34 ms·
"Adobe has released Adobe Photoshop CS6, which addresses these vulnerabilities"
- danilocampos 14y agoThat's some brass fucking balls, right there. Break working software, demand users pay for the fix. Photoshop, I mourn for thee.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago>"This upgrade addresses critical vulnerabilities in the software." Not only broken, broken with "critical vulnerabilities." They have no shame, do they?
- valisystem 14y agoOnly engineers would be really ashame of that, and I often wonder if there is some left at adobe.
- captain_mars 14y agoOn reading that paragraph, my instinctive reaction was that they (Adobe) got to be kidding. But no, they are completely serious.
- odddogmedia 14y agoAdobe has a new marketing strategy! This must have come straight from the sales team... after a wild night of drunken fun in Vegas. You just can't make this stuff up! True creativity right there.
- Luyt 14y agoDon't forget that the majority of people see computers as tools or vehicles, and just like you have to fill your gas tank from time to time with expensive gas, they think it's perfectly normal to pay for software regularly, even when it doesn't offer new features. Just keeping it going costs money. That the upgrade from CS5.5 to CS6 is a 'Critical security vulnerability fix' is a detail most users won't even notice.
- draven 14y agoThat's just like saying you should pay for car repairs when a faulty design of the cruise control made you loose control of it and crash into something.
- jodrellblank 14y agoIf it's your car and that's the only way to get the cruise control fixed, then you probably should.
- ralphsaunders 14y agoIt's just unbelievable, really. Can you imagine the outrage if Microsoft did this with Word?
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoThey might have until around 2001(/2002?) when they got serious about security, to be fair.
- yuhong 14y agohttp://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/MS99-044 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/MS99-04...
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoHuh. Guess I was wrong, then.
- antimora 14y agoI don't understand what kind of a best practice could be applied in this case? Here is the quote from the doc: Adobe recommends users follow security best practices and exercise caution when opening files from unknown or untrusted sources.
- babarock 14y agoThe only kind of 'best practice' a marketing team understands: buy the upgrade (starting at $299. Only).
- JoachimSchipper 14y ago"Don't open TIFF files."
- luriel 14y agoSecurity best practice: "Avoid Adobe products."
- wazoox 14y agoOpen the files with the GIMP only, and export to some other format.
- wtracy 14y agoScarily enough, that actually sounds like a decent idea.
- pilif 14y agoUnder details they state > Adobe released a security upgrade for Adobe Photoshop CS5.5 and earlier for Windows and Macintosh. This upgrade addresses vulnerabilities that could allow an attacker who successfully exploits these vulnerabilities to take control of the affected system. so what is it now? Still - even using security fixes as a vehicle to push people into upgrading is a bit crazy considering that the new version has just come out. Not even volunteer-supported software stops supporting the previous version the moment the new one comes out.
- DomBlack 14y agoThis is completely stupid, what ever the fix is; Why can the not just take the patch file from the commit which fixed the flaw, apply it against previous versions of Photoshop and release a upgrade for all versions instead of making people charge for it. A better bit of advice would be "Do not use TIF files unless you have brought CS6"
- mahmud 14y agoCan't someone make a binary patch for it? Any enterprising reversers wanna take this up? Charge 5-15% of the cost of CS6 even.
- beatpanda 14y agoSo, is someone going to do a startup to obliterate Adobe's print and graphics production monopoly, or what?
- rplnt 14y agoYou can take Gimp, fix it up, brand it, and sell.
- timinman 14y agoThe latest release of Gimp (2.8) doesn't even run on OSX. I'd love to use it, but I can't.
- starwed 14y agoYou should check that statement again! http://gimp.lisanet.de/Website/Download.html http://gimp.lisanet.de/Website/Download.html The official 2.8 release was what, a week ago? I don't think it's a big deal if it comes out on one platform a few days late. :)
- timinman 14y agoUnless I'm missing something, the latest download available on that site is 2.6. I realize it's free software, so it probably is a little cheeky to complain, but it can't be a photoshop alternative if it's not available on OSX. From what I understand, the new GTK broke tablet compatibility for OSX. If anyone knows enough about those issues and the underlying languages and libraries behind GIMP, consider this an invitation to get involved: http://www.gimp.org/develop/ http://www.gimp.org/develop/ I'm excited about the unified interface and the new transform tool, so here's hoping it is just a couple more days.
