft just don't care any more.

  4. Re:Linux? by machxor · · Score: 3, Informative

    The vulnerability exists in Flash Player not Microsoft Word. A Word document is simply the package being used to distribute the payload.

  5. Article is Dup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Doesn't Slashdot post this same article every week?

  6. 40..50 years of computing by countertrolling · · Score: 2

    And the whole damn country can be taken down by a media player. Truly fascinating.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  7. Summary not quite accurate... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Informative
    The Flash Player for Windows will get patched on April 25, but the Flash Player bug in Reader X for Windows will get fixed in June because the Reader X sandbox prevents exploitation. From TFA:

    Adobe said on Wednesday night that it plans to push out the Flash Player patch for Google Chrome today, as part of the Chrome release channel. A separate patch for Adobe Acrobat X for Windows and Mac, Reader X for Mac and Reader 9.x for Windows and Mac on April 25.

    The company is planning to wait until June to release a patch for the Flash Player bug in Reader X for Windows because the sandbox in that application prevents exploitation of the vulnerability. The patch for Chrome will be available earlier than the others thanks to Adobe's relationship with Google.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  8. Re:Via Word ... by Entropius · · Score: 2

    Why should I?

    It's a fucking document. It's a series of bits which are converted into pixel values and shown on a screen, not code.

    If you get your computer compromised by a document, then the only person who's fault it is is the one who wrote the document decoder (and/or the idiot who decided that documents should include embedded code, which is ridiculous).

    You have your computer configured right now to accept documents that you're not expecting -- jpegs, all over the web. But you do this all the time, because you know that the folks who wrote your browser managed to not fuck up a jpeg decoder -- no matter what's in that file, the worst it can make you do is get in trouble with your boss.

    Likewise, you feel, or you should feel, perfectly safe running vim on anything that comes your way, since going "vim virus.txt" is not going to do bad things to you, no matter what's in there -- because the people who wrote vim are not morons.

    The same ought to be true for other document formats. Perhaps I am an old fuddy-duddy, but there is absolutely no reason that any responsible document format needs to contain executable code -- and if any document decoder mistakes data for code (via a buffer overrun or similar), then their ass is the one to blame.

  9. Re:US grammar? by OffaMyLawn · · Score: 2

    If it's that horrible song, maybe they could patch some talent into it.

  10. Leave Flash behind by xororand · · Score: 2

    Try to uninstall Adobe Flash for a week. I did and I can't say that I miss anything.

    YouTube:
    - The HTML5 beta works rather well with modern browsers like Firefox 4.0 and nearly every video is available. You don't need a Google account. The setting is stored in a cookie.
    - If you're on Linux, try Minitube. It's a standalone player for YouTube that uses hardware acceleration.

    Thanks to the iPad, more and more web sites offer alternatives to Flash. My preferred news TV station is now streaming both with Ogg/Theora and H.264.

    Yes, I can't view the occasional funny cat video because it's only available in Flash format but guess what: I'm still alive.

  11. Re:0 day ... what it means. by bunratty · · Score: 2

    A new vulnerability can be found by white hats and reported to the company, which is not a 0-day. A new vulnerability can be found by black hats and exploited before the company knows about it. That's a 0-day, and it's problematic because they company wasn't able to attempt to mitigate or fix the problem before it was exploited. Not all new vulnerabilities are 0-days; probably most are not. It's not important whether a vulnerability was found the first day the software was released or not. The important thing is how long it takes the company to respond. If they had no knowledge of the vulnerability, it's a worst case scenario.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.