Panther's FileVault can damage data
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault (Rijndael128 on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain lost disk space in encrypted directory[1] Notice that while the screen lock buffer overrun has been fixed, there are still unresolved issues with it[2] [1]http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/33769.html [2]http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/8912 -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
On Friday, November 7, 2003, at 07:52 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault (Rijndael128 on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain lost disk space in encrypted directory[1]
Notice that while the screen lock buffer overrun has been fixed, there are still unresolved issues with it[2]
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its major new release. The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is inexcusable. Did Apple never bother to run the new version of OS X with drives made by vendors other than Apple? (I'm assuming here the Firewire 800 problem is not present in Apple drives, about which I am not 100% convinced.) Apple should've had a team of testers running the new 10.3 version, as with each new version, on a variety of machine configurations, keeping careful track of incompatibilities and gotchas. That something so gross as trashing external drives (the very popular ones from LaCie and others) went unnoticed is just plain inexcusable. I have a perfectly new copy of "Panther" OS X 10.3 sitting ready to be installed on the machine I am on right now. But I won't install it until Apple does its QC. And since I'm still on a dial-up connection and cannot easily download 100 MB of "updated" versions, I plan to contact Apple when the new fix is released and tell them to send me a new CD-ROM. As an Apple shareholder since 1984, this really sucks. What does Apple think they are, Microsoft? --Tim May
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its major new release.
The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is inexcusable. Did Apple never bother to run the new version of OS X with drives made by vendors other than Apple? (I'm assuming here the Firewire 800 problem is not present in Apple drives, about which I am not 100% convinced.)
Which Apple drives? Is there such a thing as an Apple firewire drive, and if so does it use the Oxford 922 bridge chipset? This is the closest product I am aware of: http://www.apple.com/ipod/ It's firewire 400 and most assuredly does not use a 922 chip. If software companies were responsible for bugs in hardware that they do not manufacture, MS would be in much more trouble than it is already. petard
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:59:02PM +0000, petard wrote:
If software companies were responsible for bugs in hardware that they do not manufacture, MS would be in much more trouble than it is already.
Apple is both a software *and* a hardware company, however, and they've pretty much always been negligent about making sure that other vendor's hardware worked with theirs and/or their OS. Just sticking in a new hard drive gives you error messages (which you can ignore and bypass) when upgrading the OS. You get the idea that they want you to only buy their hardware. In fact the whole OS-X thing is like that -- they deliberately, after having all the betas running on older powermacs, wrote the production code to exclude anything but new G-3 based machines. Don't get me wrong, I like Apple and their hardware, but some of their policies suck. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, petard wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its major new release.
The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is inexcusable. Did Apple never bother to run the new version of OS X with drives made by vendors other than Apple? (I'm assuming here the Firewire 800 problem is not present in Apple drives, about which I am not 100% convinced.)
Which Apple drives? Is there such a thing as an Apple firewire drive, and if so does it use the Oxford 922 bridge chipset? This is the closest product I am aware of: http://www.apple.com/ipod/
It's firewire 400 and most assuredly does not use a 922 chip.
If software companies were responsible for bugs in hardware that they do not manufacture, MS would be in much more trouble than it is already.
petard
participants (5)
-
cubic-dog -
Eugen Leitl -
Harmon Seaver -
petard -
Tim May