Apple Auto-Disables Old Flash Players In Mac OS X 10.7.4 155
wiredmikey writes "Just released, and coming in at 370 MB in size, the Mac OS X 10.7.4 update includes general OS fixes, and addresses more than 30 security vulnerabilities. But aside from typical security fixes, Apple has made an interesting move in an effort to protect users. Through this latest software update, Safari 5.1.7 will now automatically disable older — and typically more vulnerable — versions of the Adobe Flash player. While many software vendors would prefer OS makers to keep their hands off their software, the move appears to be welcomed by Adobe, which has constantly battled vulnerabilities in its widely installed Flash Player."
370 MB? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
it comes in at 370 MB for my Mac Pro
Re: (Score:2)
Re:370 MB? (Score:5, Informative)
However, I've found that delta updates can be more problematic and not patch everything that needs to be updated, which can lead to odd crashes and other funky behaviour.
In my experience, I skip the software updates for delta releases and download the combo updater which has the kitchen sink mentality of updating.
Link here (1.4GB) for standard install 10.7.4:
http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1524
1.5GB for Mac OS X Server 10.7.4:
http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1529
Re:370 MB? (Score:5, Funny)
A mere 20 hours over dialup. :-o
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah..... remember when OS updates over your dialup line only took a few minutes? And fifteen and ten years ago the average webpage was a mere 40KB and 90KB respectively. But now it's balloned to 800KB.
I upgraded to DSL for that reason. Of course a 370MB update still requires almost an hour and a half. Couldn't they at least *try* to keep software small? I like Microsoft's new philosophy of keeping Windows8 equal to Windows7 in size (only 1/2GB RAM needed).
why can't the updates be smaller like the MS (Score:2)
why can't the updates be smaller like the MS ones?
Re: (Score:3)
Mac OS X point upgrades are like Windows Service Packs.
Re: (Score:2)
When I meant point upgrades, I meant small point, like 10.7.3 to 10.7.4. The major point upgrades are a giant leap in new features.
Imagine (Score:1, Insightful)
Imagine if MS had done this, the bitching here would be enormous. Just like how Palladium was decried by everyone when it was proposed by MS to secure PCs, but when Apple did it with iOS with extreme lockdown DRM, it was the best thing ever and there was not a peep from the same commentators that blasted MS.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally wouldn't have bitched one bit if MS took a stand against Flash. In fact, I would applaud them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally wouldn't have bitched one bit if MS took a stand against Flash. In fact, I would applaud them.
Apple releases an update that disables third party software, less than a month after their inability to put a dent into bd.Flashback.
And yet you still shovel on the praise and manage to spin it in your own mind, that rather than it being the heavy-handed tactics of a company that has no idea how to play well with others, they are simply taking a brave stand against flash!
Man, Kudos to Apple, and kudos to yourself for being so brave too!
The reality distortion field is strong with this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple releases an update that disables third party software, less than a month after their inability to put a dent into bd.Flashback.
They disabled Flash in Safari only. If they take drastic actions they are vilified, but if they don't do anything they are vilified as well. The new Flash updater on Windows will perform automatic & silent updates. They don't offer this as an option for OS X.
Re: (Score:3)
I go through a reasonable amount of effort to ensure my software was up to date. I've gotten so used to Flash updating automatically on Windows that it didn't even occur to me it wasn't doing that on my Mac. After I updated to 10.7.4, it told me Flash was out of date. So I'm going to have to say this is a good move. I'd imagine most Mac users have outdated Flash versions.
Re: (Score:2)
If you own a commercial Adobe product, it comes with an update manager that can auto-update Flash. I don't know why they didn't provide this for their stand-alone free product.... ...but every time the automatic update software kicks in, I end up double checking to verify that it's the REAL automatic update software, as this is an obvious thing for a drive-by download to spoof.
Re: (Score:2)
I've gotten so used to Flash updating automatically on Windows....
"Automatically"?
If your definition of "automatic" is several dozen popups and mouse clicks, reading and accepting a new license agreement, etc. every single damn time you switch on a PC then, yes, I guess it's automatic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
and when you go to adobe's site, you're sure it really is the site of adobe? Maybe some malware changed your dns ... make sure to use https for downloads!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple releases an update that disables outdated and vulnerable third party software...
FTFY.
The reality distortion field is strong with this one.
Yep, you're standing on the wrong side of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Informative)
I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system. Maybe it does, I don't know. But at least let the owner of the computer know that...
