Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Knew of Latest Java 0-Day Security Hole In August

An anonymous reader writes "After news broke on Thursday that a new Java 0-day vulnerability had been discovered, and was already being included in multiple popular exploit kits, two new important tidbits have come in on Friday. Firstly, this whole fiasco could have been avoided if Oracle had properly patched a previous vulnerability. Furthermore, not only is the vulnerability being exploited in the wild, but it is being used to push ransomware." Meanwhile, writes reader Beeftopia, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is getting in on the action, and "has warned users to disable or uninstall Java software on their computers, amid continuing fears and an escalation in warnings from security experts that hundreds of millions of business and consumer users are vulnerable to a serious flaw."

64 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Had a few users burned by this today at work. One emergency security meeting later and we pulled Java from 3000 workstations this afternoon. Should have done this a year ago.

    1. Re:Burned by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 3, Funny

      But than how are you going to run Vuze?

    2. Re:Burned by Patch86 · · Score: 2

      Er, our company does. External SSH pipes, anyway.

      Why would you allow employees indiscriminate access to non-company machines from inside the corporate network? That would be security policy stupidity extraordinaire.

    3. Re:Burned by mevets · · Score: 2

      come on mods - that is funny....

  2. Excuse to upgrade shitty intranet apps? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I use java solely for Eclipse development but I do not have the plugin installed on my browsers.

    The people at work who still cling to IE 6 and IE 7 also are stuck in Java land and is the sole reason why XP is still alive kicking and screaming. Many still use NTLM version 1 security pre 1999 that can crack any account on AD because these apps wont work with anything newer than 13 years old!

    With the department of homeland security recommendations perhaps we can finally move on and get rid of these dinosaurs that are a liability to our employers.

    Shame on Oracle.

    Java had such high hopes and Sun fucked up royally too beforehand. If Java could have native .exes and kept being updated perhaps it could be as good as .NET and we could all run Linux with our cross platform natively compiled apps in such an alternative universe.

    Besides a few limited uses for mainframes I think it is time we said goodbye and put it to legacy ala Cobol 2.0? The question is what next? ... not language wise but richness in api wise and frameworks which is why .NET and Java are liked for complex 3-tier enterprise platforms.

  3. it's not 0-day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if Oracle knew about it in August

    1. Re:it's not 0-day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if they knew about it for that long then they should be able to be sued for negligence.

      Perhaps when the software industry has to accept the same liability and culpability as anyone else they will take their job seriously.

      Aircraft are extremely complex and they cant use that as a get out of jail free card, software should not be able to either. If they want protection and patents then they can accept the down side, liability.

    2. Re:it's not 0-day by Lisias · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they want protection and patents then they can accept the down side, liability.

      +2 Really Insightful

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    3. Re:it's not 0-day by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why programming is not an engineering profession despite what many keep claiming.

      Until they have the same standards as a mechanical, aerospace, chemical, etc engineers they are not really engineers.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    4. Re: it's not 0-day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You get what you pay for. "So, you want me to synthesize a new material, build a few skyscrapers with it, all on top of the landfill foundation the last team built, and make last at least 2 years before any substantial maintenance is performed? In a few months with a small team of survivalists?" I'm sure that'll work out great because those structural engineers are accredited.

    5. Re: it's not 0-day by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If a structural engineer signs off on that without doing the actual calculations to show it is safe and that project is investigated they will lose their license.

      They will also end up with criminal liability.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    6. Re: it's not 0-day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point is that even highly paid engineers cannot engineer the miraculous things that software systems are supposed to do in the equivalent allotted time, manpower and money, while maintaining the reliability and quality expected of their field.

    7. Re:it's not 0-day by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It usually makes for very boring news so it is not covered very much except in things like trade journals. However real engineers are sued for design flaws when they don't do things correctly.

      The laws acknowledge that no matter what there is always a chance of failure. If you did the work and can show that the odds of failure are .001% and the system still fails it will be investigated but as long as you are correct it is likely nothing will happen since rare events do happen.

      However if you falsify the work, falsify the calculations, end up with calculations that are far off of reality then you can and are held liable in many cases.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    8. Re: it's not 0-day by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That is absolutely true. The problem is that software is not delivering on all those things, it just promises all of those things.

