When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall . Everything works now, but was a big waste of time. Now All updates since installing leopard are gone (10.5.1 mainly) and I'm kinda scared to try the quicktime one again.
I'm sorry to here about your troubles. Thanks for having the decency to report this. You may have just spared me the same trouble. I'm going to hold off on this one. There may be some bugs in this that Apple will identify and fix in the next coming days.
One thing I learned is that you should always wait at least a day before installing updates, wether on a PC or Mac as updates can cause more problems than the original problem they were intended to fix. If this becomes a growing problem, there will be more reports online and here.
When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall . Everything works now, but was a big waste of time. Now All updates since installing leopard are gone (10.5.1 mainly) and I'm kinda scared to try the quicktime one again.
I will wait to upgrade to leopard when Superduper is leopard ready. Last time I checked at their website it wasn't. If I run into a problem now I've a clone of my tiger system and getting back to where I was is easy.
I will wait to upgrade to leopard when Superduper is leopard ready. Last time I checked at their website it wasn't. If I run into a problem now I've a clone of my tiger system and getting back to where I was is easy.
I have a Timemachine backup, but didn't really want to transfer 50 GB of files that were already on my computer if I didn't have to.
What do you need to call it a warning, blinky lights? A yellow triangle?
In the same sentence, right after the site name: "has reportedly been hijacked and used to infect systems with malware that opens a back door for hackers". I'd think that should be more than a hint to not tempt fate.
The article doesn't say anything about just visiting the site causing this. It just says there's an exploit. Usually this involves clicking a link on the site itself. It's the same when spam gets posted here that looks like an official site. The mods remove the link to prevent other people becoming referrers. There should just be at least a warning that says even visiting the site is harmful so do not visit the link. It's a simple warning.
The article doesn't say anything about just visiting the site causing this. It just says there's an exploit. Usually this involves clicking a link on the site itself.
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall . Everything works now, but was a big waste of time. Now All updates since installing leopard are gone (10.5.1 mainly) and I'm kinda scared to try the quicktime one again.
"So here are the STEPS if you get caught in the Leopard Setup Assistant Loop Bug ---
1) Boot into Safe Mode by holding down the shift key upon boot... (wait, wait, wait... it will finally come up)
2) DO NOT LOG IN
3) Hit the back arrow key
4) Then hit the restart button
5) Wait, it will then run/rerun the updates
6) Wait, wait, wait and it will finally restart...
Then you are back to normal without any data loss..."
Note that if you've never had to boot in Safe Mode, it takes several minutes (4-5 minutes) for it to boot into Safe Mode. At step 6, it probably takes 2-3 minutes for it to reboot.
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
Jeff, we know this kind of stuff, and we (I, at least) are not complaining that AI tricked us. But there are kids out there that would try such a site, because... And no one can know if they will take the necessary measures before doing this.
This is one of the reasons I insisted that the URL should not be in public view.
The other reason is that AI gives the URL of a nudity (porn?) site. What the...
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
That doesn't change the fact the article doesn't say that this particular site is dangerous just by visiting it.
There have been exploits like this for Mac users before, even just annoying links - remember the one where it opened a whole bunch of popups? There was a warning saying what would happen by opening it.
It's just bad taste to post a malicious URL and not describe fully what happens by clicking it. It's no better than the goatse or tubgirl links.
That doesn't change the fact the article doesn't say that this particular site is dangerous just by visiting it.
There have been exploits like this for Mac users before, even just annoying links - remember the one where it opened a whole bunch of popups? There was a warning saying what would happen by opening it.
It's just bad taste to post a malicious URL and not describe fully what happens by clicking it. It's no better than the goatse or tubgirl links.
OK. Whatever. But the article does say the site is dangerous. How it is specifically dangerous is secondary. I think people need to learn how to protect themselves, otherwise whatever they step into is pretty much their fault. I think it's infantile to not learn simple surfing rules and expect other people to do most of the protection for you.
