Mac hacked in 2 minutes


Recommended Posts

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20080327...infoworld/96676

It may be the quickest $10,000 Charlie Miller ever earned.

He took the first of three laptop computers -- and a $10,000 cash prize -- Thursday after breaking into a MacBook Air at the CanSecWest security conference's PWN 2 OWN hacking contest.

Show organizers offered a Sony Vaio, Fujitsu U810, and the MacBook as prizes, saying that they could be won by anybody at the show who could find a way to hack into each of them and read the contents of a file on the system using a previously undisclosed "0day" attack.

Within 2 minutes, he directed the contest's organizers to visit a Web site that contained his exploit code, which then allowed him to seize control of the computer, as about 20 onlookers cheered him on. He was the first contestant to attempt an attack on any of the systems.

Miller was quickly given a nondisclosure agreement to sign, and he's not allowed to discuss particulars of his bug until the contest's sponsor, TippingPoint, can notify the vendor.

Contest rules state that Miller could only take advantage of software that was preinstalled on the Mac, so the flaw he exploited must have been accessible by, or possibly inside, Apple's Safari browser.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/628192-mac-hacked-in-2-minutes/
Share on other sites

More proof that macs don't have better security than windows, just less hackers target macs...

Evidence that Macs have security flaws, not that they don't have better security. However, I would have to note that OSX has had a lot of security flaws recently - its claim to be more secure than Windows is certainly being erroded. Certainly market share is a factor.

More proof that macs don't have better security than windows, just less hackers target macs...

agreed. and yes I use macs. granted unix IS a different beast than windows.

i've gotten just about everyone in my extended family to switch to macs just because they don't have to deal with the security-maintenance [scanning for viruses, malware, spyware, adware, etc.] on a regular basis (which none of them did when they had windows, and unfortunately I'm the family g33k). This made my life a lot easier not having to constantly fix their machines. Don't get me wrong, I think windows is excellent (and still use it daily) as long as you keep up with the security-maintenance.

Edited by EXO242
You don't even need stats, OSX being based on BSD that's already loads more secure than any Windows version out there. That's not what the article's about anyway.

Not said by the people who know,imagine all this vulnerabilities in Mac OSX with this tiny market share,then imagine if Mac OSX has 93% of market share (DANG!),now imagine that windows (Vista and XP) has lesser vulnerabilites with 750 million computers than OSX with 50 million pc at the most,and im being optimistic.

Can you see the breach?

Hope so,otherwise i'm so sorry :)

You don't even need stats, OSX being based on BSD that's already loads more secure than any Windows version out there. That's not what the article's about anyway.

If it's more secure, why was it the first one hacked out of 2 Windows laptops and a MacBook? And that's exactly what the article is about.

Physical access = hackable, no matter what the system.

That's true, but you can make it excruciatingly difficult. Look at the Xbox 360 - you'd think that by now somebody would have at least hacked a way to use hard drives with partitions larger than the retail drives. Or found a way to break out of the hypervisor and access the RSX chip in the PS3. And there are millions of those machines out there where people have full 24/7/365 unsupervised access to them, with quite a few looking to game the system.

It's the open-endedness of typical software that lends itself to bugs. Considering the alternatives, though, I'll stick with the bugs. :yes:

You don't even need stats, OSX being based on BSD that's already loads more secure than any Windows version out there. That's not what the article's about anyway.

There are two major problems with that claim:

1) How do you define "BSD" and that BSD is "more secure than Windows?" There are several different BSDs, and the one regarded as most secure is OpenBSD - because it includes basically nothing. OpenBSD bears no relation to OS X.

2) Mac OS X is only very loosely based on BSD. While it does have a BSD kernel (and a Mach kernel, in a really funky arrangement), its userland, core libraries, and applications are almost entirely custom Apple code and design - with no real emphasis on security. Apple simply doesn't have the same experience writing secure software that Microsoft does. Ridicule Microsoft all you want, but they / we have learned a whole lot from what Windows has been through over the last decade. Security has become a core part of development at Microsoft. So far, Apple has done little to show that they can do the same.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Maradona if hydration breaks had existed in Mexico 86.
    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!