- starwed 14y agoThat's odd, 2.8 was clearly available when I viewed that page. Maybe you just had an old version cached? They only seem to offer links to 2.8 for Snow Leopard and Lion, so that could also be an issue.
- fruchtose 14y agoAt Adobe, an engineering code of ethics only matters when your manager wants it to.
- r3demon 14y agoPhotoshop cost so much it should be supported for centuries
- Heliosmaster 14y agoGreat, Linux is not affected at all by the vulnerability! Oh wait...
- PezCuckow 14y agoI can't believe they are allowed to do this...
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoAre they allowed? Consumer protection laws in the UK suggest that up to a year after purchase one may be able to get a full refund or a fixed product at the customers choosing ... not sure why/if that differs for some reason with digital products. I'd guess most copies are bought by businesses whom such laws don't aid.
- twomills 14y agoIt probably isn't difficult to get around such laws in light of the fact that you're actually purchasing a license to use the software and not in fact buying the software. The license-purchase paradigm usually means the vendor can do whatever they please, up to and including pulling the software right off your machine should they feel like it. Examples of the aforementioned include the kindle book scandal and sony pulling games out of their online marketplace that people had already paid for.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- btown 14y agoWow. I don't even. Not that I advocate hacking, but it would be righteously ironic if some of Adobe's employees hadn't upgraded to CS6 yet, and someone broke into their systems using this vulnerability.
- sirn 14y agoIt's also worth noting that there's no Photoshop CS5.5, only Photoshop CS5.1 (which comes bundled with Adobe CS5.5).
- vinayan3 14y agoThey have been lazy in essence. They decided not to backport the fix because it is too hard or it didn't fit in the schedule to ship CS6 out of the door.
- Gabler 14y agoIf this attitude from Adobe continues maybe there will be a larger drive toward open-source alternatives to Photoshop crosses poor student fingers
- jackolas 14y agohahaha. Next you'll be saying the programmers that did this will unionize.
- earnubs 14y agoThose of you who are surprised must not be actual Adobe customers. Only when you've been through the process of handing of thousands of pounds for their software will you realise how awful a company they actually are. It's a more of a subjugation than a transaction, like a sacrifice to a cruel god, the cherry on the cake is you have to actually wait until a person "approves" your purchase/sacrifice.
- skeletonjelly 14y agoNobody has ever put it so succinctly like this. I feel like this should be the byline of a widely read article on this disaster. Bravo.
- danieldk 14y agoOne would guess that this is done by Adobe to push paying customers to use the new subscription program: http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/buying-guide-subscriptions.html http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/buying-guide-subscri... The marketing ploy will probably be that with a subscription you will always have the latest, secure, version.
- JoachimSchipper 14y agoLooking at the timeline from http://www.protekresearchlab.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=40 http://www.protekresearchlab.com/index.php?option=com_conten..., 2011-09-20 Vulnerability reported to Adobe 2012-03-20 Publication of this advisory (180 days after reporting to the vendor) Adobe may have been blindsided, thinking that they'd "get around to fixing that one of those years". That said, there is even a proof of concept available (see bottom of linked page), so this is rather serious.
- rsynnott 14y agoWell, Adobe had to wait til they had the new version out for people to upgrade to.
- exDM69 14y agoOr they could have pushed a minor security upgrade that fixes this bug. For free. It's probably a simple buffer overflow bug and can be fixed with a change to only a few lines of code. After the problem has been identified, it takes roughly 10 minutes of coding to fix the issue and perhaps a day or two for regular testing and distribution processes.
- justindocanto 14y agoI'm confused by this line: "Adobe is not aware of any attacks exploiting these vulnerabilities against Adobe Photoshop." Did they mean to say against Adobe Photoshop CS6?
- sirn 14y agoIt means Adobe is not aware of any attack exploiting these in the wild. They're declaring this security bulletin a priority 3 which reads[1]: > This update resolves vulnerabilities in a product that has historically not been a target for attackers. Adobe recommends administrators install the update at their discretion. [1]: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/severity_ratings.html http://www.adobe.com/support/security/severity_ratings.html
- justindocanto 14y agoOh, as in they realize in theory it's vulnerable but they don't see anybody/anything actually exploiting it. Got it. Thanks =)
- justindocanto 14y agoThey should be releasing an update for CS5 since it's still the products most popular version, especially since it's 'So Critical'. If they seriously stick with this gameplan of making people upgrade... Just, wow.