And it's not a URL. If you want to sound like you know what you're talking about, at least use the correct terminology.
And it's not a URL. If you want to sound like you know what you're talking about, at least use the correct terminology.
You know, it is easy to nitpick on many occasions. Example:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
OK. Whatever. But the article does say the site is dangerous.
No, it does not. It says that "has reportedly been hijacked and used to infect systems with malware that opens a back door for hackers". It says nothing about its current state. Of course everyone in its right mind would assume that it still is dangerous, but you never know what kids would think.
I am not trying to prove you wrong, because you are not, just to point out that at this point nitpicking adds nothing. It is such the nature of these problems, that you have almost always the "other view" of things. You have your opinion as to why it does not harm to display the infected site in the original article, I have mine as to why it would do, and I have clearly explained why. Let's leave it there.
But there's just one point to be made clear though, and I think I need to make a real-world correlation. Let's say someone said that there's a report that there's a bomb behind door "B" down the hall, and it's before the proper people get there to handle it. Do you ask "what else is interesting behind door B" and then proceed to open door "B"? Should someone raise indignation when it turns out the bomb is connected to door B itself because there was no such warning of that? Is opening door B a smart thing to do?
But there's just one point to be made clear though, and I think I need to make a real-world correlation. Let's say someone said that there's a report that there's a bomb behind door "B" down the hall, and it's before the proper people get there to handle it. Do you ask "what else is interesting behind door B" and then proceed to open door "B"? Should someone raise indignation when it turns out the bomb is connected to door B itself because there was no such warning of that? Is opening door B a smart thing to do?
I hear you. As I explained I feel that your arguments stand. Perhaps I over-reacted not because of the security issue alone, but also because of the site content. I hoped this was clear.
Comments
When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall
I'm sorry to here about your troubles. Thanks for having the decency to report this. You may have just spared me the same trouble. I'm going to hold off on this one. There may be some bugs in this that Apple will identify and fix in the next coming days.
One thing I learned is that you should always wait at least a day before installing updates, wether on a PC or Mac as updates can cause more problems than the original problem they were intended to fix. If this becomes a growing problem, there will be more reports online and here.
Remove the quicktime components from /Library/Internet plug-ins.
Aha! Thanks.
When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall
I will wait to upgrade to leopard when Superduper is leopard ready. Last time I checked at their website it wasn't. If I run into a problem now I've a clone of my tiger system and getting back to where I was is easy.
I will wait to upgrade to leopard when Superduper is leopard ready. Last time I checked at their website it wasn't. If I run into a problem now I've a clone of my tiger system and getting back to where I was is easy.
I have a Timemachine backup, but didn't really want to transfer 50 GB of files that were already on my computer if I didn't have to.
Someone once said, "Curiosity killed the cat."
Only this time the cat was well aware and prepared, so it eventually was a little bit surprised.
What do you need to call it a warning, blinky lights? A yellow triangle?
In the same sentence, right after the site name: "has reportedly been hijacked and used to infect systems with malware that opens a back door for hackers". I'd think that should be more than a hint to not tempt fate.
The article doesn't say anything about just visiting the site causing this. It just says there's an exploit. Usually this involves clicking a link on the site itself. It's the same when spam gets posted here that looks like an official site. The mods remove the link to prevent other people becoming referrers. There should just be at least a warning that says even visiting the site is harmful so do not visit the link. It's a simple warning.
The article doesn't say anything about just visiting the site causing this. It just says there's an exploit. Usually this involves clicking a link on the site itself.
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
When I installed this, it crashed my system, and when I restarted and logged in, Apple tried to tell me that I hadn't registed my MBP. After various combinations of restarting, registering, quitting, and reseting things (pram and pmu), and finally trying to repair my disk from the leopard disk, I had to archive and reinstall
For those that have had this problem (including me), here's a thread to fixing this problem without having to reinstall Leopard: http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...t=leopard+shut
Here are the instructions from the original post:
"So here are the STEPS if you get caught in the Leopard Setup Assistant Loop Bug ---
1) Boot into Safe Mode by holding down the shift key upon boot... (wait, wait, wait... it will finally come up)
2) DO NOT LOG IN
3) Hit the back arrow key
4) Then hit the restart button
5) Wait, it will then run/rerun the updates
6) Wait, wait, wait and it will finally restart...
