Reply to: Virus cum Trojan cum Worm

[bogeyman]

No. But it does something better IMO. You replace your old hard drive, put in the install disk and click "Restore from Time Machine back-up" and within the hour, your machine is exactly as it was before your hard drive died - software, settings, files, everything.

So that's better than holding down the OPTION key at boot time, how exactly?

If my built-in HD has got it's tits in the mangle, I don't want to be reaching for the screwdrivers - I just want to boot up, carry on with work, and fast!

[Cowboy Bob]

Can Time Machine make your backup HD bootable like SuperDuper does? Now that IS a life saver!

No. But it does something better IMO. You replace your old hard drive, put in the install disk and click "Restore from Time Machine back-up" and within the hour, your machine is exactly as it was before your hard drive died - software, settings, files, everything.

[bogeyman]

At PreviousClientCorp, the MacBook they provided was running Leopard - this was starting in January, so it would have been .0 or .1. I found it had the odd performance issue, though only affecting cosmetic stuff (e.g. the rotating-screen switch to/from the login screen would stall half way through, then rush to catch up with itself at the last moment), and the Spaces multiple-desktop capability has been implemented in a silly way.

A number of these things were improved with incremental releases, including an option to change the way Spaces works to something that fits better with my workflow... but by then I'd given up on it.

However, there are a number of small but significant enhancements to the standard apps that are worth having. For example, I spend a lot of time in Terminal, and it now has tabs - given that I usually have half-a-dozen or more shells (local or remote) open at a time when developing, this is an absolute godsend. Preview has developed some useful image manipulation capabilities, although they were a bit unstable in earlier releases, and then I got the client to install Photoshop anyway, and didn't need them.

I still haven't bothered upgrading my own machine, but when I get around to installing the new hard drive I might do so. But I'll have a play with an in-store display model first, just to see if that slight clunkiness has definitely gone away.

But I miss tabs in Terminal...

Tabs in terminal sounds nice but not something I'd consider worth upgrading for. Likewise Preview - I too have PS running constantly so hardly worth it for me.

I suppose I will give Leopard a go in the end but other priorities for now.

Leopard is a must have for one thing - Time Machine. It *will* save your life...

Doubt it. SuperDuper and incremental backups to Firewire/USB drives have been enough to save my life so far.

Can Time Machine make your backup HD bootable like SuperDuper does? Now that IS a life saver!

[Cowboy Bob]

Leopard is a must have for one thing - Time Machine. It *will* save your life...

[NickFitz]

Yes that is a gem!

Thank goodness it's a local exploit only.

I'm still on Tiger 10.4.11 - holding off on 'Leoptard' as it seems it will break too many things I need.

Must say, Apple OS updates are pretty crappy about backwards compatibility compared with Windows - and you have to pay for what amounts to a cumulative service pack (plus some pointless eye candy).

At PreviousClientCorp, the MacBook they provided was running Leopard - this was starting in January, so it would have been .0 or .1. I found it had the odd performance issue, though only affecting cosmetic stuff (e.g. the rotating-screen switch to/from the login screen would stall half way through, then rush to catch up with itself at the last moment), and the Spaces multiple-desktop capability has been implemented in a silly way.

A number of these things were improved with incremental releases, including an option to change the way Spaces works to something that fits better with my workflow... but by then I'd given up on it.

However, there are a number of small but significant enhancements to the standard apps that are worth having. For example, I spend a lot of time in Terminal, and it now has tabs - given that I usually have half-a-dozen or more shells (local or remote) open at a time when developing, this is an absolute godsend. Preview has developed some useful image manipulation capabilities, although they were a bit unstable in earlier releases, and then I got the client to install Photoshop anyway, and didn't need them.

I still haven't bothered upgrading my own machine, but when I get around to installing the new hard drive I might do so. But I'll have a play with an in-store display model first, just to see if that slight clunkiness has definitely gone away.

But I miss tabs in Terminal...

[bogeyman]

Agreed that it's best not to be too smug. From the notes on Security Update 2008-005, just released (last Friday), among other stuff OS X 10.4.11 had this little gem: ...

Yes that is a gem!

Thank goodness it's a local exploit only.

I'm still on Tiger 10.4.11 - holding off on 'Leoptard' as it seems it will break too many things I need.

Must say, Apple OS updates are pretty crappy about backwards compatibility compared with Windows - and you have to pay for what amounts to a cumulative service pack (plus some pointless eye candy).

[Sysman]

As a Mac user I somewhat disagree, but I do think smug complacency could be our (Mac users) downfall when I read some of the previous comments.

Good security practices apply as much to OS X as to Windows or anything else.

Agreed that it's best not to be too smug. From the notes on Security Update 2008-005, just released (last Friday), among other stuff OS X 10.4.11 had this little gem:

Disk Utility

CVE-ID: CVE-2008-2324

Available for: Mac OS X v10.4.11, Mac OS X Server v10.4.11

Impact: A local user may obtain system privileges

Description: The "Repair Permissions" tool in Disk Utility makes /usr/bin/emacs setuid. After the Repair Permissions tool has been run, a local user may use emacs to run commands with system privileges. This update addresses the issue by correcting the permissions applied to emacs in the Repair Permissions tool. This issue does not affect systems running Mac OS X v10.5 and later. Credit to Anton Rang and Brian Timares for reporting this issue.

