I was just playing, I only watch flash stuff on my Samsung 7.7" as that's my designated media player. The speed is actualy not bad, there was an update a month back that seemed to fix most of the lag I was getting for Android 4.04. My iMac seems to be unefected becasue that blazes threw Flash. I know Adobe said,"No more updates for mobile flash" but they've sure been kicking them out lately, almost twice a month and the versions are getting more stable and faster. I think they realized how many sited are actually still using it or they lied, I'm going for the latter. The latest update was on May 4th.
If your Macintosh will support it, you can upgrade to a later version of Mac OS X that is still receiving regular security updates (and that is supported by a current version of Adobe Flash or a patched release of the Java runtime). Mac OS X 10.7 seemingly does not include Java as part of a default installation. Though I think Intel-based Macintosh users on 10.5 can still get Flash Player 10.3 with current security patches, there is no corresponding PowerPC release of the Flash Player. (Yet another reason to utterly despise Adobe, although Flash Player was getting pretty draggy on PPC, at least up to a 1.25 GHz G4.)
In the event that you cannot move to a newer OS or Macintosh computer, you might be able to use something like HTML5 video with some sites.
The delivery of this update is rather unique in that Apple has tradtionally supported only one version of Mac OS X behind the current release. I take this to mean that such a policy might be revised if the issue is serious enough, as Flashback may well be.
I haven't tried it yet, but I wonder if this 10.5 updater is available for PowerPC as well. That would really be amazing, considering how quickly Apple turned away from that platform.
The Flashback trojan, as it existed in the wild, required an Intel-based Mac in order to perform any malicious action. The attack vector was through Java, but the actual payload was a native executable. And that executable was not Universal; it was Intel-only.
So, at the moment, even if a PowerPC-based Mac did come into contact with a website attempting to install the Flashback attack, no immediate harm would come to your system. Hence, there's no pressing need for Apple to go out of its way to engineer a PowerPC version of the clean-up tool.
As for the Flash update notification utility -- there is no newer version of Flash for a PowerPC-based customer to upgrade to. So the smarter thing for anybody to do is to simply uninstall the Flash plugin entirely.
Web browsers:
Currently, there are known vulnerabilities in the final version of PowerPC Safari which have not received a fix, so as far as I'm concerned, continuing to use Safari on Leopard is totally out of the question. I would suggest that anybody still using either Leopard or a PowerPC-based Mac should jump over to the Firefox bandwagon. Ok, not Firefox specifically, because they also dropped official support for PowerPC. But their source code is still almost entirely compatible with PowerPC, and an independent branch called TenFourFox (a reference to the fact that it runs on OS X 10.4) has opened up to fill in the gaps. The current version, TenFourFox 10.0.4, is security- and (almost) functionally-identical to the current ESR release of Firefox.
Apple should just bite the bullet now and have a "Patch Tuesday" each month with their own "Malicious Software Removal Tool" just like Microsoft. As more and more people use Macs, the development of viruses on that platform will only increase.
The number of infected computers reportedly dropped from 600,000 to 200,000 three days BEFORE Apple released a fix-and this drop occurred in one day. There was a command line fix earlier, but very few people would have used that - and it would have led to a gradual decline rather than a precipitous drop.
Furthermore, there were some serious questions about how they managed to track the 'infection' without having access to the servers. Unless they were monitoring all the Internet access of many thousands of computers, it would not have been possible.
Finally, look at the numbers. They reported infection numbers of 0.1% in a number of countries. That means that they would have had to monitor a minimum of 1,000 computers in each of those countries - which means that they would have had to be monitoring many tens of thousands of computers.
It was all discussed in detail when this story first came out.
Of course, there is also the morality issue. If they knew about 600,000 infected computers, why did they not notify the people?
So pointing out that the number is bogus is a 'mightier than thou attitude'?
They were criticized because the numbers are BS - not because they were critical of Apple.
Do you have any links to support this? All you have provided is hearsay - even Gruber accepts the figures in question http://daringfireball.net/2012/04/flashback_eword and he would be the first to debunk them.
