This text is replaced by the Flash movie.
 

Posts Tagged ‘ Mac OS ’

By Gregg Keizer
March 23, 2011

FRAMINGHAM – Apple on Monday patched 56 vulnerabilities, most of them critical flaws that could be used to hijack machines, as part of 2011′s first broad update of Mac OS X.

Among the fixes was one for a vulnerability that four-time Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller didn’t get a chance to use at the hacking contest earlier this month.

Of the 56 bugs patched in the update for Snow Leopard, 45 were accompanied by the phrase “arbitrary code execution,” Apple-speak for rating the flaws as “critical.” Unlike many other major software makers, like Microsoft and Oracle, Apple doesn’t assign severity rankings to vulnerabilities.

According to Apple’s advisory , more than a dozen of the bugs can be exploited by “drive-by” attacks that execute as soon as a victim browses to a malicious Web site with an unpatched edition of Mac OS X.

Several in that class resided in Apple Type Services (ATS), the operating system’s font renderer, and could be exploited using malicious documents embedded with specially-crafted fonts. Of those four vulnerabilities, two were reported by researchers from Apple’s rival Google.

Other drive-by attacks could be launched using malformed files exploiting six vulnerabilities in Mac OS X’s ImageIO component, another five in QuickTime and two in QuickLook, the operating system’s document preview tool.

One of the latter was uncovered by Charlie Miller and Dion Blazakis, researchers with the Baltimore-based consulting firm Independent Security Evaluators (ISE). Miller, who has won cash prizes at the Pwn2Own hacking challenge four years running, and Blazakis planned to use their QuickLook bug to hack Mac OS X and Apple’s Safari browser at the contest.

But because Miller and Blazakis drew a late spot at Pwn2Own, they were unable to use the vulnerability: A team from the French security company Vupen, which had the first crack, broke Safari and hijacked a MacBook Air to win the $15,000 prize with a different bug.

“[Mac OS X] 10.6.7 fixes a ton of bugs. It slaughters at least 4 I was sitting on including my OS X entry to pwn2own I didn’t get to use,” said Miller in a Monday tweet .

Miller and Blazakis sold their unused vulnerability and exploit to HP TippingPoint’s Zero Day Initiative (ZDI), the Pwn2Own sponsor.

The second day of Pwn2Own, Miller and Blazakis exploited another bug to hack an Apple iPhone , and walked off with their own check for $15,000.

The update to Mac OS X 10.6.7 also fixed several non-security bugs including issues in the AirPort Wi-Fi driver, and offered numerous enhancements, such as a reliability improvement to MobileMe’s Back to Mac remote access technology.

Users of new MacBook Pro notebooks also received a fix Apple said would “improve graphics stability and external display compatibility” in the laptops, Apple’s first to boast processors from Intel’s new Sandy Bridge line.

Apple’s support forum has been flooded with complaints that the new MacBook Pros lock up when stressed by graphics processing chores.

Mac OS X 10.6.7 and the separate 2011-001 security update for Leopard can be downloaded at the Apple site or installed using the operating system’s integrated update service.

The update downloads weigh in between 241MB and 475MB for the client versions of Snow Leopard and Leopard.

  • Squidoo
  • Multiply
  • Facebook
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • TechNet
  • Technorati Favorites
  • MySpace
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

By Jeff Bertolucci
June 3, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO – It looks like Microsoft isn’t too pleased with Tuesday’s rumors that Google will stop using Windows internally due to security vulnerabilities in the OS. Google reportedly will switch to more secure operating systems, including the Mac OS, Linux, and Google’s upcoming Chrome OS, according to the Financial Times.

Microsoft’s response: Our security is better than you think, and theirs’ really isn’t so great if you look closely enough.

A Tuesday post on The Windows Blog by Microsoft’s Brandon LeBlanc defends Redmond’s honor in the ongoing security debate. He asserts that when it comes to thwarting malware, Microsoft has stepped up its once sorry game.

“When it comes to security, even hackers admit we’re doing a better job making our products more secure than anyone else. And it’s not just the hackers; third party influentials and industry leaders like Cisco tell us regularly that our focus and investment continues to surpass others,” LeBlanc writes.

Microsoft’s more recent security improvements include: Frequent software updates via Windows Update and Microsoft Update, many of which are pushed to users automatically; BitLocker disc encryption improvements in Windows 7; and various security enhancements in Internet Explorer 8, including the SmartScreen filter to thwart malware and phishing attempts online.

