MailWatch, a PPC app which I really love, was working just fine until I installed the Security Update today. It seems that the Security Update somehow broke MailWatch. Below is the CrashLog. Am hoping someone can decipher this and let me know if there is something I can do to fix it. MailWatch was literally working fine just minutes before I installed the Security Update.

In the alternative if someone knows of a similar application I'd love to know about it. MailWatch resides in the menu bar and notifies me when there is new mail on my mail server.

Process: Mail Watch [207]
Path: /Applications/Utilities/Mail Watch.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail Watch
Identifier: com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail
Version: Mail Watch version 3.3 (3.3)
Code Type: PPC (Translated)
Parent Process: launchd [92]

Date/Time: 2012-02-01 14:32:35.569 -0800
OS Version: Mac OS X 10.6.8 (10K549)
Report Version: 6

Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGTRAP)
Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000
Crashed Thread: 0 Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread

Thread 0 Crashed: Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread
0 libSystem.B.dylib 0x80239236 __pthread_kill + 10
1 libSystem.B.dylib 0x80238ad7 pthread_kill + 95
2 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80bfb30 0xb8000000 + 785200
3 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c0037 0xb8000000 + 786487
4 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80dd8e8 0xb8000000 + 907496
5 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8145397 spin_lock_wrapper + 1791
6 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb801ceb7 0xb8000000 + 118455

Thread 1:
0 libSystem.B.dylib 0x80142afa mach_msg_trap + 10
1 libSystem.B.dylib 0x80143267 mach_msg + 68
2 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb819440f CallPPCFunctionAtAddressInt + 206231
3 libSystem.B.dylib 0x80170259 _pthread_start + 345
4 libSystem.B.dylib 0x801700de thread_start + 34

Thread 2:
0 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb815acc0 spin_lock_wrapper + 90152
1 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8179c5b CallPPCFunctionAtAddressInt + 97763
2 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c6b13 0xb8000000 + 813843
3 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c0037 0xb8000000 + 786487
4 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80dd8e8 0xb8000000 + 907496
5 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8145397 spin_lock_wrapper + 1791
6 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb801ceb7 0xb8000000 + 118455

Thread 3:
0 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb815a8ff spin_lock_wrapper + 89191
1 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8176e5d CallPPCFunctionAtAddressInt + 85989
2 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c6b13 0xb8000000 + 813843
3 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c0037 0xb8000000 + 786487
4 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80dd8e8 0xb8000000 + 907496
5 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8145397 spin_lock_wrapper + 1791
6 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb801ceb7 0xb8000000 + 118455

Thread 4:
0 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb815a8ff spin_lock_wrapper + 89191
1 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8176e5d CallPPCFunctionAtAddressInt + 85989
2 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c6b13 0xb8000000 + 813843
3 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80c0037 0xb8000000 + 786487
4 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb80dd8e8 0xb8000000 + 907496
5 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb8145397 spin_lock_wrapper + 1791
6 com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail 0xb801ceb7 0xb8000000 + 118455

Thread 0 crashed with X86 Thread State (32-bit):
eax: 0x00000000 ebx: 0x802fc540 ecx: 0xb7fff9ac edx: 0x80239236
edi: 0xb8211640 esi: 0x00000005 ebp: 0xb7fff9d8 esp: 0xb7fff9ac
ss: 0x0000001f efl: 0x00000286 eip: 0x80239236 cs: 0x00000007
ds: 0x0000001f es: 0x0000001f fs: 0x00000000 gs: 0x00000037
cr2: 0x8023922c