A: This version of flash will be uninstalled because yadda yadda yadda.
and
B: Accept or Decline, BTW here's a link to obtain the latest version after this Apple update has been completed.
It disables Flash. It doesn't uninstall or delete it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not if you give them a means to install it. As would appear to be the case based on the number of malware infections that people have willingly installed as well as all the crapware that gets put on machines, put a button that says "download" or "install" in front of them and they will do it. Which is exactly what Apple did.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Informative)
I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system. Maybe it does, I don't know.
On both of the systems I applied it to yesterday, it popped up a dialog warning me that it was going to disable the out-of-date flash player, and inviting me to visit Adobe's website to download the latest copy. The two buttons on the dialog were along the lines of one to go to the download page, and one to simply continue disabling the out-of-date plug-in.
And now you know.
Yaz
Re: (Score:2)
I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system. Maybe it does, I don't know. But at least let the owner of the computer know that...
Agreed. Nothing is more annoying than a piece of software turned off because "we know better". Follows what sort of dialog I would myself craft.. ;)
"MacOS has detected an old version of Adobe Flash running on your computer. To help protect your security, this software has been temporarily disabled. You can choose to continue running current version (not recommended) or update Flash."
[Update] [Continue using current] [Leave current disabled]
Re:Imagine (Score:4, Insightful)
That's pretty much exactly what it says. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system.
You have no more right to be notified when Old Flash is being purged from your computer then to not be vaccinated from disease. This is a proactive measure from the state (or the megacorp acting for the state) to protect the internet from bad programs. We can't allow your diseased computer (or body) to be spreading these bots/viruses to other people.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it is the same. Saying people cannot "interact with society at large" unless they are vaccinated is equivalent to forcing all computers to have the latest Updates and a virus prevention, else they won't be allowed on the internet.
Re: (Score:3)
A perfect candidate for Microsoft's "malicious software removal tool" program.
It is disappointing that none of the updates to this tool have even tried to stop such a widespread infection. If anything, the enormous flash install base demonstrates that Microsoft's tool is completely ineffective against serious a malware infection.
Re: (Score:1)
Imagine you taking your meds this morning.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Informative)
He has no valid point. This something that Adobe wanted them to do to help fight Flash player exploits. And you can always reenable your vulnerable Flash player if you want.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe finish reading the whole summary where even Adobe welcomes this? Oh and you've made sure to bitch about Mozilla doing the same thing to older versions of the Java plugin [slashdot.org], right?
Re:Imagine (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
For the last time, Apple is not microsoft and is not a convicted monopolist. Your comparison is retarded. When Apple holds ~85% share of all computers EVERYWHERE, then you can start making valid comparisons between the two.
Bad behavior is bad behavior, regardless of past actions.
Re: (Score:1)
For the last time, Apple is not microsoft and is not a convicted monopolist. Your comparison is retarded. When Apple holds ~85% share of all computers EVERYWHERE, then you can start making valid comparisons between the two.
DOJ oversight ended recently http://www.neowin.net/news/doj-oversight-of-microsoft-ends [neowin.net]
The iPad holds about 60 to 90% of the installed base of tablets and it doesn't bans Netscape(Firefox) from even running, forget about getting trouble for just bundling Safari by default like MS did.
Re: (Score:2)
For the last time, Apple is not microsoft and is not a convicted monopolist. Your comparison is retarded. When Apple holds ~85% share of all computers EVERYWHERE, then you can start making valid comparisons between the two.
You're right, they're only a tiny helpless corporation with more spare cash (not even something intangible like nonliquid assetsmoney, but real money) than any other company in existence right now. Stop picking on them! they obviously don't have the capability to do anything beyond what they currently are able to manage, poor guys :C
Re: (Score:2)
So this is your argument.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, because they bundled their web browser with their operating system. Therefore, if they distribute a patch or an upgrade which as part of its functionality disables a product which:
and the third party vendor expresses their support for that action;
then they are scum and you disapprove. But only because they were convicted of bundling IE with Win
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
we treat Microsoft history with a different lens
They were judged to have done a bad thing, they were convicted, and they paid the price. Agreed, not a stellar part of Microsoft's corporate history. Okay. Why does that mean that if they did the same thing today as Apple is doing, with the purpose of enhancing security, and with the full approval of the involved third party, you should have a different response based on whether it's Apple or Microsoft?