Google, Apple Diss

LeBlanc also accuses Google of being a tad hypocritical about security. He links to a Mashable story from March that states that Yale University had delayed switching to Google’s Gmail due to security concerns. “There is some irony here that is hard to overlook,” he writes.

Apple gets the treatment too. LeBlanc points to an InfoWorld article that discusses how the Mac’s growing popularity may make it (and other Apple devices) more appealing targets for hackers.

LeBlanc’s points are valid, and certainly no operating system is 100-percent secure. And it’s also possible that Google’s alleged plan to dump Windows internally–a report that didn’t originate from an official company mouthpiece–may be a sneaky PR stunt to trumpet the security strengths of Google’s Windows competitors, Android and Chrome.

That said, Microsoft has no one to blame but itself for its bad security rap. Indeed, past versions of Windows and Internet Explorer were a hacker’s dream. And even if Redmond has changed its security-deficient ways, its competitors are bound to exploit its malware-friendly image.

  • Squidoo
  • Multiply
  • Facebook
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • TechNet
  • Technorati Favorites
  • MySpace
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

When you buy an Apple device, you’re often locked in to buying other Apple products that are compatible with it. Here are five examples, and some advice on what to do. Oh, wait–there’s nothing you can do.

By Dan Tynan
November 4, 2009

4. Installed Software and Extra, Unwanted Apps
Apple has a history of taking advantage of its iTunes-iPod/iPhone headlock to promote its other products and services. For example, in March 2008 many Windows users were surprised to find Apple’s Safari browser installed on their systems–a little gift left by the latest iTunes update.

At the time, Mozilla CEO John Lilly lit into Apple for the practice. “It undermines the trust relationship great companies have with their customers, and that’s bad–not just for Apple, but for the security of the whole Web,” Lilly wrote.

After enough people complained, Apple made an infinitesimal change, creating a “new software” category in its update app but leaving installation as the default.

In July 2008 Apple’s iTunes update began quietly installing the company’s MobileMe online data-sync service without any notification to the user.

In September of this year, Windows blogger Ed Bott noted that again Apple tried to use updates to an existing software program (Boot Camp) to install an iPhone Configuration Utility, even though he had never used an iPhone. Apple subsequently removed that program from its Windows Update utility. To this day, if you update the QuickTime video player, it will also look to install iTunes, regardless of whether you’ve ever owned an Apple device.

With the exception of MobileMe, none of these software programs generate revenue for Apple. But they do serve to pull users further into Apple’s ecosystem.

4. Shoes and Spies
In March 2007, Apple applied for a patent on technology that allowed it to pair a garment with an electronic sensor, as it had done with the Nike iPod Sport Kit. That kit allowed owners of Nike shoes to track their speed, mileage, and other data on their iPods. Apple’s objective in the patent: to prevent users from removing the sensor from the Nike shoe and putting it into shoes from a different manufacturer–what New Scientist’s Paul Marks called “DRM for your wardrobe.”

Two months later the company filed for a patent on technology that would prevent Apple devices from accepting a charge during certain circumstances. This tech would prevent a thief from recharging your iPhone or iPod, but it could also keep you from charging the device if you tried to sync it with an “unauthorized” PC. And last August the company filed for a patent on sensors that would record “customer abuse events” on Apple products; the data from these sensors would presumably be used to deny warranty repair claims by documenting damage that was the customer’s fault.

Apple is certainly within its rights to patent such technologies; what these applications show, though, is that there is seemingly no limit to what the company wants to control.

Many such lock-in examples exist, to be sure, and we’d like to hear yours, in the comments below.

The question is, do Apple fans care? Widman, for one, says, “Choice is overrated. As a consumer, I’m more interested in something that works.”

It’s a reasonable argument–but also a costly one. Is it really worth it?

Page 3 of 3
<< PREVIOUS
  • Squidoo
  • Multiply
  • Facebook
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • TechNet
  • Technorati Favorites
  • MySpace
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

When you buy an Apple device, you’re often locked in to buying other Apple products that are compatible with it. Here are five examples, and some advice on what to do. Oh, wait–there’s nothing you can do.