Binary Images:
0x80000000 - 0x8005dff7 com.apple.framework.IOKit 2.0 (???) <3DABAB9C-4949-F441-B077-0498F8E47A35> /System/Library/Frameworks/IOKit.framework/Versions/A/IOKit
0x8007d000 - 0x800e7fe7 libstdc++.6.dylib 7.9.0 (compatibility 7.0.0) <411D87F4-B7E1-44EB-F201-F8B4F9227213> /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.dylib
0x80142000 - 0x802e9ff7 libSystem.B.dylib 125.2.11 (compatibility 1.0.0) <2DCD13E3-1BD1-6F25-119A-3863A3848B90> /usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib
0x8036b000 - 0x804e6fe7 com.apple.CoreFoundation 6.6.6 (550.44) <F88C95CD-1264-782D-A1F5-204739847E93> /System/Library/Frameworks/CoreFoundation.framework/Versions/A/CoreFoundation
0x805de000 - 0x805ecfe7 libz.1.dylib 1.2.3 (compatibility 1.0.0) <33C1B260-ED05-945D-FC33-EF56EC791E2E> /usr/lib/libz.1.dylib
0x805f1000 - 0x805fdff7 libkxld.dylib ??? (???) <9A441C48-2D18-E716-5F38-CBEAE6A0BB3E> /usr/lib/system/libkxld.dylib
0x80601000 - 0x80647ff7 libauto.dylib ??? (???) <29422A70-87CF-10E2-CE59-FEE1234CFAAE> /usr/lib/libauto.dylib
0x80654000 - 0x807d6fe7 libicucore.A.dylib 40.0.0 (compatibility 1.0.0) <D5980817-6D19-9636-51C3-E82BAE26776B> /usr/lib/libicucore.A.dylib
0x80838000 - 0x808e5fe7 libobjc.A.dylib 227.0.0 (compatibility 1.0.0) <9F8413A6-736D-37D9-8EB3-7986D4699957> /usr/lib/libobjc.A.dylib
0x808f9000 - 0x808fcfe7 libmathCommon.A.dylib 315.0.0 (compatibility 1.0.0) <1622A54F-1A98-2CBE-B6A4-2122981A500E> /usr/lib/system/libmathCommon.A.dylib
0x8fe00000 - 0x8fe4163b dyld 132.1 (???) <4CDE4F04-0DD6-224E-ACE5-3C06E169A801> /usr/lib/dyld
0xb8000000 - 0xb81defff +com.AstroK-Software.Watch.Mail Mail Watch version 3.3 (3.3) <F24FBFDD-E694-6F38-BFFB-293613CEF2DE> /Applications/Utilities/Mail Watch.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail Watch
0xffff0000 - 0xffff1fff libSystem.B.dylib ??? (???) <2DCD13E3-1BD1-6F25-119A-3863A3848B90> /usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib

Translated Code Information:
objc[207]: garbage collection is ON
NO CRASH REPORT

Which Security Update did you install?

Have you looked at /Apps/Utils/Console > Console Messages to see if there's anything useful in there?

Have you tried trashing Mail Watch and/or its plist, app support...whatever, and reinstalling?

Sorry, I did try reinstalling and also deleted the plist to no avail. What I posted is what I got from console, but I cannot determine anything from that which is why I posted.

I just tried to d/l Mail Watch 3.3 for a look-see, but MacUpdates "Download Now" and "Visit Developer's Site" links both come up with


(dodownload.com, cnet.com, and mac.softpedia.com links return the same error.)

I dunno...

Edit: If you're running Time Machine, you can always revert to a pre-update backup (but at the cost of losing your newly gained security, of course).

Don't want to lose the Security and I knew this day was coming as MailWatch was one of 2 PPC apps that I still run on 10.6.8. The other being Quicken 2007. As soon as Quicken 2007 comes out with the Intel version I'm probably going to Lion but I'll definitely miss MailWatch.

Hard to believe that a similar app never made it to an Intel version. Oh Well.

This question seems to have fallen by the wayside, but FWIW I suspect that this must have been Security Update 2011-006 (Snow Leopard).

More likely Security Update 2012-001 (Snow Leopard).

I dropped that issue because I found the Security Update after having been away from my deuced Mac(hina) for a day.

(Interestingly, though, MacUpdate's page incorrectly linked to the update alternaut posted.)

> Hard to believe that a similar app never made it to an Intel version. Oh Well.

It seems to me that I've seen similar apps on MacUpdate; have you searched?

It was the Security Update from yesterday that I installed.