Your attempt to reduce the the verdict and punishment to browsers is cute.
"Cute"? Anyway...
I recognize things are almost always more complex than they appear on the surface. But fu
Re: (Score:2)
I reject the question outright. They are not the same and shall not be judged the same. Just because you feel like they have paid their penance doesnt mean that we dont STILL feel the effects of those crimes today. What they got was a slap on the wrist because at the end of the day Windows 'worked' for everyone and the DOJ was afraid of killing the golden goose. We judg
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if MS had done this, the bitching here would be enormous.
I don't think that's true. Mainly because I think you're vastly underestimating the blood-soaked hatred most people here have for the Flash player.
I also think most people here are probably fine with the masses getting their shit updated automatically, as long as those of us who develop for and/or have to support old versions have the option of keeping older versions around when necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Because phones and computers are two different things?
Re: (Score:2)
What about tablets? We hear so much about a post-PC word and lots of common folks replacing desktops, laptops and netbooks with the iPad.
Re: (Score:2)
I sort of want a Galaxy Note. It's the happy middle ground between a tablet and a phone, but oddly I don't really see myself holding something with 5.3" screen up to my ear...
"I CAN'T TALK, I'M AT THE THEATRE! NO, IT'S RUBBISH!"
Re: (Score:2)
requirements are key, I couldn't care less about how it looks. Right now I'm using a ZTE F930 tethered to my laptop for interweb access, my carry-around is a Motorola V3. Basic model, no memory card slot, vga camera but it's rugged and works everywhere. The smartphone might be pretty but that's precisely why I don't carry it - who's gonna want to steal an eight year old EDGE/GPRS handset??
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now Apple, and the rest of the world, is not so dependent so much on Flash, due partly to the iPad, so they can
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly when did Apple ever install and activate Flash automatically?
Re:Imagine (Score:4, Insightful)
I would have exactly zero problems with Microsoft doing something like this (their biggest problem: getting people to actually install the update).
When I read the headline and started the summary my reaction was along the lines of "whaaaaaat!". Then I saw that they were only disabling "older" versions of Flash, not Flash entirely, and thought about what it would be like for the end user. They visit a website that uses Flash, they see a message that Flash is not enabled or installed with a link to install it, they go through the process, et voila, you've gotten your users to update to the latest Flash player.
I have zero issues with an OS update automatically disabling old vulnerable software versions (especially Java and Acrobat reader), provided there is a way for the user to re-enable them if there's some reason that they require a specific old version.
I also generally hate every stance that Apple takes regarding control over their products, but this decision does make sense if they're trying to protect their users who wouldn't otherwise protect themselves. Microsoft should do the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Right. Disabling Flash entirely is what Microsoft is doing, in the "Metro" flavor of "Windows 8" (where no browser plugins work at all).
(Though if you flip back into "Desktop" mode, you can still get them. The "Desktop" flavor of the web browser is dumbed down over c
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
New user, first comment, excessively praising one tech company.
Jesus H Christ, do I have to come downstairs and TEACH you guys how to do your jobs properly???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you often hear a noise you can't place, sounds like "woooosh"?
I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was downstairs giving Cheese and the other new hire shills the monologue from Glengarry Glenross. I'm sure the quality of their 'posts' will rise soon.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything, and I mean everything, just works so easily and quickly.
Everything except Flash websites, apparently...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
From a small business standpoint Mac is simply not an option in many cases. Most medical transcription software, dental software, Sage/ Planning/construction software requires Windows and often times a back-end Windows server machine. On top of that things like Google Apps sync is only for the PC, not mac, preventing Mac users from using the paid Google Apps services. If you just fart around and browse the web and send emails the built in Mac software works fine, but for those that run businesses it's a
Re: (Score:2)
No one is going to deploy a virtual hackintosh in a production environment. Unless the bare metal is a mac, you are in violation of the mac EULA. See Psystar v. Apple.
Why are you watching video in a virtual environment? Also, VMs are more then jsut another 'machine'. Its a machine with some very unique and useful properties above and beyond what a bare metal machine is. Running one ALL the time is not the same thing as running a bare metal machine. You can replace a Windows m
Re: (Score:2)
Strange that you should run OSX and Linux on Windows 7...
I'd suggest doing it the other way around, making your base system Linux or OS X, and then running a lightweight VM for your medical transcription software/dental software/etc. -- a trimmed XP in a VM should do the job nicely -- assuming that you can't just use something like WINESkin [doh123.com] to run the software directly inside OS X.