By Dan Tynan
November 4, 2009

2. iPhone and the App Store
It’s sad but inescapable: if you want a sexy iPhone in the US, you also have to make do with AT&T (or Globe Telecom here in the Philippines — ed). Your alternatives? Take your chances with iPhone unlocking software (and hope that Apple doesn’t release an OS update that turns the phone into a brick), or move to Europe, where you have a somewhat broader choice of carriers. Locked (though heavily subsidized) phones are an unfortunate fact of life in this country, a situation not unique to the iPhone.

The iPhone’s software shop, on the other hand, is a dictatorship. Apps for the iPhone are available only from the App Store in iTunes. And North Korea’s Kim Jong-il has nothing on the people who run the App Store, whose decisions about what apps may be sold seem more capricious as time goes on. Apps that duplicate (or improve upon) features available from Apple or AT&T are strictly forbidden–hence the ongoing controversy over Google Voice, an application that would allow VoIP calls over the iPhone, if only Apple would approve it.

iPhone owners have had the option of jailbreaking the handset, which allows them to install apps not approved by Apple while voiding the warranty (see the dangers of unlocking, above). With changes that Apple has made to the iPhone 3GS, however, jailbreaking may no longer be possible.

Apple claims that jailbreaking the iPhone violates its copyrights and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Digital-rights organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation beg to differ.

The EFF’s Fred von Lohman argues that iPhone owners should be free to tinker with their phones, especially when they can add capabilities that App Store programs don’t yet provide. He notes that “the courts have long recognized that copying software while reverse-engineering is a fair use when done for purposes of fostering interoperability with independently created software, a body of law that Apple conveniently fails to mention.”

By comparison, things are slightly different for the open-source mobile OS Google Android, whose owners can buy apps from multiple online stores (including AppVee, Handango, and MobiHand). Android apps also undergo an approval process; Google says about 1 percent of apps are rejected. Still, according to Wired, several iPhone developers booted from the App Store are opting for the friendlier environs of Google’s mobile OS, which some say allow them to be freer with both the OS code and the phone features when they’re creating apps.

With each major mobile platform developing its own app stores, more differences may emerge. As its competitors grow in popularity, the iPhone App Store may have to relax some of its restrictions or risk driving away more developers.

3. Mac Computers and the Mac OS
Ever since the Second Coming (aka the return of Steve Jobs to Apple in 1997), the Mac has been a tightly controlled, closed system. The result? High prices and limits on the options you can get with Mac hardware.

For example, you still can’t buy an Apple machine with support for Blu-ray drives. And although Apple has cut prices–in part due to some aggressive Microsoft marketing–the average Mac still costs more than the average Windows PC, according to the latest figures from The NPD Group‘s retail tracking service.

“The Mac showcases the traditional lock-in method of tying software to hardware,” says Rob Enderle, principal analyst with The Enderle Group. “This is the act of making the OS and certain core software inexpensive or free, and subsidizing it by high-margin hardware. It’s a classic misdirection, and it works as long as there isn’t a third party who can compete with a more reasonably priced package (which is what Psystar is trying to do).”

Psystar’s attempts to market hardware capable of running the Mac OS have resulted in an ongoing legal battle between it and Apple; few observers give Psystar much chance of winning that fight.

The main advantage to the marriage of Apple hardware and software is “a unified source of service,” notes Jake Widman, who has written about Apple for two decades, most recently for bMighty’s blogs. “You made everything in this box; you fix it.”

Reopening the Mac OS to third-party manufacturers, as Apple did in the mid-1990s, might lower prices but increase support pain, Widman adds. “I recently compared the cost of a Psystar with that of a Mini (and the old Mini, before the recent bump), and ended up wondering how much hassle one was willing to put up with in order to save $120.”

Has the closed Apple ecosystem resulted in more-reliable, better-supported systems? Apple has traditionally fared well in consumer hardware-reliability surveys (including PC World’s). This year, however, Apple fell to a distant second behind netbook maker Asus in reliability data collected by Rescuecom, an independent customer-support vendor. Recent glitches with the Snow Leopard OS and performance problems with the newly introduced iMacs also suggest that the Mac platform could be losing its purported quality advantage.

Page 2 of 3
<< PREVIOUSNEXT >>

  • Squidoo
  • Multiply
  • Facebook
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • TechNet
  • Technorati Favorites
  • MySpace
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

When you buy an Apple device, you’re often locked in to buying other Apple products that are compatible with it. Here are five examples, and some advice on what to do. Oh, wait–there’s nothing you can do.

