top | item 7054790

Oracle to issue huge security patch addressing 36 Java vulnerabilities

40 points| dsl | 12 years ago |theinquirer.net | reply

36 comments

order
[+] JohnTHaller|12 years ago|reply
For context, Java will not run by default in any of the 3 major web browsers. In Firefox, it uses Click to Play, requiring you to click on the plugin to load it. In Chrome and IE, it will present a permissions box asking you for permission to run the applet that you can deny.
[+] jgalt212|12 years ago|reply
Let's say this update does everything advertised and more, the perception remains that Java is just not usable in the browser--it's just too dangerous.

Away from testing purposes, the only reason we use IE in the office is so that we can use Webex without Java.

[+] pjmlp|12 years ago|reply
So you rather use the ActiveX plugin instead?!

Talk about security.

[+] hershel|12 years ago|reply
I think bromium.com includes a hw-virtualization option that enables one to use java in the browser safely.
[+] y0ghur7_xxx|12 years ago|reply
We really need to implement the missing functionality Java applets are providing in plain JS, so applets can die. The last time i absolutely had to implement an applet was to provide my client with this functionality that was not available with pure JS:

- direct access to printer: the user wanted to print on a specific tray of the printer, without selecting it every time. JS only implements window.print() with no fine grained printer control.

- serial/parallel/usb access: access to a POS for card processing, and we needed to write some data on a smartcard.

- plain TCP connections

- read/write files on the local filesystem.

I understand that all these features require more control of the underlying hardware and need to be somehow secured, but we did not want to write a desktop app just for these features, and applets gave us the means to implement what the user needed. Once JS can do that, applets can die a quick dead.

[+] skybrian|12 years ago|reply
Why not an HTTP server running on localhost that provides these things?
[+] Joister|12 years ago|reply
Out of curiousity, why did it have to run in the browser?
[+] beedogs|12 years ago|reply
What an utter mess Java is. You'd think after 20 years they'd have this sorted out by now.
[+] tptacek|12 years ago|reply
You mean, what an utter mess the Java Applet Plugin is. And it is, but keep in mind that the Java team signed up for a world of hurt: they produced a design whose attack surface is an entire programming language, complete with networking and a user interface toolkit and all the timers, retention cycles, native code bindings, and other junk that comes with it.

Surely there are several bugs here that aren't specific to the Applet Plugin, but their impact is probably minimal outside of the plugin.

[+] gojomo|12 years ago|reply
And then, finally, Java will be secure. Right?
[+] mragab|12 years ago|reply
No system/platform is 100% secure, and Java is no exception

It is all relative

[+] waps|12 years ago|reply
Please note that the only way to exploit these vulnerabilities is you've already got your code executing on the machine you intend to break. The only thing this allows you to do is to break out of the java sandbox, and keep in mind that most languages don't even pretend that sandbox isolates code (e.g. python/perl/go/... all openly say you can easily break out of the sandbox). So they're trying to solve a really hard problem.
[+] tptacek|12 years ago|reply
They are indeed trying to solve a hard problem, and they're shackled to a 1990s design.

But I'm not sure I understand the rest of your comment. The threat model for a Java plugin vulnerability is, if your target has the Java plugin enabled, they can't safely browse the web; any page they visit could end up redirecting them to a page with a malicious applet. That's pretty bad.

[+] taspeotis|12 years ago|reply

    Please note that the only way to exploit these vulnerabilities is you've already got your code executing on the machine you intend to break
I can't reconcile this with the article.

    ...34 that are bugs that can be exploited remotely by an attacker without requiring authentication
By "your code" do you mean "Java-based application"? Honest question.
[+] InclinedPlane|12 years ago|reply
This is a very disingenuous way of describing the risk of drive by exploits in the browser.