- brainless 14y agoLooking at this and past news from Adobe (Flash stuff for example), makes me realize how good companies go bad and die.
- Smerity 14y agoIf a car company sells you a car engine that bursts into flames, they're still held liable for damages. They can't just say "Uhmm... The engine may burst into flames, you should buy our next model". The fact that Adobe can get away with this amazes me! With the theoretical engine problem you need to recall/repair each and every engine individually. With software, once you've developed the patch you can distribute it at next to no cost. There's no excuse for this. Why can software engineers and companies get away with such horrendous practices?
- nitrogen 14y agoWhy can software engineers and companies get away with such horrendous practices? Because most of us who write software believe that the risks associated with effectively zero liability for software failure are far outweighed by the costs of government intervention. General purpose software is far too "easy" to create for mandatory liability to make any sense. The better solution is for the market to demand simple security fixes in situations like this. [Edited to clarify that software risk is less costly than government intervention]
- regnum 14y agoSteve Jobs was right. Adobe is lazy.
- quink 14y agoThey're not lazy. If you've ever used Fireworks in the Macromedia days and compare it to the massive behemoths of slowness they've added to each subsequent CS version, I can only conclude that they're not lazy. An effort this concerted to make no progress in ten years and add naught but a twenty second startup time on processors that weren't even conceived back in Macromedia Fireworks 8 days cannot be a product of laziness. Just like I think that this here thing doesn't have anything to do with laziness. It's that Adobe wants you to pirate the crap out of CS6, because they know they won't get money from you anyway. They do know, however, that every cent they don't get directly from you is a cent they'll get from your future employer or customer or small business which is forced to buy Adobe CS6. It's not laziness, it's doing exactly what they need to to make sure that they keep their repeat customers upgrading.
- bobsy 14y agoI don't understand. I have Photoshop CS5. I didn't event know there was a vulnerability in it. So, after all I paid for this, there is a vulnerability which lets an attacker take control of my system... and they aren't fixing it? Seriously... what... the... fuck. I'm never buying an Adobe product again.
- quink 14y ago> I'm never buying an Adobe product again. So, you pirate it instead. Adobe will still win out, since you'll still keep using Photoshop and are still bound to their toolkit. You'll put it on your resume, you'll be employed by a company that buys it and has to buy it legitimately. You're not punishing Adobe unless you create a genuine replacement for the toolbox of Illustrator, Fireworks, InDesign and Photoshop and are putting those on your resume, unless you're versatile with those more open-source tools, whenever they should exist.
- protolif 14y agoIs Pixelmator not a decent alternative to Photoshop? What about the GIMP? I haven't installed Photoshop in years, but then again, I'm a developer, not a designer.
- xinsight 14y agoI've tries using pixelmator as an alternative to photoshop. The main problems: No layer effects, no pattern fill, no paths. Good for simple stuff though.
- wtdominey 14y agoThe copy writing in that tech note is so disingenuous it makes my head spin.
- farslan 14y agoAnother reason to support and use opensource software whenever it is possible. Thus even if the software doesn't provide any update you can easily fix and close the security hole. Adobe did the same for 64bit flash player in the past. They did update the 32bit flash player on Linux, but the 64bit one just waited ~1-1.5 year for an update.
- pepijndevos 14y agoAnyone knows what happens when you open the POC[1]? I read most of them try to open calculator(on Windows). What is the equivalent on Mac, or is it a windows-only POC? :P [1]: http://www.protekresearchlab.com/exploits/PRL-2012-07.tif http://www.protekresearchlab.com/exploits/PRL-2012-07.tif
- trotsky 14y agoOnly took a quick look at it, but I can't see any NOP sleds - and you'd probably need more room to reliably spray the heap anyway. My guess is that it isn't weaponized at all - it'd just cause memory corruption (but I don't have PS).
- hughw 14y agoOn OS X using CS4 it opened, displayed an image with a horizontal band of corrupted pixels. Photoshop continued running.
