Clan x86
General Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: Newby on October 17, 2006, 07:44:39 pm
-
http://news.com.com/Apple+loads+Windows+virus+on+iPods/2100-7349_3-6126804.html?tag=nefd.top
I hope Apple gets sued into oblivion. That's just not cool.
I mean, it would be, but taking a stab at WINDOWS SECURITY is pretty fucking low.
It's not your fault you own 2% of the market when Microsoft dominates the other 97%. I mean, hell, apparently you use WINDOWS in your production line. That's pretty good.
-
Mac is just plain retarded. Vista 2.0...yet they've called Vista a trainwreck. So Mac is Trainwreck 2.0? Or were they lying before?
Also: Mac's most touted feature:
http://yourupload.com/public/1349/Timemachine.jpg
Give me a fucking break, Apple is lame.
-
http://news.com.com/Apple+loads+Windows+virus+on+iPods/2100-7349_3-6126804.html?tag=nefd.top
I hope Apple gets sued into oblivion. That's just not cool.
I mean, it would be, but taking a stab at WINDOWS SECURITY is pretty fucking low.
It's not your fault you own 2% of the market when Microsoft dominates the other 97%. I mean, hell, apparently you use WINDOWS in your production line. That's pretty good.
O.o apple sucks ass :P
-
Mac is just plain retarded. Vista 2.0...yet they've called Vista a trainwreck. So Mac is Trainwreck 2.0? Or were they lying before?
Also: Mac's most touted feature:
http://yourupload.com/public/1349/Timemachine.jpg
Give me a fucking break, Apple is lame.
Hahaha, they have a shadow copy feature? Shadow copying has been part of Windows since Windows 2000. :)
-
http://www.apple.com/support/windowsvirus/
-
I mean, it would be, but taking a stab at WINDOWS SECURITY is pretty fucking low.
Well, what was it I just said about auto-run being stupid for running arbitrary code from untrusted hardware?
(for non-security guys: this (http://www.x86labs.org:81/forum/index.php/topic,7605.0.html))
-
I mean, it would be, but taking a stab at WINDOWS SECURITY is pretty fucking low.
Well, what was it I just said about auto-run being stupid for running arbitrary code from untrusted hardware?
Unfortunately, potentially any CD is untrusted hardware today. Should we disable autorun on all CDs?
-
As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses
Thats a pretty cheap shot in their press release.
-
Ugh, I'm not even an apple user and I can almost assure you Apple, Darwin, has always had shadow copy features (aka snapshots or some other name). Remember, Darwin is based on Mach, which is, in turn, based on BSD. Newer Apple systems also include much of FreeBSD.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=GEOM
GEOM is an interface to do stuff like snapshots, RAID, and etc...
If you sit down at an Apple machine and open up a terminal, you will essentially see, feel and breathe a BSD system below its very beautiful interface.
-
Well, they're pushing it as a new major feature.
-
They're mad at Windows for having vunderabilities? Isn't that somewhat hypocritic?
-
Ugh, I'm not even an apple user and I can almost assure you Apple, Darwin, has always had shadow copy features (aka snapshots or some other name). Remember, Darwin is based on Mach, which is, in turn, based on BSD. Newer Apple systems also include much of FreeBSD.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=GEOM
GEOM is an interface to do stuff like snapshots, RAID, and etc...
If you sit down at an Apple machine and open up a terminal, you will essentially see, feel and breathe a BSD system below its very beautiful interface.
That might be, but I'm talking about Apple, not BSD, and it wasn't until OS X that Apple OS was based on BSD.
-
They're mad at Windows for having vunderabilities? Isn't that somewhat hypocritic?
Nope. Apple has no vunderabilities.
-
Ugh, I'm not even an apple user and I can almost assure you Apple, Darwin, has always had shadow copy features (aka snapshots or some other name). Remember, Darwin is based on Mach, which is, in turn, based on BSD. Newer Apple systems also include much of FreeBSD.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=GEOM
GEOM is an interface to do stuff like snapshots, RAID, and etc...
If you sit down at an Apple machine and open up a terminal, you will essentially see, feel and breathe a BSD system below its very beautiful interface.
That might be, but I'm talking about Apple, not BSD, and it wasn't until OS X that Apple OS was based on BSD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_9
That's very disappointing ... I can remember my father telling me years before that Apple was terrible.
Codenamed Sonata and originally intended to debut as Mac OS 8.7, Mac OS 9 is considered by some the most functional version of the original Mac OS. Still, Mac OS 9 did not include modern operating system features such as protected memory (which was investigated for applications using the CarbonLib libraries but not implemented)[1] and pre-emptive multitasking (except for applications using the nanokernel introduced in Mac OS 8.6). Mac OS 9’s lasting improvements include the addition of an automated Software Update engine and support for multiple users.
-
I mean, it would be, but taking a stab at WINDOWS SECURITY is pretty fucking low.
Well, what was it I just said about auto-run being stupid for running arbitrary code from untrusted hardware?
Unfortunately, potentially any CD is untrusted hardware today. Should we disable autorun on all CDs?
Yes, the user should have to open the cd and run the program. I don't care if that's more difficult, the extra little bit of safety is worth it.
They're mad at Windows for having vunderabilities? Isn't that somewhat hypocritic?
Mad? It didn't sound like they were mad, and in TFA they even said that they're more upset with themselves than with Microsoft.
-
They're mad at Windows for having vunderabilities? Isn't that somewhat hypocritic?
Nope. Apple has no vunderabilities.
Don't kid yourself :)
I'm sure if they exploited Aqua (which probably runs as priviledged)...there would be your vulnerability.
UNIX, on the other hand, has an advantage. All users are under priviledged ... the question isn't really whether the system can be exploited, it's weather malicious code can be executed with priviledges. Because of this, it's difficult to screw up the system ... unless one of the priviledged daemons or processes have an exploit. For example, ping has suid bit set ... if you found some sort of buffer exploit, in say, getopt() then you could do damage ... although ping surrenders root after it makes a raw socket.
-
I was poking fun at the spelling error.
-
Nope. Apple has no vunderabilities.
Don't kid yourself :)
He's being sarcastic.
-
Nope. Apple has no vunderabilities.
Don't kid yourself :)
He's being sarcastic.
bah :P
-
Mad? It didn't sound like they were mad, and in TFA they even said that they're more upset with themselves than with Microsoft.
Am I taking this out of context, or did you miss it?
"As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses, and even more upset with ourselves for not catching it," Apple said on its site.
I was poking fun at the spelling error.
::)
-
A getopt() exploit would present more alluring targets than the ping binary.
-
A getopt() exploit would present more alluring targets than the ping binary.
He merely used it as an example.