About the security content of macOS Tahoe 26.6
andor
202 points
132 comments
July 28, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 375.6ms across 15,236 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- macOS 26 adoption rate lower than prior macOS versions seam_carver · 11 pts · May 09, 2026 · 65% similar
- CVE-2026-28952: Apple macOS 26.5 Kernel Vuln found by Claude dragonsenseiguy · 118 pts · May 25, 2026 · 62% similar
- You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings zdw · 451 pts · April 10, 2026 · 58% similar
- Tailscale's new macOS home tosh · 401 pts · April 02, 2026 · 58% similar
- Apple announces macOS 27 Golden Gate grassfedgeek · 19 pts · June 08, 2026 · 57% similar
Discussion Highlights (8 comments)
embedding-shape
Lots of "in collaboration with Claude and Anthropic Research" mentions, no mentions of other labs. I'd assume Apple already had access to whatever the most powerful model is at the various US-based labs, but perhaps not?
AJRF
Weird thing to see at number 3 on HN - is there some subtle context I am missing here? Are we wink winking that it's a lot of fixes?
nizbit
Collision counts are absurd. CVE-2026-43739 has roughly twenty credited researchers; CVE-2026-43816 has nearly as many. And ai attribution getting credit.
pjmlp
Map the amount of fixes with "... improved bounds checking..." , "...improved memory handling..." , "...improved memory management..." into the amount of developer, QA and release management teams salaries per hour, versus other stuff they could be working on, and that gives an approximate value of how using specific languages maps into monetary loss, and why companies are starting to care nowadays, given computers are always exposed to the world network.
tengwar2
15.7.8 is out today as well, with these security fixes: https://support.apple.com/en-us/128071 . For context, there have been issues with MacOS 26 which have led many people to defer upgrading until MacOS 27 is available, and MacOS 15 is the previous version.
TheJoeMan
This may be a naive take, so if anyone has insight please feel free to share, but across Windows, Mac, and Linux OS's I see many cases of path parsing vulnerabilities resulting in sandbox escapes, code execution, or data access issues. When presenting the user with a file picker or command-line input, is it really needed that the software can handle the full POSIX spec? I do not see a "typical" user needing to access a path with say a network storage but multiple ../.. and hard and soft symlinks simultaneously. I think "be liberal in what you accept" might need to be revisited for path parsing with some sort of OS-wide single-implementation as an optional feature.
FabHK
Apropos, anyone else saw "fast user switching" in Tahoe turn into "excruciatingly slow user switching which after a minute of switching without success rebooted the whole damn machine"?
BoardsOfCanada
It would be so nice to see how many zero-days are going away for bad players right now.