27 ms·
I promise, you will be just fine without the security updates.
by whiterknight 2y ago
I promise, you will be just fine without the security updates.
- drawnwren 2y agoThis is probably misguided. Apple includes the OS version number in the user agent, so an attacker can actually pay to have code delivered only to users with vulnerable versions of MacOS. (advertising marketplaces allow bidding by user agent)
- threeseed 2y agoThe user agent is defined by the browser. And it only contains: Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7 irrespective of what Mac you are using.
- drawnwren 2y agoI’m seeing Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 14_7). What do you think the 14_7 stands for on MacOS 14.7?
- koito17 2y agoI currently use M3 Max MacBook Pro. Mac OS 14.6.1（23G93). Firefox 130.0.1 "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:130.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/130.0" Safari 17.6 "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.6 Safari/605.1.15" Seems like a Google Chrome-specific behavior, but I don't have Google Chrome installed to test.
- threeseed 2y ago> Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7. This is on an M4 MacBook Pro running 15.0. So not correct.
- BrutalCoding 2y agoHeya, I couldn’t find a way to contact you privately but I’d assume you want to delete your comment until (presumably) next month! Correct me if I’m wrong tho :) Alternatively, a mod could help to edit it instead
- Sharparam 2y agoWhy would they want to do that?
- BrutalCoding 2y agoTo be honest, I’m not entirely sure. It’s a product that isn’t officially announced yet. Anyone could mention that they own that device of course, but it’s the extra credibility of him being an ex-Apple SWE (judging from his comments) that convinced me to drop that comment. Dunno if there could be any legal implications, if not - all good!
- whiterknight 2y agoAre you thinking of a safari exploit that allows JavaScript to get out of the safari process? What’s the attack scenario?