OT: Mac OS X Root Hacked in 30 Minutes

Coursedesign wrote on 3/6/2006, 5:57 PM
It took a hacker less than 30 minutes to gain root-level access to Mac OS X, according to a report from ZDNet. The hacker who penetrated the system called the Mac "easy pickings."

The security breach took place on February 22 after a Swedish devotee of the Mac [...] invited all takers to try to compromise the system's security to gain root-level control. Once a hacker has gained root access to a computer system, the attacker can install applications, delete files and folders, and use the computer for any nefarious purpose.

The competition was over in a matter of hours after a hacker, who asked to be identified only as "Gwerdna," gained access to the server in question and defaced the Web site with a message that read, "This sucks. Six hours later this poor little Mac was owned and this page got defaced."
...
"The lesson here is that if we look at Mac OS X and compare it to, say, Windows XP, we find that, in terms of the number of vulnerabilities, they are actually quite comparable," said Vincent Weafer, senior director at Symantec Security Response.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So no safe harbor there...

Comments

John_Cline wrote on 3/6/2006, 6:19 PM
The ONLY reason that Macs haven't been the target of hackers is because Macs only have about a 3 to 4% share of the market. What fun is that?

John
PossibilityX wrote on 3/6/2006, 7:08 PM
Our local weekly "alternative" newspaper had a fawning cover story a few weeks ago about Macs and how great they are.

The bottom line seemed to be that Macs have an elegant design, and "creative" people use them, and Mac owners feel like they're REALLY DIFFERENT from regular people; like they belong to a special club.

I don't care if my computer looks like a turd and weighs as much as an engine block. All I want it to do is FUNCTION PROPERLY. Being a member of some "elite" group that you have to buy your way into is pretty much meaningless.

I wanted to write a letter to the editor of that paper saying, well, yeah, I know you Mac folk think you're really hip and with it and all alternative and everything, but let it be also noted that there is nobody more conforming than a non-conformist.

Just look at any outlaw biker, Goth girl, cult member, uber Yuppie, etc. and notice how similarly they talk, dress, and behave within their respective groups. Almost to the point of zero deviation from their "outsider norm!" Non-conformists, indeed.

I don't think Macs are bad computers, I just don't think they're all that much better, if any, from Windows machines. How they LOOK and what ownership of one presumably "says" about you is MEAN-ING-LESS!

It'd be nice if we could ever learn to quit defining ourselves by the trinkets we own. But I ain't holding my breath.
jrazz wrote on 3/6/2006, 7:35 PM
"The Inmates are Running the Asylum" by Alan Cooper discusses this "special club" syndrome that PossibilityX discusses. Although that is not the point of the book, he does point out that it is no better than Windows in a lot of areas but a main difference is the loyatly that its customers have for it. All companies would do well to learn from Apple concerning this loyalty, but they would do even better to create user-friendly interfaces that users want and need instead of just putting up with to perform the task.

j razz
Coursedesign wrote on 3/6/2006, 8:26 PM
And according to the National Vulnerability Database, NIST, "in 2005, more software flaws were found in Mac OS X than in Microsoft Windows."

At least by the end of 2006, Macs will have caught up performance-wise.

With end-of-2005 PCs.

Today's IDF (Intel Development Forum) meeting experts are now hopeful that "Intel will begin to catch up with AMD by early 2007".