The only place I've ever had problems running Win32 software natively under OS X or Linux on an Intel processor has been when th
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
The task(s) should always define the tool needed. If it's a Mac that's needed to run the software to do the task so be it.
Re: (Score:2)
Further to this, since I've owned my mac, i've been able to get real work done without having to purchase very many applications at all. Pixelmator, TextWrangler and with iLife and Xcode, i can create/edit multimedia content write native applications, do web development, network admnistration (ssh, and friends are included), etc.
What is this mystical work you can't do on a mac?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've had a Macbook Pro for almost two years now, and I've yet to run into a problem with lacking software variety or developer-friendliness. Most Windows software has either a straight Mac port or comparable Mac software. And under the bells and whistles and shiny paint, OS X is a Unix-based OS just like Linux is. Dig down deep enough, and you'll find that their innards are remarkably similar.
And the only big difference involving software variety is the fact that there's a whole lot less shovelware for O
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's clearly trolling. I imagine it's the same guy who has made an anti-Google one that started showing up yesterday. My thought is it's either someone just trolling for fun or someone creating obviously shill-like accounts to bolster their pet theory that every second person on /. is a shill paid to astroturf. Probably best to just ignore it.
Re: (Score:2)
So, a false flag operation, you say?
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, are you talking about the same Slashdot as I've been reading? Because for the past half-decade I've heard nothing but whining here about iOS's app lockdown.
From developers. The were off in a sepia colored la-la land referred to as Instagram.
Re: (Score:3)
Flash installer deletes itself, too (Score:4, Insightful)
The Adobe Flash installer deletes itself, too, after installation. They really don't want the old, buggy stuff laying around.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What about Acrobat? (Score:2)
Last time I had an issue with a virus intrusion attempt, t was acrobat, not flash, that was the vector.
Re: (Score:2)
I never install the Acrobat Reader on OS X, because the Preview application bundled with the OS does everything I need with PDFs.
Sure, there are some who will need esoteric features of the full Reader client but it cuts out the vector for a huge majority of users.
Re: (Score:2)
Why did you even install it in the first place?
Flash is required for youtube and other sites.
Whyever would you need Acrobat?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can put Videos inside a PDF document now?!?! Please tell me your kidding.
That's like when I get those annoying "joke" emails that are in Powerpoint with loud music and walls of text. Or an Inventory system that uses a workbook in Excel.
If I was the Hulk, this is the kind of stuff that would turn me green.
Re: (Score:2)
This proves, (Score:2)
A correction... (Score:1)
Safari 5.1.7 is installed AFTER upgrading the OS to 10.7.4. The ~400MB delta or ~1.3GB combo updates applied thru Software Update (700MB delta / 1.55GB combo if downloaded as standalone updaters) bring Safari to 5.1.6 and patch a slew of other pending issues. Then you can run Software Update again and install the ~35MB Safari 5.1.7 update.
As for the disabling of vulnerable versions of third-party software, worth noting that a couple of weeks back during the FlashBack Trojan affaire, after installing the sec
Adobe Update Schedule (Score:2)
Updates delivery issue (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The only acceptable solution is a system-wide update system, the way it works on Linux but without any user interaction; or updates delivered for all installed applications via Windows Update on Windows (which Microsoft is unlikely to accept).
As long as it is optional. I see no reason to force user to upgrade anything on their system. Also, the OS could simply have a tool that programs can register with at install. That one tool would then regularly check for all registered programs. It doesn't have to be a single repository of software just a single communication standard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is an issue that all non-OS applications have: how to get and install updates in a timely manner? Firefox checks for updates upon launch; drawback: annoyance for user as this results in an apparent slow launch. Google installs an update service; drawback: many users will disable this service due to the perception that it could slow down the entire system. Adobe Flash Player is a "system plugin" with its own update tool that runs at boot time; drawback: it requires user interaction, thus it is annoying. RealPlayer creates update tasks in the TaskManager; drawback: some users will disable them as they could increase boot/login time and/or are perceived as intrusive/spyware. The only acceptable solution is a system-wide update system, the way it works on Linux but without any user interaction; or updates delivered for all installed applications via Windows Update on Windows (which Microsoft is unlikely to accept).