      For a real engineering profession you have the whole sign off system and if someone wants something done for a song and to do everything you don't sign off on it. If they try to get around that sign off there are some pretty serious legal consequences to that.

      For programmers there is no legal way to say that the manpower involved is not sufficient to deliver the required quality. They will just be fired and replaced. Without programmers having some level of authority and the responsibility that goes with that you won't really see software getting better since there is no real incentive for it.

      Look at some of the break in stats, 50% of windows break ins last year where form Java and IE made up about 3% yet Microsoft and IE are still blamed for all the security problems. Why should Java or Flash really try to do much better if the average person is not going to blame them or making purchasing decisions based on that anyways?

      If you are a programming for Oracle and you say that X design is dangerous and you won't do it you will be fired.
      If you are a chemical engineer and you say a certain reactor design is dangerous it will be fixed or it won't get used.
      That is the real difference and that is what programmers need to have also.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    9. Re: it's not 0-day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Software is "designed" all the time. The downside is that you can only get "more of the same" that way. There's a reason why software engineering is mostly known for bloated code that works but doesn't really do what you need it to do. When engineers build truly new stuff, things routinely go wrong as well. See the Boeing Dreamliner or the Airbus A380 for examples. The structural engineering for big builds is hugely expensive, even when it's not groundbreaking. Software is both much more complex and almost always substantially new, because most things that aren't new are abstracted and automated. No sane engineer would sign off on a build with as many variables and new techniques as are in medium sized software projects. If getting software bugs under control were as easy as doing "proper engineering", it would be a solved problem: We would just apply engineering methods and call it a day. Tools which enable software developers to check for correctness are a very active research topic, but even advanced tools still only scratch the surface of big projects. Complete correctness proofs are almost intractable even for example sized code.

  4. Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by gQuigs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They are used on less than .2% of websites, and many are false positives. Yes some might not be detected as well. I am aware there is one very popular video service that uses Silverlight, can't say the same about Java.

    Click on the language for more details
    http://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/client_side_language/all

    1. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Informative

      Silverlight is at least used for NetFlex and is much more secure and updated by MS.

      Java is insanely popular with old IE in the enterprise market. Banks which support Chrome and Firefox for us with consumer banking sometimes only support IE 6 - 8 with Java 5 (no I did not mistype that) for corporate customers where security exploits are used in java so accountants can put ole excel spreadsheets inside their browser for the bank to see.

      Apparently these banks have not discovered javascript yet and tools to read excel docs and reformat them internally. I guess many corps still use excel 2003 with binary data in their .xls files unlike .xlsx which make reading and parsing harder.

      Anyway, this is who heavily still uses it.

    2. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's quiet a few Android devices running Java. And developers need Java on their PCs to write apps for them

      That may be so; but it's not really a reason for people to keep Java enabled in their browsers.

      Several months ago I disabled the Java plugins/extensions in all the browsers I use. Know what I noticed? Absolutely nothing. No sites that I frequent used Java *at all*. My experience browsing the web didn't change an iota.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      Several months ago I disabled the Java plugins/extensions in all the browsers I use. Know what I noticed? Absolutely nothing. No sites that I frequent used Java *at all*. My experience browsing the web didn't change an iota.

      I had the exact same experience. Kind of sad actually given all the potential we could see when java was first announced. But in this world, java on the web is effectively dead.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dig hard enough and I'm sure you'll find equally arcane .NET setups. Remember, kids: the only difference between Java and .NET is that Java was paved with good intentions.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    5. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by BradleyUffner · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's quiet a few Android devices running Java. And developers need Java on their PCs to write apps for them

      Android is NOT running java. It's applications are written in the java language, but are not compiled to java byte-code.

    6. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Several months ago I disabled the Java plugins/extensions in all the browsers I use. Know what I noticed? Absolutely nothing. No sites that I frequent used Java *at all*. My experience browsing the web didn't change an iota.

      I had the exact same experience. Kind of sad actually given all the potential we could see when java was first announced. But in this world, java on the web is effectively dead.

      You know its bad when ActiveX from 2001/IE6 era at least had trust signed applets witn security turning unsigned applets off by default . Fucking pathetic and shows how out of date Java really is even back in 2001! Sun really let it out to rot while Oracle wont even release fixes until a quarterly update.

      May Java RIP.