I've searched high and low and cannot find any app, for POP accounts, that shows emails on the server from the menu bar. It's so convenient to know at a glance if there are any emails waiting. I hate to drop what I'm doing and open another application to see if there are any emails waiting on the server. I know I can do this from Apple Mail with Get Account Info but that is cumbersome to say the least.

You're quite right, of course, and thanks for fixing that. In my search of that url I got misdirected and didn't even notice the incorrect date staring me in the face.

That said, the issue Douglas is struggling with seems to be associated with the workings (or non-workings, as the case may be) of Rosetta-dependent apps following that security update, according to many user reports. Perhaps there will be another security update to fix this issue, but even so, Mail Watch's days are likely numbered.

I'm sorry to say the MailWatch day's were numbered long ago. It seems that only MailWatch was broken.

I'm still using Quicken 2007, PPC, and it's operating normally - thank god as I have financial records going back to 1995 on Quicken.

After an extensive search I've decide to use TopPop as a replacement. It's not free and I cannot delete emails off the server from TopPop but it's the closest I could find and I do like the Growl notification.

Thanks for the help everyone !

Was just in the Apple Forums and there are tons of reports that the Security Update, Snow Leopard, broke almost all PPC applications in one way or another. Just checked my Quicken 2006 and while I can work in the Register I am unable to print or export without crashing.

Thank god I've got a clone but I hope Apple can fix this ASAP. The reason I did not update to Lion is because I need Quicken.

Running or rerunning, as the case may be, the OS X 10.6.8 Update Combo v 1.1 has been presented as an option, as has reinstalling Rosetta (with Pacifist) from your install disc, although with no accompanying success/failure reports, here.

I don't know that I'd hold out much hope for the Combo; reinstalling Rosetta sounds like a more realistic approach.

I wonder if the following sheds any light. I only saw the update bulletin yesterday so, given this thread, I clicked on:

For information on the security content of this update, please visit this website:

I went to the link . Yesterday evening the page was not available but this morning it is and this information is provided.

Name and Information

OSX Lion v10.7.3 and Security Update 2012-001

Released for

Mac OS X v10.6.8, OS X Lion v10.7 to v10.7.2

Perhaps Apple didn't write code that broke Rosetta. Maybe, in their haste to get a Lion update out and combine it with Snow Leopard, Apple has completely missed the fact that SL has the Rosetta component and left it out.

I just copied the ImageIO.framework from my clone over to my regular HD and all is back to normal and working correctly. Both Quicken, can print and export now, and MailWatch is working too.

Pretty easy fix but you need to boot with the clone and then copy the file to the regular HD and reboot into the regular HD.

ryck, I don't follow you. Are you suggesting that the OS X team at Apple forgot that under Snow Leopard, many people use Rosetta to run PPC-only apps?

Can you provide a link to the source of this fix suggestion? The Security Update lists three ImageIO fixes patches for Snow Leopard; this fix (presumably) reintroduces some vulnerabilities by overwriting them.

Why wouldn't it be possible? Rosetta isn't installed automatically, but has to be chosen when Slow Leopard is installed. And Lion does not come with Rosetta.

I'm not a person who has ever written code, so I am at a bit of a disadvantage, but it doesn't make my query unreasonable. It seems to me that a team focussed on Lion, incorporating the unsupported Snow Leopard that has Rosetta as an add-on, could drop the Rosetta ball. I'm sure that stranger things have happened.

You can do it manually but this link from a very kind mac owner makes it easier.

http://www.educate-it.org/content.php?130-Rosetta-Issue-after-Security-Update-2012-001

I haven't used the Combo, but reinstalling Rosetta didn't work. Fortunately for me, the only PPC app that I rely upon is Eye-One Match 3.6.3 for monitor calibration, and it works. Word X crashes when I try to open a document but I use Word 2008 and haven't used any of the Office X apps for awhile. My other PPC apps are things that I don't need anymore. Still, I hope that Apple issues a fix soon. I can always clone back from my SD backup (after manually copying some new files). Running Archive & Install is also an option.

The only MS app I run is Office Excel X, which has had no trouble opening the two files for which I use it (although I haven't tried changing and saving yet).

