News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Security Update 2014-002. Parent comment

Re:Security Update 2014-002 by SeanLuke on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @06:08PM (#7630803)
You do what you gotta do. 10.5.8 is the last OS X version which supported PPC.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by stock_toaster on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @06:28PM (#7630896)
Run Linux or one of the *BSD's on it?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by SeanLuke on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @11:57PM (#7632003)
Would that I could.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by coherentpony on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @06:39PM (#7630943)
And any Mac software you buy that still supports PPC is almost certainly not vendor-supported with security updates.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by yuhong on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @07:58PM (#7631251)
Luckily PowerPC exploits were pretty uncommon even back when it was current, partly because it was more difficult to create than x86 exploits.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by tptacek on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @09:35PM (#7631557)
How so? Do you just mean fewer people knew PPC? I'm not sure I follow this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by yuhong on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @09:57PM (#7631615)
Yea, partly, but also because PowerPC shellcode is more difficult:

http://uninformed.org/?v=1&a=1&t=pdf

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by plantain on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @10:39PM (#7631767)
It's a dream compared to x86...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Update 2014-002 by tptacek on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @10:47PM (#7631811)
Split I&D caches on the PPC complicates things.
[ Parent | on HN ]