 manfmmdPremium
join:2003-01-14
Earth, TX | New Challenge has been posted:
»test.doit.wisc.edu/
We'll see how things go. |
|
| I doubt anyone would do it:
"if you feel you have met the reqiurements, along with the mechanism used. The mechanism will then be reported to Apple and/or the entities responsible for the component(s)."
Does this mean it doesn't count if you don't tell them how you did it? |
|
|
|
 antwanpBeyond FM, Beyond AM, XM Satellite RadioPremium
join:2002-05-14
Cedar Hill, TX | reply to manfmmd
This will probably be the real contest to pay attention to. The first contest was complete bullsh*t. A real hacker wouldn't already have local access through SSH. This contest was fubar.
-Antwan L.
--
The Perils of Living in 3-D: »www.antwanpayne.com |
|
 sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to manfmmd
I recommend all the dingbat/braindead MS fanbois have a read of that site.
--
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity |
|
 kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
1 edit | reply to antwanp
said by antwanp:This will probably be the real contest to pay attention to. The first contest was complete bullsh*t. A real hacker wouldn't already have local access through SSH. This contest was fubar. -Antwan L. :D I was sure we gonna hear some excuse like this.
How about the fact that both the actual guy and the expert in the article says OS X has numerous undocumented exploits? |
|
| reply to sporkme
said by sporkme:I recommend all the dingbat/braindead MS fanbois have a read of that site. What does that mean?
I seriously doubt that this machine will be compromised just sitting there. Anymore than an XP SP2 machine will be compromised just sitting there. (Don't believe me? It already was tested here: »El Cheapo Router Challenge)
What that site says is very true - "Mac OS X is not invulnerable. It, like any other operating system, has security deficiencies in various aspects of the software. Some are technical in nature, and others lend themselves to social engineering trickery."
The same can be said of XP SP2 - just you have a whole lot of people that use it - thus your chances of finding people that can be "socially engineered" into giving up access to their machine is easier. |
|
 BuriedCaesarIt's Not Polite To Stare.
join:2004-03-27
Richardson, TX | reply to kamm
How about some actual, verifiable replication of this "contest"? If it can be done again, using similar circumstances in a different location, then I think there should be some concern. Until then, isn't this just another claim like the scientists who created cold fusion?
Wow, two people are claiming that OS X has "numerous undocumented exploits." If that's truly the case, then why aren't we seeing a veritable explosion of viruses and trojans and worms being unleashed upon the unsuspecting and unprotected masses who use OS X? Are they just choosing to be altruistic and not letting anyone else in on the secret until they tell Apple so they can provide a security update before anything dire happens?
--
That was preposterous! Utter Nonsense! Totally unsupportable drivel! You can't be serious!....Um, what did you say? |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | said by BuriedCaesar:How about some actual, verifiable replication of this "contest"? If it can be done again, using similar circumstances in a different location, then I think there should be some concern. Until then, isn't this just another claim like the scientists who created cold fusion? Wow, two people are claiming that OS X has "numerous undocumented exploits." If that's truly the case, then why aren't we seeing a veritable explosion of viruses and trojans and worms being unleashed upon the unsuspecting and unprotected masses who use OS X? Are they just choosing to be altruistic and not letting anyone else in on the secret until they tell Apple so they can provide a security update before anything dire happens? How about reading the fuckin article first? 
They already answered this as well as zillion other experts - because nobody gives a shit about Apple's error margin-sized market share, that's why.
BTW when a hack happens, usually most of the victims won't tell to anyone. |
|
BuriedCaesarIt's Not Polite To Stare.
join:2004-03-27
Richardson, TX | I did, as you put it so eloquently, RTFA. And as so many others have said elsewhere, it also appeared to me to be a poorly arranged and inadequately thought-out "contest."
said by kamm:They already answered this as well as zillion other experts - because nobody gives a sh** about Apple's error margin-sized market share, that's why. Fascinating - you contradict yourself all in one neat, compact sentence. If nobody cares, then why are so many people talking about it? If Apple's influence is so negligible as to be marginalized, why bother with any of this in the first place?
"Market-share" is a specious phrase, thrown around without context or meaning, regardless of your cleverly descriptive use of adjectives. Just what exactly is "market-share" anyway? Installed machines? Machines that have been logged on to the internet? Machines sold over time? During a specific period in time? How about PCs in use that are tracked when they visit some company's website so they can make a buck selling that data to news outlets that then report that as "fact"? In my world and on my desk, Apple's "market share" is currently 100%. That's hardly error margin-sized to me - but that's my world. I suspect yours is not similar.
And your last claim was mere conjecture. How do you know "most people won't report" being hacked? And, no, I don't know that most, or any, would report it, but that's beside the point.
You sure seemed to be upset when you hit the "Post Now!" button. Did you have a bad day? 
--
That was preposterous! Utter Nonsense! Totally unsupportable drivel! You can't be serious!....Um, what did you say? |
|