Have you tried Douglas's linked solution?

ryck's suggestion is not at all off-the-wall; it's given context by Apple's having overlooked the Safari regression caused by the OS X 10.6.8 v1.1 Combo Updater.

I can open Quicken 2007 and enter Data, but I can't print anything from it.

I am a person who has designed, coded, and tested hundreds of thousands of lines of code and from what I have seen of Apple's software development process over the years I can safely say, the omission of Rosetta was clearly not an oversight. Apple broadcast their intentions to drop Rosetta when it became an optional install in Snow Leopard. At that point if developers did not migrate their code to the Intel platform they were signaling their loss of interest in the product and users who were listening should have begun seeking alternatives.

It has been Apple's practice, from their very beginnings to drop support for obsolete hardware and software technologies as they add support for newer hardware and software technologies. Apple has always broadcast their intentions for dropping a technology well in advance and when necessary providing a bridging technology such as the Classic Environment in earlier releases of OS X and more recently Rosetta. But those bridging technologies are never intended to be permanent and will be dropped usually after a couple of OS X upgrades. These bridging technologies are intended to allow time for developers to adapt to the new platform or users to find alternative applications.

If you are looking for a platform that provides support for code going all the way back to the dark ages of personal computing, Dell will be more than happy to accommodate you.

You're suggesting that Apple deliberately broke Rosetta and screwed all those still relying on it without broadcasting either the intention or the fact and in complete contradiction of its retention of Rosetta in Snow Leopard?

I'll be shocked if it's true!

Really? And how was the average user, without any powers to divine intent from a process, supposed to know that?

Certainly a person who has "designed, coded, and tested hundreds of thousands of lines of code" is able to divine such intent, but no one should expect that of the average user.

If it was Apple's intent that, in the future they would write an upgrade that would remove Rosetta from Snow Leopard, they should have said exactly that AND they should have said: "We'll let you know when we're about to do it."



That's not news and I'm not sure why you thought it should be stated. However, if what you have said is true (the omission of Rosetta was clearly not an oversight) then the process was underhanded and immoral. The "Software Update..." function presents a dialogue box that says:

Security Update 2012-001 is recommended for all users and improves the security of Mac OS X.

Apple could just as easily have added a caution: "By the way, if you install this update, you will no longer have Rosetta."

Not adding the caution....reiterate underhanded and immoral.


Condescension is not necessary. We've been through this before. My daughter is in her last year of university (in another city) with Snow Leopard and Rosetta working just fine. I am not about to start introducing new software, with the possibility of the problems that can accompany it, when she needs to be focussed on her studies.

I wasn't actually taking issue with that suggestion (though I don't agree with you that it's possible that Apple software engineers, working on a Security Update with, by my count, five patches which address issues that apply only to Snow Leopard, would somehow lose all awareness of context); I was only seeking clarification that that's what you meant.

It wasn't clear to me how you got from


to



With 20/20 hindsight, we can clearly see from Douglas's experience that Apple did write code that broke Rosetta.

I'm downloading it as I write this. However, it is downloading at speeds reminiscent of dialup connections. I'll post back after I install it.

Fascinating! The Apple Support document HT5130 ("About the security content of OS X Lion v10.7.3 and Security Update 2012-001"), which not 20 minutes ago had last been updated Feb. 1, 2012, and contained three ImageIO patches—one targeted only for Snow Leopard—now reads "Last Modified: February 03, 2012," and contains only two ImageIO patches, both Lion-only.

No "2012-001 v1.1" on Support Downloads yet, though.

Security Update 2012-001 v 1.1 is only on Software Update as of this time.

I solved my problem my coping the unaffected folder from my clone HD to my regular boot HD and that fixed the problem with Quicken and Mailwatch.

I've since installed Security Update 2012-001 v 1.1 from Software Update and I can report that both Quicken and MailWatch are still operating correctly.

BTW I, too, would be extremely surprised if Apple screwed up Rosetta intentionally. What would the upside be, a few more sales of Lyon? Hardly worth the bad publicity and howling by long time Apple fans.

Perhaps not clearly written on my part, but easily clarified. I meant that perhaps it wasn't poorly written code causing a poorly performing Rosetta, but rather a failure to include Rosetta at all.