      I really wanted to like it as I thought with native compiler or a fat binary we could all be using Linux now with a gui framework next to none. Swing is really powerfull but ugly and slow in 1999 era hardware with JIT. .NET is the future but it is tied to Windows for server apps as I can see until the next big thing has an answer and HUGE framework.

      Java should be studied in I.T. management courses of greatly engineered products killed by incompetent management. Yes, java was hot and even secure shit back in 1990s! It just was never really updated extensively.

      I still have found memories of programming in it even if the syntax was verbose and I shudder at the idea of Linux dying due to everyone using .NET now in the server room. If JavaFX had been around in the 1990s with real compilers and signed applets perhaps we would not have flash today.

      Android is a classic example of what Java could have been 10 years ago in the browser if Sun got their shit together.

    7. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I remember back when it was coming out a big deal was made about how the VM was in a sandbox and couldn't nuke user or system files under any circumstances. Convenience killed good intentions and now we may as well be on activeX bullshit.

    8. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      But in this world, java on the web is effectively dead.

      What killed it?
      My experience seems to be that flash has replaced everything that java was supposed to do.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    9. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      Android runs Dalvik. It's a clean-room partial implementation but uses a different architecture. Perhaps, theoretically, it's vulnerable to the same problem but Android doesn't include applet nor java web start functionality.

      As for developing using the JDK, don't install the public JRE. The 64bit version is safer since, last time I checked, browsers for 64bit Windows are still 32bit and hence the plugin won't work!

    10. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by TopSpin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      java on the web is effectively dead

      What killed it?

      It's clunky. That's the shortest correct explanation I can provide. The whole user experience is just awful.

      The first thing you experience when you encounter a Java applet is a sinking feeling as the browser becomes unresponsive with a large gray void somewhere on the page that will eventually render the applet. Sometimes this is alleviated slightly by a progress indicator in some weird JVM font that looks like it was salvaged from OpenBoot. All this "loading" takes large amounts of RAM so the OS starts paging which creates more anxiety for the user as the drive LED indicates vast amounts of mysterious IO. In any case the process takes too long and by the time the applet has rendered something meaningful most users have lost patience.

      At this point the applet has started rendering. Frequently this is a bad thing because many Java applets are tragically ugly. Repulsive, really. So bad they look like hastily made email phishing attempts. It would have been better if the "loading" had never ended leaving the user to seek alternatives. The moment a user sees those fonts they squint, groan a bit inside and consider calling someone for help. The GUI widgets look weird. Things don't work right, like copy and paste or common GUI hot keys. And everything lags; you can feel extra tens of milliseconds of lag with every UI operation; click, scroll, whatever. It all lags.

      Finally whatever unfortunate task led our victim here has been accomplished and it's time to leave. You click 'home' or some link or whatever to be on your way and BOOM!, the browser segfaults and closes. Recent browsers mitigate this habit by isolating applets (and other plug-ins) in process sandboxes, but the user still gets that extra little poke in the eye to top off the rest of the 'experience.' The sort of effort required to make the JVM run smoothly inside common browsers has never been applied and to this day it is a fragile and crashy combination.

      People that care about the user experience, people with tens or hundreds of millions of users using their site(s), don't tolerate this heinous shit. So Java applets die the death they deserve.

      --
      Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    11. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Tridus · · Score: 2

      That'd be because Oracle's Java updater had a nasty habit of turning the browser plugins back on. Not sure if they've fixed that yet or not.

      Besides, it's just standard security practice. If you don't need something, removing it is the safest way to go. At this point, most home users have no need for Java whatsoever.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    12. Re:Time to just remove Java (and Silverlight)? by Alomex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      to provide a richer *and* secure programming environment inside a web browser, it's clear that aspect of it is a failure.

      This was clear five minutes after Java was introduced. Eighteen years later the web still is mostly a static medium with modest programming. So modest indeed that a screwed-up dynamically scoped mishmash of a script language (JavaScript) suffices to meet them.

      Java was a 45K ton battleship when all that was needed was an 100lb sturdy fishing dory.

  5. Please, can we stop with "0-day"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can we please, please, please stop using the term "0-day"? It's completely meaningless here. Actually, it's worse than meaningless as it's used incorrectly and just makes things confusing. Is it a noun? Is it an adjective? Depends on who's writing the Slashdot headline! Try reading the headline and article while omitting the text "0-day" and you'll see it reads just fine and actually makes sense now.

