If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 2015-08-04 16:47, Eric Stevens wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08..._exploit_wild/ "The amusing vulnerability in Apple's OS X that grants administrator-level access to anyone who asks is being exploited in the wild by malware. Yeah, malware exists for Macs, this isn't the 1990s. Anyone logged in to a vulnerable OS X computer, or any software running on it, can use the security hole to gain the same privileges as the powerful root user, meaning they can install new programs, change files, remove or add new users, wreck the system, and so on, at will. According to Adam Thomas of Malwarebytes, dodgy software distributed on the internet is now exploiting the vulnerability to inject the VSearch and Genieo adware plus the MacKeeper junkware on to Macs, and point users at an app to download from the official App Store." Yeah - just funny how the approximately 100M Mac users are rarely, if ever, affected by such "Malware". There are many theoretical exploits, and to be sure some of them are dangerous and able to do damage (esp. from the info gathering side and take-over (bot net) side) - but they are also paved over by Apple on a regular (if not urgent) basis. They often need the attacker to have physical access to the computer to be infected. The remaining few are trivial to detect and trivial to remove w/o resorting to Malware protection. Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 2015-08-05 09:37, PeterN wrote:
On 8/5/2015 7:06 AM, AnthonyL wrote: snip It strikes me as being bad form to let users have physical access to their computers and even worse form to allow them permissions to install anything on them. Bring back the mainframe I say. Many software publishers would like to see that happen. Except, what you call mainframe, they call the cloud. Bring back dumb terminals. Dumb terminals are for dumb users. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 8/6/2015 11:27 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: It strikes me as being bad form to let users have physical access to their computers and even worse form to allow them permissions to install anything on them. Bring back the mainframe I say. Many software publishers would like to see that happen. Except, what you call mainframe, they call the cloud. no they wouldn't. The all knowing speaks again, for all publishers. as if you do? Never claimed that, you proposed to speak for all. selling apps is big business. apps use the cloud. apps are not going away. twisting. -- PeterN |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 8/6/2015 11:44 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-08-05 09:37, PeterN wrote: On 8/5/2015 7:06 AM, AnthonyL wrote: snip It strikes me as being bad form to let users have physical access to their computers and even worse form to allow them permissions to install anything on them. Bring back the mainframe I say. Many software publishers would like to see that happen. Except, what you call mainframe, they call the cloud. Bring back dumb terminals. Dumb terminals are for dumb users. https://fasab.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/stupid-people.jpg -- PeterN |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. -- sid |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 2015-08-06 12:55, sid wrote:
nospam wrote: In article , Alan Browne wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. The point is that root access, if "achieved" will have no power over critical parts of the system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System...ity_Protection I've been running this iMac without a root account for nearly 3 years. Prior Mac's root account was used exactly twice over a period of nearly 6 years and only because I was doing things out of curiosity and experimentation that weren't "needed" to be done. Sudo is enough. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , PeterN
wrote: It strikes me as being bad form to let users have physical access to their computers and even worse form to allow them permissions to install anything on them. Bring back the mainframe I say. Many software publishers would like to see that happen. Except, what you call mainframe, they call the cloud. no they wouldn't. The all knowing speaks again, for all publishers. as if you do? Never claimed that, you proposed to speak for all. selling apps is big business. apps use the cloud. apps are not going away. twisting. there is no twisting. you said 'many software publishers would like to see that happen' (quoted above), referring to users not being able to install apps. that is flat out *false*. although industry is definitely moving to the cloud, it still requires the user to have and install native apps to access the cloud. apps are *not* going away nor do 'many software publishers' want that. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , sid
wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. thus the nickname 'rootless', which means means root can do less. the official name is system integrity protection. only code that's codesigned to make system modifications can do so, such as what happens during a system update. the only way around that would be to crack the codesigning and then spoof it so that it has the proper credentials. good luck on that one. the end result is that it's for all intents, not possible to hack. nothing is truly impossible, but the bar is *extremely* high, *much* higher than before. hackers will go after easier targets. like android. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-08-06 12:55, sid wrote: nospam wrote: In article , Alan Browne wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. The point is that root access, if "achieved" will have no power over critical parts of the system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System...ity_Protection I've been running this iMac without a root account for nearly 3 years. Prior Mac's root account was used exactly twice over a period of nearly 6 years and only because I was doing things out of curiosity and experimentation that weren't "needed" to be done. Sudo is enough. The article that you refer to implies that SIP can be disabled. -- teleportation kills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple-Verizon's latest ingratiating, self-aware, pandering iPhone ad | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 4 | May 14th 14 01:29 AM |
Are you aware about your health?? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 1 | May 21st 07 06:53 PM |
ICM-aware image viewer? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 7 | April 20th 06 07:59 AM |
ACDSee 7 ICC Aware? | Nathan Gutman | Digital Photography | 5 | January 6th 06 05:59 PM |
viewer/album software that is version aware and can tag photos? | peter | Digital Photography | 6 | August 12th 04 09:50 PM |