Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

support.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–155 of 155 posts

Re: About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

#151

Post by WaltSellers »

pencilo wrote: post #61
lstamour wrote: post #57

As it happens, Secure Transport (edit: on OS X) is open source. I just spent the last hour rummaging through source code ... It was later renamed to "libsecurity_ssl" when it landed on iOS. It's been around since OS X launched. They also have a folder with about four dozen regression tests and a test app, not that I've had the chance to inspect either that closely. The tarballs are spread across two folders in the ta…

Take a look at http://opensource.apple.com/source/Security/Security-55471/l... specifically check the function SSLVerifySignedServerKeyExchange I leave the joy of spotting it to you. It is obvious and if you know c you'll see it(You don't need any knowledge of crypto).

Was there a more fundamental problem in the assumptions of the code?

The state of the operation is "success" (err==zero) until some step changes the state to "failure" (non-zero).

The state should be assumed to be "failure" until the last step changes it to "success".

Re: About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

#152

Post by hawleyal »

nikster wrote: post #133
pencilo wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look at http://opensource.apple.com/source/Security/Security-55471/l... specifically check the function SSLVerifySignedServerKeyExchange I leave the joy of spotting it to you. It is obvious and if you know c you'll see it(You don't need any knowledge of crypto).

Conspiracy theories aside, every programmer has probably made that mistake. The better ones learn to just avoid if statements without blocks ;) But one thing that pisses me off is that they go and implement SSL and don't have any automated tests for it !! For a company of Apple's size, that can only be called grossly negligent. There is no excuse. And they probably don't have any automated testing for most of their o…

It's not a mistake, though. The second goto line was added separately.

I could see if they were copying & pasting goto statements all over the place, and happened to paste it twice by accident. But that's how it occurred. The second one was added in a separate commit.

Re: About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

#153

Post by dspeyer »

lectrick wrote: post #129
alex1 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a diff of that file from OS X 10.8.5 (Security-55179.13) to 10.9 (Security-55471): https://gist.github.com/alexyakoubian/9151610/revisions Check line 631. Appears seemingly out of nowhere.

Goto considered harmful, indeed!

    return ERRCODE;
Would have produced the exact same bug.

Re: About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

#154

Post by dspeyer »

lectrick wrote: post #130
PhantomGremlin wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python does not allow an assignment to occur within an expression. They deliberately chose that restriction, to avoid that hard-to-see bug.

A better solution is gcc's which forces you (if you enable the restriction) to put an extra pair of parens around inline assignments.

The parenthesis in this attack are sufficient to prevent that warning.

Re: About the security content of iOS 7.0.6

#155

Post by rplnt »

baq wrote: post #98
wreegab wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People bitch about indentation in Python Really? I did something in Python for the first time a while ago and the indentation as code block is something I find very elegant. I can't fathom why would people find something wrong with this.

it's relatively harder to refactor code - you can't just select between { and }. otherwise, no idea - python is my weapon of choice, so i may be biased.

Can't really write onliners. And use of otherwise great interactive shell is not as good (not that bracketed blocks would help).
Post reply on HN