That's what I meant in the next sentence: "Maybe, in their haste to get a Lion update out and combine it with Snow Leopard, Apple has completely missed the fact that SL has the Rosetta component and left it out."

Subsequently, that's also what joemikeb suggests: "....the omission of Rosetta was clearly not an oversight"

Also just installed the new update (from MacFixIt Apple fixes Rosetta problems with new security update) and can now print in Quicken 2007

I guess I'm not understanding the whole discussion of the omission of Rosetta. If one hadn't previously installed Rosetta, one wouldn't be running any PPC apps, and therefore nothing would be broken by this update. Whatever the update did, it didn't omit Rosetta. It broke Rosetta, i.e. altered existing code in a way which rendered Rosetta dysfunctional.

The fact that the two approaches to dealing with this problematic update which seem to have been successful for many folks—either reinstalling Rosetta, or replacing ImageIO.Framework on the affected machine with a copy of the pre-update ImageIO.Framework—strongly suggests that the cause of the problem was one or more of the three ImageIO patches included in the original update. (In the original update, all three ImageIO patches applied to OS X 10.6.8.)

The fact that Apple has replaced that version of the update with a new one containing no ImageIO patches for OS X 10.6.8 confirms it, as far as I'm concerned. Whether Apple simply failed to test the original update on any configurations which included PPC apps running on Rosetta, or cynically "tested the waters" to see how feasible it might be, from a political standpoint, to abandon Rosetta support (not very feasible at present, it appears!), is a question the answer to which probably depends on one's particular predisposition towards Apple.

I personally believe they just didn't test it on Rosetta configurations. They may not even have any in-house. As always, their desire to make everybody current outweighs their interest in supporting those who aren't. I seriously doubt they "deliberately broke Rosetta and screwed all those still relying on it without broadcasting either the intention or the fact," to crib artie's nice turn of phrase.

The updated update is now available at Security Update 2012-001 (Snow Leopard), but note that although the page is still headed "Security Update 2012-001 (Snow Leopard)," the right-side info box states "Version: 2012-001 v.1.1."

Chances are that you're correct...that Apple simply neglected to test the update on a Rosetta reliant OS X configuration, but you've missed the point I think ryck was trying to make (albeit not terribly clearly)...that Apple simply forgot that Rosetta exists. (As I mentioned above, they forgot about the Safari update that came between OS X 10.6.8 and 10.6.8 v1.1.)

Aren't the two underlined suggestions contradictory rather than supportive of each other?

Maybe it's because you're making my simple-minded supposition too complicated.

I observed a string of posts that seemed to indicate that Rosetta had been affected by the way the recent update was written. I just put forth the idea that maybe it wasn't writing...that maybe Apple just forgot.


When you asked if that what I actually meant, I confirmed and added the caveat that I have less technical understanding than others here.


artie505 understood what I meant.


You disagreed with my supposition....


....but asked for further clarification, which I gave.


You have provided data showing why my idea was likely not correct and I accept your conclusions, although I don't understand them (I wouldn't know a Framework IO if you dropped it on my foot).

Yes...mea culpa....chalk it up to poor editing.

What am I missing? I've just been to that page but don't see any reference anywhere to a V1.1 Even when I went to the link on that page, which takes me to a box with descriptive columns, I don't see any reference to V1.1....and the Release Dates all say Feb 1, 2012

I have gone there through two methods. Just pasting your link and also by using "Software Update..." under the black apple.

Look immediately below the "Download" button here (Click me). (Oops... I didn't notice the incorrect date.)

I installed the original update, and this evening Software Update told me I needed a new one, but since I installed the d/l from the linked page SU tells me that I'm up to date.

I've just followed that link but still no indication that the update is a V1.1

As I don't know how to post a screenshot I'll just provide what I see under the Download button:

Version: 2012-001
Post Date: February 01, 2012
Download ID: DL1489
Licence: Update
File Size: 192.73 MB
System Requirements
Mac OS v10.6.8

Question: Is it possible that my system or Safari are pulling up dated pages? If so, what's the fix? Cache clearing?