  6. The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by mark_osmd · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was reading that the vulnerability is not in general standalone Java but only in the Java plugin in your browser, that is, you can secure from the issue by disabling the Java plugin in your web browsers but it's not that big of a risk to a standalone Java app. Is that true?

    1. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was reading that the vulnerability is not in general standalone Java but only in the Java plugin in your browser, that is, you can secure from the issue by disabling the Java plugin in your web browsers but it's not that big of a risk to a standalone Java app. Is that true?

      Yep. Instructions are here to disable it. Or enable it for corporate folks in a seperate secure zone. IE 6 - 9 maybe retarded in HTML rendering, but knows when it is on the net vs a lan and loads different security settings.

      If you are just a home user go under addons in Firefox and IE and disable sun/oracle and java. DONE. You are secure at this point. The security exploit is not java per say but the browser as it executes by default unsigned with no authentication nor permission! A HUGE security risk. BUt without access to run it can't do anything.

    2. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by thue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Standalone Java apps already have full arbitrary code execution and full access to the system. What would be the point of using an exploit to gain access to a system you can already access. If you are running a standalone Java app, you have already chosen to trust the code completely, unlike a sandboxed app in a browser.

    3. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      If you are just a home user go under addons in Firefox and IE and disable sun/oracle and java. DONE.

      I just updated yesterday to the latest Java (addons v7.10.2.18 in FF, v7.0.100.18 in IE) and I swear that the update re-enabled my previously disabled plugins in FF and IE.

      I only checked on a whim after reading your post.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by sourcerror · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that in fact runs untrusted code (say, third-party web applications) and places them in a Java sandbox, then they can use this exploit to leave the sandbox.

      Only applets run in sandbox so there's nothing to leave. On the server side there are two choices:

      - shared hosting (Tomcat): everyone uses the same VM just like with PHP so we are sparing memory, but increasing the security risk
      - virtual private server: everyone uses the their own VM and everyone is secure

    5. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by _xeno_ · · Score: 2

      Only applets run in sandbox so there's nothing to leave.

      Wrong. Anything can be placed, optionally, in a sandbox.

      - shared hosting (Tomcat): everyone uses the same VM just like with PHP so we are sparing memory, but increasing the security risk

      Look up the Tomcat -security option, which enables a SecurityManager and places each individual web application in its own sandbox. It's an option, it "works," and this vulnerability would circumvent it.

      Now, granted, no one bothers actually using the option, but it is there.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    6. Re:The hole is only relevant to the Java plugin? by Tridus · · Score: 2

      Yeah, the Java updater likes to enable itself in your browser for future exploiting.

      That's why the best advice is "remove Java".

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
  7. Re:How to run java on the intranet safely by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can setup IE to use java internally on intranets only.

    Instructions are here and is a must in 2013 for any IT support professional! They can still have their netmeetings and be secure at the same time. IE has security zones under preferences. One for Internet, another for intranet if you fiddle in the options. Under Internet disable java scripting, note this is not javascript. Under intranet enable java scripting.

    Instructions for enabling java for intranet security zones only in group policies are here.

    After that all your users are safe and they can still run their shit ERP apps and Netmeetings. At least this is a temporary solution until they upgrade their software as I agree. Internet wise there is no reason to run it except for a few banks.

  8. Re:Jave whitelist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not going to hurt you to play minecraft, you don't have to pretend. Just don't install the fucking browser plugin.

  9. It is so obvious... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It is so obvious, why do not the Java users see this...

    .
    It has become apparent that Oracle either does not understand the concept of computer security....

    - or -

    Oracle does understand the concept of computer security, and they are using these exploits to kill off Java, which they do not want to support anymore.

    What else can it be?

    (btw, my bet is that Oracle is clueless regarding computing security)

    1. Re:It is so obvious... by Junta · · Score: 2

      Why does Oracle's incompetency and disinterest in Java have to be mutually exclusive propositions?

      Of course, for having spent 7.4 billion dollars acquiring Sun, Oracle hasn't put much effort into preseving the value of the assets from that acquisition. Solaris is stagnant, all the Sun efforts to *try* to compete with Linux seem abandoned. Java is a security nightmare on top of being generally despised on end user client platforms. Java's biggest success as a platform has been in Android, and Oracle's response is trying to undermine Google through legal action.

