71–80 of 100 posts
> when some malware does manage to slip an evil kernel extension past a user and is rewarded with the protection of SIP, neither the user nor any anti-malware tool will be able to remove that extension, unless the user restarts from a different boot volume, or KernelExtensionManagement allows it. But isn't that scenario "Game Over" anyway? At least installing kernel extensions is a process that is explicit and - impo…
Apple users terrify me.
”But they had to allow installation first” is no defense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can not trust the user. Never.
How does that work in parallel with "It's my device, I'll do what I want with it"?
The article doesn't mention that this is not new; nor is it 'the' app you can't trash: it joins Safari, Finder, and most other 'Apple apps'. I find it quite surprising. Even when Windows defaulted to IE without choice, it could always be removed with 'Add or Remove Windows Features', as I recall.
You forgot to mention Chess. You can't trash Chess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It took Linux/BSD years to get it right, too. It often takes a long time for the user-facing interface to catch up to the kernel functionality.
> It often takes a long time for the user-facing interface to catch up to the kernel functionality. A long time to catch up for a company that revolutionized UX?
> when some malware does manage to slip an evil kernel extension past a user and is rewarded with the protection of SIP, neither the user nor any anti-malware tool will be able to remove that extension, unless the user restarts from a different boot volume, or KernelExtensionManagement allows it. But isn't that scenario "Game Over" anyway? At least installing kernel extensions is a process that is explicit and - impo…
"trained to ignore' permissions dialog." Apple users terrify me.
A lot of people are forgetting that security prompts look like this to ordinary users https://i.imgur.com/H0uVqFer.jpg ”But they had to allow installation first” is no defense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> not just another 'trained to ignore' permissions dialog. I have never seen any user reading a dialog message if it has a button with label "ok", "cancel", "allow" or "next". Including a lot of developers/dev-ops.
This seems a bit hyperbolic. I do, and I'm pretty sure a lot of people do - especially developers; and especially dialogs that you didn't explicitly expect. Not saying that the majority do; or that a dialog is "good security protection". I just don't think it's as useless as you seem to imply.
> when some malware does manage to slip an evil kernel extension past a user and is rewarded with the protection of SIP, neither the user nor any anti-malware tool will be able to remove that extension, unless the user restarts from a different boot volume, or KernelExtensionManagement allows it. But isn't that scenario "Game Over" anyway? At least installing kernel extensions is a process that is explicit and - impo…
"trained to ignore' permissions dialog." Apple users terrify me.
Add "System Integrity Protection" to the list of reasons why my next laptop won't be a Mac. Although based on a free operating system, Mac OS is gradually taking away users' control over their own devices. Either the user controls the software, or the software controls the user.
Just as with SELinux or AppArmor, you can ignore it if you think your normal practices keep you safe. That's probably mistaken but it's fully under your control: https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Se...
