Photon powers conversational AI agents on iMessage, WhatsApp, Telegram, and more. Open-source Spectrum framework + SDK for seamless agent interactions.
Yeah, macOS, like most UNIX/BSD and Linux systems (even NT systems), use BSD‘s rather ancient TCP/IP stack. And, like most systems, have found their own unique ways around whatever bugs once existed (or still exist) in that stack.
This case uses iMessage as an example, and it would be kind of foolish not to think that between the TCP/IP stack and macOS‘s internal messaging system there isn’t some kind of time reset handler before it gets handed off to iMessage.
I’ve also had Macs online for years without issue.
I guess it only applies to “ephemeral” ports 49152–65535, though I’m not sure what range macOS actually uses. Wikipedia has numbers for Linux and various Windows versions but not macOS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeral_port
So does that mean typical desktop usage, like email, web browsing, SSH, etc. would be unaffected? Anyone have any insight on this? I’m not a networking expert myself.
I can’t believe the claim that “everything else dies” when that goes directly against observed reality.
Yeah, I run a macOS server (on 10.13.6 no less) that regularly has several months of uptime without issue, and I ran my new MacBook Pro for six months since I bought it perfectly fine without rebooting it until a recent update forced me to. I’m not sure what the problem here is.
there may be some “secret sauce” here that combines a certain version of OS, hardware and DHCP. I thought it was an interesting read and thought I would share.
I suppose it is interesting, and I wasn’t complaining about you posting it. I was more a bit puzzled about the somewhat grandiose claims that the headline makes. That’s on the author, not on you.
So, why is this being disclosed here and not a CVE reported to Apple?
While contemplating that, my Mac has been up for longer than that and it’s working fine.
The Mac I had before that was up for years, also fine.
So … what is this really about?
A lot of these new AI found bugs are proving to be nothing burgers. Just a waste of money to try and hype the latest models.
They’re either in old code not actually used anymore or miss a system interaction that fixes the supposed bug or just straight up are wrong.
LLMs are shit
Yeah, macOS, like most UNIX/BSD and Linux systems (even NT systems), use BSD‘s rather ancient TCP/IP stack. And, like most systems, have found their own unique ways around whatever bugs once existed (or still exist) in that stack.
This case uses iMessage as an example, and it would be kind of foolish not to think that between the TCP/IP stack and macOS‘s internal messaging system there isn’t some kind of time reset handler before it gets handed off to iMessage.
I’ve also had Macs online for years without issue.
I guess it only applies to “ephemeral” ports 49152–65535, though I’m not sure what range macOS actually uses. Wikipedia has numbers for Linux and various Windows versions but not macOS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeral_port
So does that mean typical desktop usage, like email, web browsing, SSH, etc. would be unaffected? Anyone have any insight on this? I’m not a networking expert myself.
I can’t believe the claim that “everything else dies” when that goes directly against observed reality.
Because it’s not a security issue? It is a bug that would affect long running MacOS machines which is quite low impact.
Yeah, I run a macOS server (on 10.13.6 no less) that regularly has several months of uptime without issue, and I ran my new MacBook Pro for six months since I bought it perfectly fine without rebooting it until a recent update forced me to. I’m not sure what the problem here is.
there may be some “secret sauce” here that combines a certain version of OS, hardware and DHCP. I thought it was an interesting read and thought I would share.
I suppose it is interesting, and I wasn’t complaining about you posting it. I was more a bit puzzled about the somewhat grandiose claims that the headline makes. That’s on the author, not on you.