      It seems the biggest issue is not Oracle's technical competency or lack thereof, but the business competency certainly seems dubious....

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    2. Re:It is so obvious... by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are numerous indications to be found in their enterprise database products that Oracle really _is_ clueless with regard to security. For example, they do not know how to protect passwords and certificates against competent attackers. Such a company has no business being even a tiny bit as important as Oracle is today. Apparently there are no working mechanisms in capitalism to keep monsters like them under control.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  10. Re:Bring your own Java? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

    You kind of brought up my topic:

    1. There is non-browser-related software that runs on Java. The software for my cheapo vector network analyzer is written in Java, for instance. Then you have other things, even system software such as Dalvik. Thus, even if we can make it go away in the browser, we can't everywhere else.

    2. That brings up your point: my software didn't bring its own JRE. However, it turns out it runs just fine on OpenJRE. MY question: is OpenJDK/JRE vulnerable to this exploit? Is Dalvik? Or is this an inherent vulnerability to the language or interpreter (no matter who writes it) itself? (I hope that makes sense...)

    Yep, they are all insecure. Dalvik? It is an interpretter and not run in a browser so no. OpenJDK is OracleJDK with a few proprietary libraries from Adobe and a few others replaced with equilivent functioning ones.

    The exploit only works on a browser so disable it in IE and Firefox and you are good. If that program works in a browser you need to setup an IE zone and add an exception to your site, or use Firefox with noscript or set click to run as default?

  11. How to disable java on every major browser by CNeb96 · · Score: 2
  12. Wouldn't that make this... by segoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a -150 (approx) day vulnerability?

  13. What happened to Java? by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in college (when Java was the new thing) one of its big touted features was security -- all applets would run in a sandbox, Java would be written in bytecode that would be automatically verified before it was executed, array access indices would be bounds-checked, etc etc. This all made Java execute more slowly than the alternatives (er, ActiveX?), but the (expected) upside was that Java would be super-secure and we wouldn't have to worry about our computers getting exploited by evil web pages that we accidentally loaded.

    Now it's 2013 and Java (at least in the context of a web browser) is turning into an unreliable bug-fest.

    So, what happened? Is it just a matter of incompetence at Oracle (and/or Sun)? Or is Java's security model fundamentally broken in some way that other in-web-browser languages (particularly JavaScript) are not? Where are all these security holes coming from?

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    1. Re:What happened to Java? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is that security cost usability.

      Completely disable the ability of Java to read/write files on the local filesystem and it'd be a lot more secure for example, but then it'd be more useful as well.
      "" direct access to graphics hardware, "" - well pretty much everything. And once you crack the door open a little it's really hard to find and close all the corner cases that open up.

    2. Re:What happened to Java? by Dolda2000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's mostly a matter of incompetence in the implementation, indeed. The Java vulnerabilities I have followed have always included calling some obscure part of the Java class library which is implemented using native code (mostly for optimization reasons) that happened to be buggy in some way.

      It should be said in this case, however, that the new Java 7 dynamic language support infrastructure, which is one of the things Oracle added since they took Java over. Many of the things Oracle has done to Java lately (and especially as additions in Java 7) have struck me as poorly designed features that just allowed Oracle to check of some feature-lists to make Java appear as "feature-complete" as dotnet.

    3. Re:What happened to Java? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Theo de Raadt once said, "these guys can't write a secure OS, why would you expect them to write a secure VM?"

      These bugs have always existed in Java, but no one went out to exploit them because there were easier vulnerabilities available. Now as Microsoft has put more emphasis on security, the low-hanging fruit has become Acrobat reader, then Flash, now Java. Used to be you could smash the Microsoft stack any time you wanted. Now they are randomizing the stack and it's not so easy.....

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:What happened to Java? by Mathematiker · · Score: 2

      The problem is that security cost usability.

      Completely disable the ability of Java to read/write files on the local filesystem and it'd be a lot more secure for example, but then it'd be more useful as well.

      This problem has already been solved, and solved mostly well. It is possible to specify exactly where a piece of java code may access files, and enforce it.