By Dan Tynan

November 4, 2009

Art by Luis Anthony Oliveros

Once you enter the Big Tent of Apple, it’s exceedingly hard to find the exit.

Over its 33-year history, Apple has consistently elected to limit consumer choice, creating a situation known as “lock in.” As soon as you start buying stuff from Apple, you’ll find it difficult to move to products made by someone else without losing everything you’ve already paid for.

Of course, many people don’t want to leave Apple’s tent. After all, it’s filled with iPhones and MacBooks and other cool stuff. And Apple is hardly the only business that tries to lock in customers–wireless carriers are probably the worst offenders. Nor is Apple the only vendor to use one product as leverage to push others onto consumers (let’s declare Microsoft the champion there).

But no other technology company exercises the same amount of control over what its customers can and can’t do with the things they bought. Part of this approach is due to Apple’s deep belief that a closed digital ecosystem with limited options benefits both Apple and its customers. Part of it is due to an all-consuming desire for control on the part of the ringmaster, otherwise known as Steve Jobs.

The bottom line: Apple makes great products, but its marketing practices limit your choices and cost you more money. Here are five classic examples of how the company has done it.

1. iPod and iTunes

When the iPod arrived in fall 2001, followed by the iTunes Music Store in spring 2003, few early adopters realized the commitment they were making by buying their media player and their media from the same source.

Due to Apple’s digital rights management setup, until April 2007 any music you bought from iTunes could play in only three places: on an iPod, within registered iTunes software on a limited number of computers, or on certain Motorola phones (that nobody bought).

If you wanted to move the songs you bought at a buck apiece to a cheaper player from a competing manufacturer, you had two options: an onerous process in which you burned your songs to a CD and then reripped them as MP3s, or quasilegal software that essentially did the same thing using your hard drive instead of a disc.

The last vestiges of DRM-protected music vanished from iTunes two years later. Apple offered to remove the DRM from the music that iPod owners had already bought, as well as to bump up the sound quality, for an additional 30 cents a track. (Gee, thanks, Apple.) Of course, movies and TV shows sold on iTunes are still copy-protected and cannot be legally converted to a DRM-free format.

Locking content to hardware cost consumers money–especially when first-, second-, and third-generation iPod batteries began failing. Consumers could either shell out the cash for a new iPod or pay Apple as much as $100 (plus shipping) to put a new battery in their existing device. In June 2005 Apple settled a class-action suit filed by iPod battery victims, offering a $50 voucher toward future Apple purchases (excluding downloads) and another year of warranty support.

Over the last three years, consumers have filed multiple antitrust suits against Apple alleging that the tight connection between the iPod and iTunes constitutes a monopoly; these have been consolidated in a federal class-action suit currently under way in Northern California [PDF].

Daring Fireball blogger John Gruber acknowledges Apple’s lock-in advantage with iTunes, but echoes what many Apple supporters often claim: The company’s hands are tied by content providers.

“When you buy a movie through your Apple TV, and the movie is in a DRM-protected format that will not work on home theater systems from other companies, it makes you less likely to switch,” he says. “But what choice does Apple have? They can sell DRM-protected movies, or they can sell no movies at all.”

Actually, Apple has at least two other choices. It could license its Fairplay DRM technology to other hardware manufacturers and allow multiple devices to play media purchased on iTunes, as Amazon does with its video-on-demand service. Or it could use its market power to push for one of the industry-wide DRM schemes proposed by Disney, Sony, and other parties. (Given the close ties between Steve Jobs and Disney, though, Apple might eventually endorse the digital rights scheme that the Mouse House favors.)

Page 1 of 3
NEXT >>
  • Squidoo
  • Multiply
  • Facebook
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • TechNet
  • Technorati Favorites
  • MySpace
  • Share/Save/Bookmark
Subscribe E-Newsletter

Don't get left behind. Sign up to receive the latest news.

Our Sponsors
Kerio
Ozaki
redwood
Super Micro
Kaspersky
KOSS
Xitrix
ArcusIT
Emerson
Copylandia
Piso Cloud
ePLDT
Bitdefender
Multi-Color
Chikka
Smart
Peplink
Sophos
Astaro
itproasia
MEC
APC
wsi
 
 
 
PC World Magazine Subscription
subscribe now
Web Design