Gotta hit the sack. Will check back in the morning.

Bizarre! Maybe Probably a cache thing; try command-option-E.

In the meantime, though.

I just installed v 1.1 via Software Update and all is well. I had decided to wait for Apple to issue a patch rather than try the one that I referred to in my previous post, figuring that Apple should (?) be more reliable than a third party. Maybe I'm naive? Anyway, everything PPC is working.

Doesn't seem to be a cache issue. I see what ryck sees, and I had already tried emptying Safari's cache prior to reading your last post. Either Apple is serving up different pages in different circumstances (depending on one's hardware, or geographic location, or some other variable), or the page you screen-captured has been unrevised again...

Got me beat!

I just followed my link and the "Security Update 2012-001 (Snow Leopard)" link here, and both times I was taken to a page that showed "Version: 2012-001 v.1.1."

Edit: Could this oddity possibly be related to the FTM favicon's inexplicable failure to update immediately for some people when it reverted/was updated during the last UBB.threads update process? (If so, it's kinda odd that I got immediate results in both instances.)

Edit 2: I'm seeing the v1.1 thing when I click on the link to the Server update, too.

Apparently, some are enjoying success by using RosettaFix

That's already been linked above, Harv, but to paraphrase Jon, why rely on a 3rd party's guess fix when Apple has issued a presumably on-the-mark fix.

Even if you can't link to v1.1, Software Update is delivering it...maybe.

Oops. Sorry I missed that.

One of those could be the answer. I know that, when Douglas started the thread, I still did not have notification that there was a security update (I checked when the issue was posted). Geographically, I'm not too far north of him but there is a border between us. Maybe it's sitting in Cyber Customs

When using a 2008 MBP (Safari 5.0.6) or a 2005 iMac G5 (TenFourFox 10.0) both running Leopard, I get the version of the updater page sporting 'v.1.1' where Artie says he sees it. This suggests it's not the hardware or an 'unrevision', and shows that 'Artie's' version is still up. That seems to leave location or some such variable.

However, when I attempt to reach that same page on the G5 using Safari 5.0.6 (all using the links posted here), Safari balks and returns the message (note the appendage in red):
Safari can’t open the page. Too many redirects occurred trying to open “http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1489?viewlocale=null&locale=null”. This might occur if you open a page that is redirected to open another page which then is redirected to open the original page.

Reloading Safari or restarting the Mac didn't help, and there are no obvious explanatory items listed by Little Snitch or the hosts file. Odd.

That's the exact behavior i'm seeing now (12:15PM Saturday), with my 2010 (core i7) MBP (10.6.8/Safari 5.1.2).

I must add that many Apple pages have been acting like that for several weeks now.... but refreshing/reloading has always worked in the past.

bizarre


edit/ i note that macintouch for friday has a note mentioning the "1.1" update, but provide no linkage at all (at this time).

I just went to the page using artie's link and only got Version: 2012-001

However I went back again, did a page refresh, and now have Version: 2012-001 v.1.1

For what it's worth, I installed the security update when it first came out and had no problem with Rosetta. However, Software Update today offered to install it again, presumably to give me the 1.1 version.

This-all has got me wondering whether a d/l from an incorrectly labeled page would be the real goods?

I'd try, but I can't get to an incorrect page.

I installed V1.1 this morning (although I downloaded the .dmg rather than using "Software Update....") after making a new SD Clone (suspenders) and a new TM Backup (belt).

I've quickly run through PowerPoint, Excel and Word (including some .docx, .xlsx conversions) and everything seems to be fine.

It finally worked for me today. For anyone who may need "1.1" but still can't get that page to open, the path to initiate a dmg download appears to be the same:

http://support.apple.com/downloads/DL1489/en_US/SecUpd2012-001Snow.dmg

and the digest value is (currently):
SHA1 = 29218a1a28efecd15b3033922d71f0441390490a

when finished downloading, the file i got has a modified date of:
Feb. 3, 15:39:16
(i.e., Friday 3:39 PM)



edit/ To check the digest of any file, use this command:
openssl sha1 /path/to/the/file
where "/path/to/the/file" depends on your file's location