Then you are back to normal without any data loss..."
Note that if you've never had to boot in Safe Mode, it takes several minutes (4-5 minutes) for it to boot into Safe Mode. At step 6, it probably takes 2-3 minutes for it to reboot.
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
Jeff, we know this kind of stuff, and we (I, at least) are not complaining that AI tricked us. But there are kids out there that would try such a site, because... And no one can know if they will take the necessary measures before doing this.
This is one of the reasons I insisted that the URL should not be in public view.
The other reason is that AI gives the URL of a nudity (porn?) site. What the...
But that's how a lot of malware works. All a site needs to do is serve you an infected object, no clicking necessary. You didn't already know that just visiting a site can cause problems? Then were f'd, I thought someone like you would know about that sort of thing.
That doesn't change the fact the article doesn't say that this particular site is dangerous just by visiting it.
There have been exploits like this for Mac users before, even just annoying links - remember the one where it opened a whole bunch of popups? There was a warning saying what would happen by opening it.
It's just bad taste to post a malicious URL and not describe fully what happens by clicking it. It's no better than the goatse or tubgirl links.
That doesn't change the fact the article doesn't say that this particular site is dangerous just by visiting it.
There have been exploits like this for Mac users before, even just annoying links - remember the one where it opened a whole bunch of popups? There was a warning saying what would happen by opening it.
It's just bad taste to post a malicious URL and not describe fully what happens by clicking it. It's no better than the goatse or tubgirl links.
OK. Whatever. But the article does say the site is dangerous. How it is specifically dangerous is secondary. I think people need to learn how to protect themselves, otherwise whatever they step into is pretty much their fault. I think it's infantile to not learn simple surfing rules and expect other people to do most of the protection for you.
And it's not a URL. If you want to sound like you know what you're talking about, at least use the correct terminology.
And it's not a URL. If you want to sound like you know what you're talking about, at least use the correct terminology.
You know, it is easy to nitpick on many occasions. Example:
OK. Whatever. But the article does say the site is dangerous.
No, it does not. It says that "has reportedly been hijacked and used to infect systems with malware that opens a back door for hackers". It says nothing about its current state. Of course everyone in its right mind would assume that it still is dangerous, but you never know what kids would think.
I am not trying to prove you wrong, because you are not, just to point out that at this point nitpicking adds nothing. It is such the nature of these problems, that you have almost always the "other view" of things. You have your opinion as to why it does not harm to display the infected site in the original article, I have mine as to why it would do, and I have clearly explained why. Let's leave it there.
Cheers
But there's just one point to be made clear though, and I think I need to make a real-world correlation. Let's say someone said that there's a report that there's a bomb behind door "B" down the hall, and it's before the proper people get there to handle it. Do you ask "what else is interesting behind door B" and then proceed to open door "B"? Should someone raise indignation when it turns out the bomb is connected to door B itself because there was no such warning of that? Is opening door B a smart thing to do?
OK, I'm sorry.
But there's just one point to be made clear though, and I think I need to make a real-world correlation. Let's say someone said that there's a report that there's a bomb behind door "B" down the hall, and it's before the proper people get there to handle it. Do you ask "what else is interesting behind door B" and then proceed to open door "B"? Should someone raise indignation when it turns out the bomb is connected to door B itself because there was no such warning of that? Is opening door B a smart thing to do?
I hear you.
All of the exploits for this flaw were for Windows only. There are no reports of Mac users being 'backdoored'? Feel better now?
No.
And I would have left it at that, except that AI requires a reply of at least 5 characters.