      The problem is that some bugs in the JVM make it possible to bypass these checks, and then p.ex. access files that should be impossible to access.

  14. Non Oracle Java by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the future here is Java not from Oracle. We don't use their engine on servers now so why the hell would we use it on clients?

    Oracle haven't got their act together, and obviously without a decent revenue stream they're not going to try, so time to move on from them.

  15. Java is required? by BigBunion · · Score: 2

    It drives me crazy- my kids have several java-based websites they are required to use for school. I'm not too worried if their laptops get borked- there's nothing of value on them. When the nasties spread across the network to my PC and my server, I've got real problems. What do I do besides complain to the school?

  16. Be careful what you wish for. by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I see a lot of posts saying, "I don't need java applets. None of the web sites I visit use java applets. We should use this an an opportunity to let java applets die. Die, applets, die die!"

    There are a lot of problems with this simplistic response.

    One problem is that a lot of people are using java applets to do things that are important to them. Applets are widely used in the medical industry. I teach physics for a living, and there are several educational applets, written by other people, that I use to demonstrate ideas about thermodynamics. (Warning, car analogy coming up.) Just because you don't drive a Honda Fit, that doesn't mean it's OK to tell every owner of a Honda Fit that they aren't allowed to drive it anymore.

    The other problem is that you have to consider the alternatives.

    Javascript is in many ways a nice little language. However, it's a disaster because of the lack of a standardized DOM, and it simply doesn't have the necessary facilities to do all the things that a java applet can do.

    Flash is essentially proprietary, has been designed in a chaotic way, and is a frequent vector for malware, comparable to java applets and adobe reader.

    Silverlight is only viable on Windows.

    Java applets, warts and all, have some important advantages because of the design of java. Java was designed to be extremely portable. Java (unlike flash and javascript) was intended from the start to be a good general-purpose programming language. Java and java applets were vastly overhyped back in the 90's, but java applets are in fact an important and useful web technology that some people need and want. The problem seems to be that an important and useful web technology has fallen under the control of a corporation that is irresponsible about security.

    1. Re:Be careful what you wish for. by Mathematiker · · Score: 4, Informative

      An appropriate solution would be to use something like noscript, which automatically blocks all java applets (flash and javascript as well), and makes it easy to maintain a whitelist of websites that are allowed to run java applets/javascript/flash/etc.

    2. Re:Be careful what you wish for. by crafoo · · Score: 2

      Google Chrome and their Native Client system seems like it would give you what you want.

  17. This is like the online SCADA vulnerability issue by Required+Snark · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is remarkably similar the recent post on SCADA devices being vulnerable because they were directly accessible on the net. http://slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=scada

    These are not primarily technical failures, they are institutional failures. The issue is not that Java has a zero day failure; these things happen. The critical failure is that Oracle knew what was going on before this hit the news and they could have avoided the problem with better practices.

    The US has a Laissez-faire attitude towards computer security. It's all left up to the good will of the provider, which is clearly a mistake. Some organizations do a good job, but many fail. This is because security requires expending effort, and there is a natural tendency to cut corners to save money.

    In theory, the market will be self correcting, because of the cost associated with failure. In practice, this does not occur. Neither the direct financial cost or the reputational costs are big enough to modify organizational behavior. That's why there is an never ending stream of these kinds of events.

    Ironically, it seems that highly visible open source projects have a better track record then the private sector. This shows the high level of professionalism that open source organizations maintain.

    Thing will never get any better until the cost of failure becomes much greater. This means having serious fines and/or larger payouts to those who are harmed by the security breach.

    Right now the cost of cleanup after a security failure is so low that there is no meaningful incentive to be proactive. Is Oracle going to have any negative economic repercussions as a result of this screw up? Of course not. Therefore, they will do nothing to change their ways. Until there is some mechanism to hold providers responsible for failure to act there will be no change.

    To clarify the point, the liability should be for failure to act once a problem is found, not for the existence of the original security problem. Having a SCADA device visible on the net with a default password is the kind of event that should cause liability. Likewise not fixing a critical security hole as soon as it is discovered as in this case with Oracle.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  18. Why so horrified? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has nobody on this site actually had to meet a deadline? Has nobody had to make some trade-offs to get a product out the door? Why would Java be different?

