Comment

Comment on Hackers can force iOS and macOS browsers to divulge passwords and much more | Ars Technica

Title

can force MacOS and IOS browsers

First paragraph

forces Safari

Of course it's fucking Safari. Yes it is the default browser and wrapper that apps will leverage, but Safari is not plural. Be better, ars tech.

iLeakage

No. I'm not calling it that. Stop trying to force catchy names, researchers. Because historically, you suck at it as a profession.

source

Sort:hotnew top

kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
The exploit works on sny browser on an iPhone or iPad…

source
- fiat_lux@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Because Apple are pieces of shit which force Safari to underpin any Web interaction on those devices, which wouldn't be such a problem if mobile Safari were worth a damn.
  
  But you're right and it's a valid point. I did miss that sentence on initial read and had forgotten about that problem. Thanks for the reminder!
  
  source
  - tsonfeir@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    It also said this hasn’t actually ever been exploited. So, looks like they’ll collect the bounty and move on. Bugs are bugs.
    
    source
    fiat_lux@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Cha-ching! Good for those researchers, get that bag. It's much better than finding out the other way.
    
    I'm still not calling it iLeakage though. They'll have to make do with the well-deserved cash.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Stop trying to force catchy names, researchers.

From someone who works regularly with vulnerability management, it’s actually needed.

Vulnerabilities have really boring numbers and it’s difficult for humans to discuss them in a meaningful way. I believe the first vulnerability to get a “name” was heartbleed, the theory being that with a name people would take it seriously and discuss it properly. Given the severity of this vulnerability, it probably got a name but since it’s being patched by the vendors affected, it was probably not needed.

Heartbleed was needed because individual web sites had to update their software immediately or have their traffic intercepted.

source
- fiat_lux@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Yeah, I hear you, fair point. I can't recall CVE numbers off the top of my head either.
  Heartbleed was also a great name, whereas iLeakage is... a choice.
  
  I'll probably be referring to it as 'the latest Safari security failure', hopefully they can ensure that description stays relevant for a few weeks.
  
  source