Comments
I was just playing, I only watch flash stuff on my Samsung 7.7" as that's my designated media player. The speed is actualy not bad, there was an update a month back that seemed to fix most of the lag I was getting for Android 4.04. My iMac seems to be unefected becasue that blazes threw Flash. I know Adobe said,"No more updates for mobile flash" but they've sure been kicking them out lately, almost twice a month and the versions are getting more stable and faster. I think they realized how many sited are actually still using it or they lied, I'm going for the latter. The latest update was on May 4th.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnexpectedBill
If your Macintosh will support it, you can upgrade to a later version of Mac OS X that is still receiving regular security updates (and that is supported by a current version of Adobe Flash or a patched release of the Java runtime). Mac OS X 10.7 seemingly does not include Java as part of a default installation. Though I think Intel-based Macintosh users on 10.5 can still get Flash Player 10.3 with current security patches, there is no corresponding PowerPC release of the Flash Player. (Yet another reason to utterly despise Adobe, although Flash Player was getting pretty draggy on PPC, at least up to a 1.25 GHz G4.)
In the event that you cannot move to a newer OS or Macintosh computer, you might be able to use something like HTML5 video with some sites.
The delivery of this update is rather unique in that Apple has tradtionally supported only one version of Mac OS X behind the current release. I take this to mean that such a policy might be revised if the issue is serious enough, as Flashback may well be.
I haven't tried it yet, but I wonder if this 10.5 updater is available for PowerPC as well. That would really be amazing, considering how quickly Apple turned away from that platform.
The Flashback trojan, as it existed in the wild, required an Intel-based Mac in order to perform any malicious action. The attack vector was through Java, but the actual payload was a native executable. And that executable was not Universal; it was Intel-only.
So, at the moment, even if a PowerPC-based Mac did come into contact with a website attempting to install the Flashback attack, no immediate harm would come to your system. Hence, there's no pressing need for Apple to go out of its way to engineer a PowerPC version of the clean-up tool.
As for the Flash update notification utility -- there is no newer version of Flash for a PowerPC-based customer to upgrade to. So the smarter thing for anybody to do is to simply uninstall the Flash plugin entirely.
Web browsers:
Currently, there are known vulnerabilities in the final version of PowerPC Safari which have not received a fix, so as far as I'm concerned, continuing to use Safari on Leopard is totally out of the question. I would suggest that anybody still using either Leopard or a PowerPC-based Mac should jump over to the Firefox bandwagon. Ok, not Firefox specifically, because they also dropped official support for PowerPC. But their source code is still almost entirely compatible with PowerPC, and an independent branch called TenFourFox (a reference to the fact that it runs on OS X 10.4) has opened up to fill in the gaps. The current version, TenFourFox 10.0.4, is security- and (almost) functionally-identical to the current ESR release of Firefox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandil
Apple should just bite the bullet now and have a "Patch Tuesday" each month with their own "Malicious Software Removal Tool" just like Microsoft.
But it's not needed at all.
Quote:
As more and more people use Macs, the development of viruses on that platform will only increase.
Please stop this FUD. People have been saying this for twenty years. It isn't happening. Give it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The number of infected computers reportedly dropped from 600,000 to 200,000 three days BEFORE Apple released a fix-and this drop occurred in one day. There was a command line fix earlier, but very few people would have used that - and it would have led to a gradual decline rather than a precipitous drop.
Furthermore, there were some serious questions about how they managed to track the 'infection' without having access to the servers. Unless they were monitoring all the Internet access of many thousands of computers, it would not have been possible.
Finally, look at the numbers. They reported infection numbers of 0.1% in a number of countries. That means that they would have had to monitor a minimum of 1,000 computers in each of those countries - which means that they would have had to be monitoring many tens of thousands of computers.
It was all discussed in detail when this story first came out.
Of course, there is also the morality issue. If they knew about 600,000 infected computers, why did they not notify the people?
So pointing out that the number is bogus is a 'mightier than thou attitude'?
They were criticized because the numbers are BS - not because they were critical of Apple.
Do you have any links to support this? All you have provided is hearsay - even Gruber accepts the figures in question http://daringfireball.net/2012/04/flashback_eword and he would be the first to debunk them.