The difficulty with some of these (granted, never had this issue with flash) is legacy support. Some businesses run specialized software that is occasionally broken by software updates. My personal experience with this has been JRE updates that break an app, until a couple release down the line fixes the issue, but others have seen this with Firefox as well. When this happens, users begin to equate "updates" with "broken apps" and then puts them off, it not avoiding them forever. While this isn't an excuse,
Re: (Score:2)
Most GNU/Linux and BSD derivates do this.
MS doesn't because they don't want people to use IE, WMP, MS Office, etc. As long as they dont' provide the means for third parties to install/update software, they can control what average joe installs/runs. And it contributes to keep third party software out-of-date, which makes the software look bad as well, hence, point for MS (from the average user's PoV).
Optional (Score:2)
I understand not offering support or having a important sounding warning but why make it mandatory? I tend to keep my software updated but what if I didn't want to update my software? Why should Apple or any company be able to come in and make changes to my system without me first either giving them permission or setting the computer/software to auto-update?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not mandatory. It disables it but you can reenable it if you really want.
Adobe products -- unsecure by design (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What Adobe needs to do is completely overhaul Flash. And by overhaul, I mean throw it away and create a brand new Flash player from scratch that fulfills the specifications. And if the specifications lead to security holes, then change the specifications. But Adobe is either unable to do this, or too scared to do it.
Isn't this more or less what Apple is attempting to do, except they call the overhauled version "HTML 5"?
why does TFA say MacOS X (Score:2)
when it means Safari?
in other news: adobe security updates are payware (Score:2)
Yeah, go for it.
paying for security patches is the way to go.
Re: (Score:2)
You can reenable it...
Re:Big Apple like Big Government! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why *should* they leave your computer alone? If you are either too stupid or unwilling to take proper care of it, and the repercussions of that fact affect everyone around you, then don't start complaining when others take the job out of your hands.
There are all sorts of regulations regarding cars. You need licenses, tests to prove you can drive safely, legally mandated regular checkups, etc. If you don't follow through, then the gov't will decide you can't drive it anymore.
It's inevitable that the same will happen to computers, for pretty much the exact same reasons.
TL;DR version: If you want people to treat you like an adult, then ACT like one.
Re: (Score:3)
I've always viewed Apple hardware as the toaster oven of computers. In that, I don't *care* what's going on under the hood, I just want the bloody thing to work - which it does, barring spouses leaving it switched on and resting on a feather pillow (ouch time!). When I want something to tinker with, I crank up my Linux box and if I really have a few hours to kill, on goes the Wintendo.
Re: (Score:2)
Because if you are stupid enough to run ancient versions of plugins like adobe flash and not bothered to update, then your ability to manage your computer is so poor that you don't deserve the privilege making that choice.
Software will always have bugs, and until there is a seismic shift in attitude over how software is designed, security vulnerabilities will always exist. The question becomes a) how do the vendors respond, and b) how do the users respond. Vendors should be putting out updates to patch th
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you really don't get it, do you?
Since you appear to be fond of the hyperbolic, lets try this: You buy a gun. Are you allowed to buy a guy? Yes. Are you allowed to wave it around in the privacy of your own home? Yes. Are you allowed to wave it at someone else? No, unless you have a license.
Now take that same gun, put it on a pedestal in front of you, and stand back as hundreds of thousands of people walk past it, some of them looking at it, some of them poking at it... and a couple attach a doohi
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations.. you are a winner! And by winner, I mean you are a typical Apple cheerleader douchebag.
Fuck you.
Wow, you really showed me there. You were clearly the leader of your high school debating team. Thank you for proving this: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19 [penny-arcade.com]
Now I see why you're posting as a coward. I admit I was curious to see how this would play out, but now that I know I can just save myself the time and effort of responding to anonymous cowards in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Leave MY computer alone Apple!
Is Apple preventing you from running, say, Firefox on your Mac? Firefox, as far as I know, isn't doing the Flash player check that Safari is doing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see them in the Mac App store - give it a year and you'll only be able to run what Steve Jobs 'brain in a jar' says.
And my prediction is "give it a year and you'll still be able to run stuff not from the App Store". We'll see who's right in a year.
Re: (Score:2)
Consider this almost a year... people were saying this when the App Store came out, and it's not true yet....
A more realistic timeline would be ten years, at which point you'll likely need to register with Apple and sign the developer's keychain to install software on whatever the OS X replacement is. Before a step like this happens (with a new OS), I don't see running arbitrary code going anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Glad to see that Apple is taking all the necessary steps to return to "no viruses on Apple".
FTFY