    If you are working on a non-trivial project, and you don't know about at least half a dozen horrible "zero-day" flaws, then you don't know your project very well!

    In real life, businesses have to make trade-offs. They can't fix everything. Every release cycle, product managers have to make decisions about which fixes go in, and which fixes have to wait. I'm no Java fan, but with as many people poking around it as there are, I'm amazed that there aren't many more known vulnerabilities!

    1. Re:Why so horrified? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Java is a platform, not a normal application. It's infrastructure. A bug in the infrastructure potentially affects every application depending on that infrastructure. That makes the impact of every bug orders of magnitude larger than it is in a normal application. The importance of that outweighs the importance of deadlines.

  19. AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH NOOOOOOOO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Javascript. Fuck me!

    The only thing in computing more fucking brain dead than javascript is XML. You bastards! You've sucked the brain cells out of too many people with your bullshit non-programming and bullshit non-formats.

    If java is dead and javascript is the answer then you've asked the wrong fucking question!

    1. Re:AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH NOOOOOOOO! by isopropanol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because it is possible to code badly in an language does not mean you can only code badly.

    2. Re:AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH NOOOOOOOO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Someone should tell enterprise Java developers that.

  20. Horrified because professionalism is expected by dbIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Has nobody on this site actually had to meet a deadline? Has nobody had to make some trade-offs to get a product out the door?

    Because it's used by others so effectively infrastructure, thus irresponsible to cut corners before release. To invoke a car analogy it's like opening a bridge on the announced date without finishing it in one lane so that cars driving from one direction keep falling into the water. Such an example appears so ridiculous because it's comparing a carefully planned engineering project on one hand (the bridge) with a room full of blindfolded basketweavers trying to weave bits of an elephant shaped basket while being shouted at in a language they cannot understand and none of them know what an elephant looks like (a typical mismanaged software project like your above example with your "tradeoffs").

  21. horribly misleading title by buddyglass · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oracle was notified of the vulnerability and attempted to fix it. Their fix was inadequate. So they're just incompetent instead of willfully dismissive of security concerns.

  22. Amazed? by mevets · · Score: 2

    I am surprised that you find it amazing that list of obscure lumps of software all beginning with the word java confuse people.
    Do you find it more, or less amazing that java (perhaps java dash some-obscure-addendum) has eclipsed flash and windows as the malware enabler of choice?
    17 years ago java(-.*)* was unleashed, heralded as the saviour of robustness, security and apple pie at only the cost of a few âoemooreâ(TM)s incrementsâ and uniformly ugly interfaces. Now we have this steaming pile.
    Now we have a feature to disable it. I bet that âfeatureâ(TM) becomes target #1 of the next wave of malware, so well intentioned people will only think they have disabled it?

    1. Re:Amazed? by aled · · Score: 2

      I am surprised that you find it amazing that list of obscure lumps of software all beginning with the word java confuse people.

      I had expected the slashdot community not to make that kind of mistakes. Wrong assumption it seams.

      Do you find it more, or less amazing that java (perhaps java dash some-obscure-addendum) has eclipsed flash and windows as the malware enabler of choice?

      More. I must confess I hadn't expected it at all. I started to be aware of serious security problems with the series of exploits for the Java implementation for Apple platform, 1 or 2 years ago.
      I don't know if it something that Oracle is doing particularly wrong in the last years or if it is just that hackers are more active lately. Oracle will have to strengthen seriously Java for any kind of remote exploits or disable the plugin for default.

      17 years ago java(-.*)* was unleashed, heralded as the saviour of robustness, security and apple pie at only the cost of a few âoemooreâ(TM)s incrementsâ and uniformly ugly interfaces. Now we have this steaming pile.

      I don't understand exactly what your point is. Java has a lot of good things and also has its problems. The security problems -as serious as it is- don't invalidate other benefits of the language or the platform, for example for server applications, IDEs, tools, etc.

      Now we have a feature to disable it. I bet that âfeatureâ(TM) becomes target #1 of the next wave of malware, so well intentioned people will only think they have disabled it?

      As may happen with any other platform. I think it is positive that Oracle acknowledges somewhat that there is a general problem and implements an option to disable the Java plugin. I have at work and at home several Java programs that are not applets and is good to be able to use them without being forced to be open to these kind of security problems.

      --

      "I think this line is mostly filler"