|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
 |
« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2007, 04:13:33 AM » |
|
Reflex... just for my satisfaction... the 12 that you mentioned for M$ - can you shed any more detail on the figure?
Was this a number of vulnerabilities or number of patches?
Do you have a reference where I can check it out?
I know that I've downloaded all patches - but I don't remember looking at any detail.
nervouschimp - cross fingers. I hear that a Service pack is on the way in the next few months. I imagine this will make things a little smoother for Vista.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2007, 04:38:06 AM » |
|
Off the top of my head I don't know what the total is, but it was extremely low. At least comparatively. That said, problems can arise in batches because a new attack vector can reveal vulnerabilities in a ton of different areas resulting in a high vulnerability number even though only one fundamental weakness was discovered. Normally I would say that was probably the case for Apple considering the very high number of attacks, however also contributing was the month of Apple bugs and a previous event they held that revealed a ton of other problems. That said, I agree with nervouschimp, ultimatly these things are a service to Mac users as it will prevent future attacks. My complaint is the idea that its an inherantly more secure OS, users who believe that are fools, ANY OS can be attacked, if you can't come in the front door the attacker will simply rely on social engineering.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
|
« Reply #27 on: May 24, 2007, 11:44:05 PM » |
|
I'd feel better if you had an actual number instead of using words like "tons".
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #28 on: May 25, 2007, 08:07:50 AM » |
|
Be my guest and look it up if you wish. Many websites have commented on it, including Ars Technica and Dailytech. I'm not your research assistant.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
|
« Reply #29 on: May 28, 2007, 03:54:58 AM » |
|
Thanks.
Here is what I found.
For Microsoft:
July 2006 - 7 patches
Aug 2006 - 12 patches
Sept 2006 - 4 patches
Oct 2006 - 10 patches
Nov 2006 - 6 patches
Dec 2006 - 7 patches
Jan 2007 - 4 patches
Feb 2007 - 20 patches
Mar 2007 - 0 patches released - 9 outstanding vulnerabilities.
April 2007 - 6 patches.
For Apple
9 patches in the period Jan - April.
Reflex - you mentioned 70+ updates for Apple this year. What you meant is vulnerabilities, and even this number is incorrect.
Let's just say that you WERE a little off with your numbers - which isn't very helpful- especially from a moderator.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #30 on: May 28, 2007, 06:23:25 AM » |
|
you say updates, is that a single patch or is that a bundle of patches?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
|
« Reply #31 on: May 28, 2007, 07:15:11 AM » |
|
Sorry about that - I'll correct it.
In saying updates, I meant patches.
So for one of Apples patches - this fixed four vulnerabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #32 on: May 28, 2007, 09:36:05 AM » |
|
so then it was really 4 patches?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reflex
Ace
Posts: 11,331
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #33 on: May 28, 2007, 09:39:58 AM » |
|
I'm reffering to vulnerabilities, not updates. One update can contain many patches. The 'month of Apple bugs' back in January turned up 30 vulnerabilities alone, for instance. Quoted for those who seem to not have read the entire thread. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
|
« Reply #34 on: May 29, 2007, 01:01:12 AM » |
|
MrbLOB9000 - No - One patch. Four vulnerabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #35 on: May 29, 2007, 03:22:41 AM » |
|
MrbLOB9000 - No - One patch. Four vulnerabilities. ya, that's one file that's patching 4 things, to me that's four patches rolled into one exe. A service pack would then just be "one patch" and that's patently untrue and tells you nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wildmannz
Regular
Posts: 214
Join Date: May, 2004
|
|
« Reply #36 on: May 29, 2007, 08:03:12 AM » |
|
Yes - you understand that correctly.
You can assume that for all of the numbers listed. 1 patch = 1 or more vulnerabilities fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MrbLOB9000
Ace
Posts: 12,896
Join Date: Apr, 2002
|
|
« Reply #37 on: May 29, 2007, 09:11:24 AM » |
|
to me 1 patch = 1 vulnerability, so if a file fixes multiple vulnerabilities then it's got multiple patches within it.
counting patch bundle vs. patch bundle is meaningless. You have to count how many vulnerabilities were patched.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
synexpl0it
Veteran
Posts: 470
Join Date: Jan, 2006
|
|
« Reply #38 on: May 29, 2007, 09:41:32 PM » |
|
Yeah, I have to agree with MrbLOB9000 on this. It may be just 1 patch but it will address more than one issue. What MS does though is release a patch per problem. So obviously MS is going to have what looks like more patches and problems when actuality that isn't true. I will admit that's smart thinking by Apple. Sort of like releasing mini service packs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Balthaser
Ace
Posts: 1,037
Join Date: Nov, 2006
|
|
« Reply #39 on: May 31, 2007, 11:10:34 AM » |
|
What an interesting read.
Sry but I'm a Mac hater,,,what? no right click? wth?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
