Revealed: Chrome Really Was Exploited At Pwnium 2013

Posted by timothy on Tuesday March 19, 2013 @01:29AM from the for-some-values-of-exploited dept.

Freshly Exhumed writes with an "inconvenient truth" as reported at Internet News: "Google Chrome running Chrome OS was hailed as being a survivor in the Pwnium/Pwn2own event that hacked IE, Firefox and Chrome browsers on Windows. Apple's Safari running on Mac OS X was not hacked and neither (apparently) was Chrome on Chrome OS. Google disclosed [Monday] morning that Chrome on Chrome OS had in fact been exploited — albeit, unreliably. The same researcher that took Google's money last year for exploiting Chrome, known publicly only as 'PinkiePie' was awarded $40,000 for exploiting Chrome/Chrome OS via a Linux kernel bug, config file error and a video parsing flaw." Asks Freshly Exhumed: "So, was it really Google Chrome, or was Linux to blame?"

1 of 102 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Google is a responsible firm by tuppe666 · 2013-03-19 02:07 · Score: 0, Redundant

This is an unashamedly attack Linux/Chrome from those, with some of the most emotive language I have ever seen [Seriously "inconvenient truth"(sic)]. The only truth here is Operating Systems are not impenetrable. Words like blame should only be thrown around, when the part of the OS is designed without security in mind; fixes are not implemented in a *timely* manner. I don't have to provide examples.
The only "inconvenient truth*(sic) is that Google and Intel are *responsible* [and others] for securing that Driver [i915], which I use on GNU/Linux, and due to this event and $4000 Google have made my computer a little more secure. It shows how incredibly successful Stallmans Licence GPL2 can be used by Linus as a "Tit for Tat" License, for an Open source graphics driver.