Forgot your password?
Oracle Java Security

Oracle Fixes 42 Security Vulnerabilities In Java 211

Posted by samzenpus
from the patching-things-up dept.
wiredmikey writes "Oracle released its quarterly Critical Patch Update (CPU) for April, which addressed a whopping 128 security issues across multiple product families. As part of its update, Oracle released a Java SE Critical Patch Update to plug 42 security holes in Java, 19 with base CVE score of 10 (the highest you can go) and 39 related to the Java Web Start plugin which can be remotely exploited without authentication. According to security analyst Wade Williamson, organizations need to realize that Java will continue to pose a significant risk. 'The first step is for an organization to understand precisely where and why Java is needed,' Williamson wrote. 'Based on the rate of newly discovered vulnerabilities, security teams should assume that Java is and will continue to be vulnerable.' Organizations should to take a long, hard look at Java and answer for themselves if it's worth it, Williamson added. Due to the threat posed by a successful attack, Oracle is strongly recommending that organizations apply the security fixes as soon as possible."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle Fixes 42 Security Vulnerabilities In Java

Comments Filter:
  • Naive question (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Thursday April 18, 2013 @10:28PM (#43489215)

    What's the deal with people saying Java is a major source of insecurity?

    Does that mean compared to C++? Are they comparing (Java + all its libraries) to (C++ plus one instance of each library which is needed to match Java's standard libraries)? Insecurity of the JVM itself, compared to native object code?

    I honestly can't tell.

  • by viperidaenz (2515578) on Thursday April 18, 2013 @11:06PM (#43489439)

    Java isn't evil, Browser plugins are.
    Leave Java on the server side and be done with it.

  • Re:#1 web error (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 18, 2013 @11:09PM (#43489457)

    Speaking as someone who does Release Engineering professionally, and thus tends to see all the technologies that a company uses in deploying modern systems, Java is still #1 by a long shot, and I continue to see new development done all the time.

    It's all middleware, though. And, frankly, for pretty much any reasonably scalable system which has some sort of a front end web-ish part, a middleware "business logic" part, and a DB backend, Java is not only the leader, but its essentially one of two choices: .Net is the other.

    Standalone apps don't much exist in Java anymore (the few that do are mostly legacy). It's also almost completely disappeared as part of the Frontend portion of content delivery (i.e. not in the dynamic content being served to the end user, nor in the "web server" portion of the infrastructure).

    But in terms of middleware, well, only .Net is a serious competitor in terms of enterprise requirements. Java's got all the nice library and code support, plus plugins and stuff for all the build/deployment/test infrastructure. C++ doesn't even come close, and python/ruby/perl aren't even in the running. Now, there are architectures where there IS no middleware, and the frontend system actually is a python program which both serves content and has business logic in it, but I see them far less commonly, and they have serious scalability issues.

    And, frankly, the middleware tier is also the place which minimizes Java's deficiencies, and maximizes its strengths.

    As far as the future goes, I desperately wish Oracle would quit expanding the featureset of Java, and just spend all the time cleaning up the codebase. Java (the language) is more than feature-full at this time, and there's really very little need to keep adding stuff to the language. The codebase, on the other hand, needs at least couple of years of full-on cleanup. The JVM itself is still pretty solid, but everything else is suffering from neglect pretty badly.

  • Re:Repeat after me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by viperidaenz (2515578) on Thursday April 18, 2013 @11:19PM (#43489493)

    yeah, it should read: 3 Java security vulnerabilities (2 are client only) and 39 Java Web Start vulnerabilities fixed.

  • by StormReaver (59959) on Thursday April 18, 2013 @11:52PM (#43489651)

    Leave Java on the server side and be done with it.

    Or learn to use Java properly on the client side, which means stop using it as a browser plugin. Java makes an excellent desktop application development platform, but an absolutely lousy browser plugin.

  • Ask (Score:4, Insightful)

    by andrewa (18630) on Friday April 19, 2013 @12:13AM (#43489743)
    Yet still they are trying to sneak the "Ask" toolbar in there.....
  • by symbolset (646467) * on Friday April 19, 2013 @01:59AM (#43490119) Homepage Journal
    My teller offered me online banking once. But her monitor was tilted just enough that I could tell she was using IE6. "Um, no. Thanks. I'm good."
  • Ballanced? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Racerdude (1006357) on Friday April 19, 2013 @02:23AM (#43490191)
    "Organizations should to take a long, hard look at Java and answer for themselves if it's worth it, Williamson added.". This doesn't sound very balanced. It sounds like he has some sort of ulterior motive
  • by symbolset (646467) * on Friday April 19, 2013 @02:30AM (#43490215) Homepage Journal

    Languages need to keep up with the times, or they become an albatross.

    Unless through being steeped in the art and basic principles and with an eye toward the future the authors built their language in such a way that it could be timeless art that stood for all time, like for example Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie's "C".

    Go ahead and learn ALGOL, FORTRAN, BASIC, SNOBOL, APL, ADA, brainfuck, R, LISP and dozens of others like I did if that's your nerd thing. It's fun. After you've done that you'll come to the same conclusion I did: programming languages are syntactic sugar. They are constructs for interpreting your ideas into references to libraries that instantiate the desired result in predictable ways.

    C is. It stands like the Oedipus trilogy as a distillation of all prior art and a foundation of all subsequent art. It is beautiful and timeless in the same way. Learn this one thing and all else becomes easy. Unfortunately, like the Tau, it is not possible to really understand C until you don't need to do so any more. When you have learned enough about C to know why it is a fool's game you will have become ready to launch your own inferior language.

  • Re:NOT correct (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrXym (126579) on Friday April 19, 2013 @07:03AM (#43491223)

    With a C++ program it is up to me, the programmer to make sure there are no exploits.

    Which is why of course all those ActiveX controls running in IE, mostly written in C++ were so immune to exploitation. The security exceeded everybody's wildest expectations.

  • by darjen (879890) on Friday April 19, 2013 @08:23AM (#43491593)

    How many good programmers actually exist who are capable of writing secure code in C++? And out of them, how many will still make simple errors like an occasional buffer overrun? Even if you're a "good" programmer there will be lapses in judgement or things that are just overlooked.

    I do largely agree with your comment about keeping it out of the browsers though.

  • Re:Naive question (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, 2013 @09:33AM (#43492439)

    There was ActiveX, which was a fancy name for "let's download DLLs from websites and execute them in the browser process". We all know that bombed massively, especially because rogue website could launch (e.g.) HP's dlls inside their HTML code. They would then proceed to exploit the buffer overflows in the HP DLLs.

    ActiveX was a security nightmare based on downloaded C++ dlls.You see, mankind enumerates all possible ways of crap until it decides to limit itself to the less dangerous crap (JS).

To understand a program you must become both the machine and the program.