- splatcollision 14y agoDefinitely a good reason to switch to a web application, especially if all you need to do is create and design HTML documents. Edit Room is coming soon (my product), and we won't have to suffer from our tools much longer.
- tar 14y agoJust one more reason to use and contribute to Inkscape and the Gimp.
- purephase 14y agoI'm not surprised. One of my favourite anecdotes is either Warnock or Geschke giving a keynote in which the audience was asked the following question: What business am I in? Naturally, being an industry conference the consensus was they were in the software/technology business. Wrong on all counts. The correct answer was: The business of making money. And, each time, their actions speak to that goal.
- its_so_on 14y agoI don't know about customers, but I think this is a pretty fair relationship Adobe has with pirates of its products. Pirate. I'll just wait till someone breaks your CS5 copy protection. Then I'll download and install your suite without paying you a dime. Adobe. If CS5 lets anyone h4x0r you through a TIFF file we won't even fix it with an update. I'd say that's a pretty fair relationship. Of course normally a company cares more about establishing a fair relationship with its paying customers, but hey, up to them I guess. /s
- mistermann 14y agoSure, it may be a fair relationship with pirates, but should paying customers have to suffer as a result?
- its_so_on 14y agoI edited in an /s at the end :)
- nailer 14y agoMicrosoft famously did this on a much higher level with their Exchange product. Not affecting individual users, but entire companies. Exchange Server 5.0 was released without any relay control. Every Exchange 5.0 box would happily send all the porn spam anyone wanted to spend, with Microsoft customers paying for it with their bandwidth bill. The 'fix' was to purchase Exchange 5.5.
- dabeeeenster 14y agoNo relay control? At all? I call bullshit!
- koeselitz 14y agoThere was relay control on Exchange 2000 at the virtual server level. However, Exchange 5.5 added controls to the mail service interface, where they probably belonged. cite: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd277329.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd277329.aspx
- Dylan16807 14y agoA missing feature, even an important one, is part of the initial purchase consideration. It's not comparable to a severe defect found months after purchase.
- nailer 14y agoI don't understand. Do you think relay control is a feature? Is a product advertised as a standalone mail usable without it?
- Dylan16807 14y agoI'm looking at it in terms of a 5.0 product. Unless they secretly removed the feature from that version (I'm assuming not but please tell me if I'm wrong), then anyone buying it knew what to expect. In terms of car analogies, one that 'bursts into flames' needs a recall, but one that tends to overheat in the worst days of summer, in a product line that's always done that, is a fair deal.
- mwill 14y agoIt took me a while to fully understand this bulletin because the idea that Adobes suggested solution to a security vulnerability is to sell you CS6 was so foreign it didn't seem possible. It looks like CS6 is a $199 upgrade. I've had "Make stuff in Flash" sitting on my todo list for a while now, I'm officially ready to strike it from the list of things I'd like to learn, if this is Adobe's corporate attitude.
- larrik 14y agoFlash is dead. They've dropped it from Linux and Android, etc. Now is not the time to learn it.
- mwill 14y agoTo clarify, I wanted to submit to portal sites like newgrounds and kongregate, just for fun. Nothing commercial, just a bit of fun with some well established communities. But I don't see myself looking into it at all now.
- ryanac 14y agoIf you want to do cartoon animation, look into ToonBoom. If you want to make games, you don't need to buy Flash, look into FlashDevelop and some AS3 game frameworks, etc. This is coming from a guy who's been using Flash for years and every day at work. Adobe is really mishandling a lot of things at this point and in my mind the future of Flash is questionable at best. Thankfully there are better options for what you're looking to do. :)
- dclowd9901 14y agoI'd go a step further and recommend looking into HTML5/Canvas and the frameworks that are starting to go up for that platform.