PS to NickFitz. The original video of that wireless vulnerability was enough to make me smell a rat. There were too many ways it could have been fixed, yet the "discoverers" were insisting that the video was ample proof.

[blacjac]

(BTW, has anybody else noticed that the only two supposed security issues in OS X presented on this thread both came from 2006? As in, two to two-and-a-half-years ago? How many viruses, worms and Trojans has Windows been subject to between then and now?)

If you are refering to the link I posted then that's not because it was hard to find, it was because it was the first link of thousands that appeared in google when I searched for Mac OS x virus

I

[Diver]

NickFitz - They themselves admitted that the supposed vulnerability didn't affect Apple's wifi drivers, just the drivers for the third-party USB wifi card they'd installed in place of the OS X drivers. They also admitted that they hadn't actually found any vulnerability in Apple's wifi drivers, despite trying to do so. And it has also been suggested that the demonstration of the vulnerability in the third-party card was, in fact, a fraud, and that they demonstrated no such vulnerability - smoke and mirrors.

I use Vista on this and one of my laptops. XP on the other.
Think I'll switch to a Mac laptop when I renew 1 though.

[NickFitz]

Hack a Mac in 60 seconds

Funnily enough, after those guys had generated a lot of publicity for themselves (and their company), they refused point blank to actually demonstrate the supposed hack to any independent observers, let alone to Apple. It's now generally accepted that they were lying, but very good at kicking up a fuss to get their names in the technical press. Their supposed exploit relied on using a MacBook with a third-party USB wifi card, which is a pretty unlikely scenario given that MacBooks have built-in wifi.

They themselves admitted that the supposed vulnerability didn't affect Apple's wifi drivers, just the drivers for the third-party USB wifi card they'd installed in place of the OS X drivers. They also admitted that they hadn't actually found any vulnerability in Apple's wifi drivers, despite trying to do so. And it has also been suggested that the demonstration of the vulnerability in the third-party card was, in fact, a fraud, and that they demonstrated no such vulnerability - smoke and mirrors.

They were challenged to demonstrate their supposed vulnerability, but they didn't accept the challenge. More on that here.

And just to be clear that I'm even-handed about these matters, you can read some more on this issue that also discusses an example of Apple being unacceptably slow in fixing an actual DHCP vulnerability, five years ago.

Finally: as the guys claiming the exploit refused to tell Apple anything, Apple carried out a security audit of their own code anyway. As a result, they identified some vulnerabilities, none of which were related to the vulnerabilities claimed above, and none of which had apparently previously been identified outside Apple, or ever exploited. These vulnerabilities were fixed in a security update in September 2006.

(BTW, has anybody else noticed that the only two supposed security issues in OS X presented on this thread both came from 2006? As in, two to two-and-a-half-years ago? How many viruses, worms and Trojans has Windows been subject to between then and now?)

It's worth bearing in mind that The Inquirer is to tech news what The Sun is to TRW news: it might be entertaining to read whilst eating your lunch, and for all I know it even tells you what's on telly that night. But expecting to get any grasp of the reality of the world from it is a fool's errand.

[scooterscot]

I take it you're a Mac user, right?

Ja

I don't know what you actually do for a living, but I'm mostly a software developer, and I download stuff for my Mac a lot - like daily

Spend most of my time writing documents & constructing formulas so there is little need to install additional software -

If your Mac came with every piece of software you'll ever need then I am truly happy for you, but you're not exactly a demanding user, are you?

I guess not!

I just use a computer for you know that computer studies question you got in high school 'how would you convince a banker who has kept paper records since 1800 that he needs a computer' - well that's me, undemanding profit making entrepreneur

[Diver]

Re. cheap software: -

WARNING: do not waste money on Office 2008 for Mac - it is utter shyte.

I thought NeoOffice was shyte - and it is - but at least it's free shyte.

If you're on a Mac and need pukka office, run Office 2007 under VMWare fusion. Office 2008 for Mac is so flakey and bug ridden it makes me cry.

I use Vista on this and one of my laptops. XP on the other.
Think I'll switch to a Mac laptop when I renew 1 though.

[bogeyman]

Hack a Mac in 60 seconds




I know but found this link for cheap software

Re. cheap software: -

WARNING: do not waste money on Office 2008 for Mac - it is utter shyte.

I thought NeoOffice was shyte - and it is - but at least it's free shyte.

If you're on a Mac and need pukka office, run Office 2007 under VMWare fusion. Office 2008 for Mac is so flakey and bug ridden it makes me cry.

[Diver]

Hack a Mac in 60 seconds




I know but found this link for cheap software

[bogeyman]

It's a good point.

And you know how many times I've had to download / install a piece of software since taking my machine out of the box over 18 months ago? Well let's just say I can still count the number of downloaded installs with one hand. Most of these were open source in any case.

It's been my experience that a regular windows user has to install programs more often on a month by month basis, irritating as @£$@£ and more often than not loaded with spyware.

I take it you're a Mac user, right?

Well, so am I.

I don't know what you actually do for a living, but I'm mostly a software developer, and I download stuff for my Mac a lot - like daily.

I need specialist tools, utilities, SDKs, things to evaluate - you know, stuff.

If your Mac came with every piece of software you'll ever need then I am truly happy for you, but you're not exactly a demanding user, are you?

BTW being 'open source' doesn't necessarily mean it isn't crapware.