Mac OS X March security updates available

[Trippy]

March security update information here:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=305214

I don't normally post Apple security updates but this one fixes some holes in OpenSSH that have been known for a while now with one being known for over a year now but for whatever reason Apple didn't bother to patch their version until now.

[stray]

Looks like the same security fixes are in the new OS update (10.4.9).

[Trippy]

Yes.

[Trippy]

Looks like the same security fixes are in the new OS update (10.4.9).

On a related note, updating your Mac can hose your system.

[stray]

In order to prevent yourself from being smacked in the face by this bug, follow this simple rule: When "Optimize System Performance" appears during the update process do not touch your computer and definitely do not launch any applications. Just back away from your computer box as if it were a swarm of bees. Yes, it does mean that if you install the Mac OS X 10.4.9 update, you may get hit by the bug.

Heh. Fortunately, I already do that with all computers when installing/updating. Not sure why. Just a habit learned from suffering with single tasking machines in the past, I guess! I guess in this case, it's for the better. 

[Righ]

You can actually fix it by replacing the update_prebinding command with a null command. Then nothing ever gets prebound, which has virtually no effect on speed on a modern Mac. Of course, most Mac users would be terrified of such "low level" Unix hackery as replacing a system command. :)

[Yegolev]

Is there no facility for updating OpenSSH without an OS patch?

[Jayce]

Of course, most Mac users would be terrified of such "low level" Unix hackery as replacing a system command. :)

Maybe it's the PC snob in me, but I get the feeling that most Mac users would give you a glassy-eyed stare if you said the words "Unix", "system command" or "low level".

Not that that's a bad thing... the fact that there are ordinary PC users who may know those words is just as damning of the PC platform, but in a different way.

[Righ]

Is there no facility for updating OpenSSH without an OS patch?

Sure, download the code and install it like you would on any other Unix box. You can use sources, Darwin binaries or any manner of packages - there are Debian and Redhat packages and tools for them, the most popular being Fink.

[squirrel]

Of course, most Mac users would be terrified of such "low level" Unix hackery as replacing a system command. :)

Maybe it's the PC snob in me, but I get the feeling that most Mac users would give you a glassy-eyed stare if you said the words "Unix", "system command" or "low level".

Not that that's a bad thing... the fact that there are ordinary PC users who may know those words is just as damning of the PC platform, but in a different way.

You'd be very surprised. Despite your PC snob impressions I can assure you a large percentage of Mac users are *nix users who want nice hardware, commercial and OSS software and like Aqua/OS X. But it's ok when people assume Mac's are just for artfags. Keeps the riff-raff out.

EDIT: Not trying to be snarky - you're correct that grandma mac mini doesn't have any idea about these things.

[stray]

Yeah, quite a few UNIX geezers are using Macs.

Still for artfags though. And since I pretty much am one, I'll just say it's not a bad thing.   

[Yegolev]

Is there no facility for updating OpenSSH without an OS patch?

Sure, download the code and install it like you would on any other Unix box. You can use sources, Darwin binaries or any manner of packages - there are Debian and Redhat packages and tools for them, the most popular being Fink.

OK, that's what I thought.  Since I can't seem to even get Ubuntu up and running, I'm starting to think about OSX.  Later, though.

[Trippy]

OK, that's what I thought.  Since I can't seem to even get Ubuntu up and running, I'm starting to think about OSX.  Later, though.

How could you not get Ubuntu running? That takes some serious skill (unless it's a laptop).

[stray]

I've done LFS, Gentoo, and Slack (actually, Slack might just be the easiest distro to run), but count me in the crowd who can't get Ubuntu running too. Mainly because I don't have the patience for GNU OS's anymore though. The slightest snag or hardware compat problems will make me quit and reboot. And Ubuntu had it's share of them for me.

[Tebonas]

Ubuntu is kinda hit or miss. If it works out of the box on your hardware it is the easiest installation ever. If it doesn't you are basically screwed without in-depth knowledge.

[Yegolev]

OK, that's what I thought.  Since I can't seem to even get Ubuntu up and running, I'm starting to think about OSX.  Later, though.

How could you not get Ubuntu running? That takes some serious skill (unless it's a laptop).

It's the desktop version of a laptop.  A Pentium II with unknown graphics card.  The weird thing was that I first tried installing it (both 6.10 and 6.06) on a machine which I had already successfully installed SLES 9 on (also PII I think), but I was getting disk errors during install.  Swapped disks and got the same error, so I then swapped machines.  It did actually install after literally an entire day, but it never did show me anything other than the desktop background.