- wtracy 14y agoI just realized that Haxe might fit the bill, with support for both Flash and HTML5: http://haxe.org/ http://haxe.org/
- trotsky 14y agoI'd be surprised if this ends up being exploited - from a practical perspective it'd be extremely high effort for comparatively little reward. Both platforms are ASLR now + no bundled scripting ability in tiff + manual work flow (ie you can't feed it to an automated process 10,000 times in a row) + low install rate (compared to say, flash or qt). Hell, at least Adobe doesn't charge you for a support contract just to let you read the CVE with WONTFIX :D
- unreal37 14y agoThis vulnerability hasn't been seen in the wild they say. And yes, the likelihood of someone opening a TIFF file they received by email in Photoshop is low. A lot of work to create this virus for very little payoff. The people who open email attachments are not the same people that have Photoshop installed. And in this case, you'd probably need to save it to disk and specifically open in Photoshop since most people won't have TIFF associated with PS automatically. It's a tough call to fix for every possible version of Photoshop affected when the likelihood of it even happening is very very low.
- ChrisLTD 14y agoGiven the enormous cost of Adobe software, you'd think they could afford to support their previous major release version with patches. CS5.5 is only a year old, and was not a free upgrade from CS5. Other commenters here are right. Microsoft does the right thing by supporting old OS's with patches years after the new versions have been released. That's the kind of support you deserve when you pay a premium price for software. These aren't $2 app store diversions made by an indie developer.
- shinratdr 14y ago> These aren't $2 app store diversions made by an indie developer. That's kind of an insult to smaller devs, who by and large offer excellent service and typically provide multiple free content updates. I paid $2.99 for Plants Vs Zombies and it has been updated more times than I can count.
- skeletonjelly 14y agoIt's not so much an insult as it is a testament to the current state of customer service between indie devs and a megacorp like Adobe. I don't like the comparison though, if a $2 product doesn't get fixed, people won't buy it en masse (or recommend it), Adobe has an insane market position. People will buy their product. Watch Adobe not go out of business as people purchase CS6. Having said that I'm not sure how people can vote with their wallets when Adobe pull shit like this (security patch via purchased update).
- chii 14y ago"I'm not sure how people can vote with their wallets when Adobe pull shit like this" please name another suite of software that can compete with adobe's creative suite. They have a defacto monopoly on professional publishing software. This is why.
- skeletonjelly 14y agoTotally agree. That was the point I was trying to make.
- Karunamon 14y agoWow. And people wonder why software is pirated.
- xutopia 14y agoI could not install some version of Photoshop on my machine because some old Adobe software was still installed on my machine. The Adobe person I chatted with told me I had to reinstall my entire OS to install their software.
- unreal37 14y agoThere are "adobe cleanup" programs on site like The Pirate Bay. I hear.
- Michiel 14y agoActually, the Adobe Creative Suite Cleaner Tool can be downloaded from adobe.com: http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/cscleanertool.html http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/cscleanertool.html From the page: "The Adobe Creative Suite Cleaner Tool helps resolve installation problems for Adobe Creative Suite 6, Adobe Creative Cloud, Adobe Creative Suite 5 - 5.5, Adobe Creative Suite 4, and Adobe Creative Suite 3 software. The tool can clean up install records for any pre-release (beta) installations of these Creative Suite products. The Adobe Creative Suite Cleaner Tool is designed to not interfere with existing installations of previous versions of Adobe Creative Suite products; it does, however, allow you to remove them as well, if you so choose to."
- jeltz 14y agoYeah, that tool worked just fine when I had to use it. So the Adobe person you asked did not know his stuff.
- lnanek 14y agoIt's a tough call for the company. They don't make money on old versions of Photoshop, they make money on selling the current version. Engineers may have long since all been assigned to working on the current version or later, or even switched companies. So if the fix required significant work you'd have to make some current product schedule slip to go fix an old product used by people who haven't bought the latest version and may never buy again. Do you put your resources into supporting your current and future buyers or put your resources into supporting old buyers who haven't upgraded and may not, just on the off chance it helps your reputation, and you get more buyers in general...it's an extra step of indirection that may lose the internal support to redirect the resources to fix the problem.
- SquareWheel 14y agoAnd yet, it makes me lose immense trust in their company. Why should I buy the current version if I'll just have to update from a security exploit in one or two years?
- chii 14y agoIf the software is making you profit, it makes sense to buy. If the software isn't then why are you paying money for it in the first place? A software company survives on selling licenses, and although I understand the moral implications of selling a security update like this, I think they are justified if the fix costs a lot of resources.
- ddfall 14y agoIt would appear that Adobe think that Photoshop is a target for attackers as the company says that it does not believe that "the real-world risk to customers warranted an out-of-band release to resolve these issues" - see here: http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Adobe-Photoshop-is-not-a-target-for-attackers-1572717.html http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Adobe-Photoshop-i...
- pasbesoin 14y agoHaving paid for 5.5 just a year ago (and having gone through the hell of Adobe Support to get things working), I now fully and sincerely say FUCK YOU to Adobe and related parties. Anything and everything I can do to (legally) promote your downfall, I will. You FULLY deserve your AWFUL reputation. Die and burn in hell. I know HN is not the place for outbursts. But I have seldom had a worse customer experience. I'm sure some good people work there. My advice would be: Get out!
- remotesynth 14y agoI have sent some emails internally at Adobe to clarify the message here and hopefully this will be addressed soon. The bulletin notes a security update to CS5.5 and earlier versions as well as this issue being resolved in CS6. I suspect that it is really a matter of poor wording within the bulletin but, as this isn't my area of expertise within the company, I am trying to confirm.
- skeletonjelly 14y agoPlease keep us updated! It's possible Adobe may have just alienated any of what remains of their remaining paying users. An exaggeration I know but who knows the extent. Edit: I see that you posted another comment below http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3955220 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3955220
- VeryVito 14y agoI sincerely believe this violates current RICO laws. Adobe is truly engaging in extortion and criminal enterprise now.
- VeryVito 14y agoI sincerely believe this violates current RICO laws. Adobe is truly engaging in extortion and criminal enterprise now.
- nkurz 14y agoDoes anyone with legal knowledge know how a class action suit would play out here? I own a copy of CS5.5 that was purchased 5 months ago. I'm already frustrated at the cost of the CS6 upgrade. Now Adobe is publicizing a critical vulnerability in their software for which the solution is me paying them for that upgrade. This feels a lot like extortion: "Sure would be a shame if someone followed our explicit directions and sent you a TIF file that took over your computer. Have you considered buying some protection?" Does one need to wait for the threat to be carried out before one has a claim, or is the veiled threat itself illegal?
- JoachimSchipper 14y agoAdobe links to an advisory; they are not the one releasing proof-of-concept code.
- nkurz 14y agoI agree that there is a difference, but I'm not sure that the courts do. Consider what Adobe's interpretation would be if someone was merely linking to a torrent of their software, rather than directly publishing it. Then consider that in this case their negligence yields them financial gain. I don't know what the legal standard is in this case --- my question is genuine. But I do know that I consider Adobe's stance reprehensible, and as an affected party I would willing to be the lead plaintiff in a class action suit if a qualified attorney would like to take this on. My contact information is in my profile.
- protolif 14y agoThey're not exactly trying to get it taken down either. I'm sure that their legal team could make that happen, if it was in the company's best interest.
- remotesynth 14y agoI've looked into this internally and here is the official response from the security team: While Adobe did resolve the vulnerabilities addressed in the security bulletin you are referencing below (APSB12-11) in the Adobe Photoshop CS6 major release, no dot release was scheduled or released for Adobe Photoshop CS5 or CS5.5. In looking at all aspects, including the vulnerabilities themselves and the threat landscape, the team did not believe the real-world risk to customers warranted an out-of-band release for the CS5 and CS5.5 versions to resolve these issues. The security bulletin for Photoshop is rated as a Priority 3 update, indicating that it is a product that has historically not been a target for attackers, and in this case we are not aware of any exploits targeting any of the issues fixed. Installation of the upgrade is therefore at the user’s/administrator’s discretion.
- mkopinsky 14y agoInstallation of the upgrade is therefore at the user’s/administrator’s discretion. If this is purely because it's not high enough priority to justify pushing a new release, they should provide an optional download link for security conscious users. Is there such a link? Sounds from the linked page that there isn't and that the only option is to shell out cash.
- 12uu45dd 14y agoShut down Adobe and place all the code in a public respository. That would be the way to fix ALL vulnerabilties, once and for all.
- GR8K 14y agoThey also announced the same thing with Illustrator CS5.5 & Flash CS5.5 same day. Critical vulnerabilities. No free patches. Gotta buy CS6 versions. Illustrator CS5.5 http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb12-10.html http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb12-10.ht... Flash Pro CS5.5 http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb12-12.html http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb12-12.ht...