361–370 of 552 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not after Catalina. Future versions of macOS will require signed software (notarized as per Apple terminology), even outside of the store. What is new in security at WWDC.
Signed is not the same to Sandboxed on macOS, afaik.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Signed is not the same to Sandboxed on macOS, afaik.
Watch the security talk. macOS is on the path to adopt iOS permissions model and long term roadmap is to apply the sandbox to everything, with the option to explicitly disable it on per-case basis. A path similar to how Windows 10 is now converging the Win32 and UWP sanbox models, or how ChromeOS sandboxes GNU/Linux processes.
I do not see where this is mentioned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not after Catalina. Future versions of macOS will require signed software (notarized as per Apple terminology), even outside of the store. What is new in security at WWDC.
That will be the Mac books death. Many open source projects will not participate in this. If this kills brew you will also loose a lot of devs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and all of those are decisions you can go along with or reject. Deciding how big an organization you will join is one of many ways you apply your ethics.
That’s another issue. As an organization is viewed as less ethical, only less ethical people join creating a downward spiral.
That's pretty epic. Apple continues to make big, brave moral gestures (like when they yanked Facebook and Google's enterprise certs earlier this year, or killed long-term tracking cookies in Safari overnight). Makes me happy to be a customer. Hope they keep enforcing their own rules and protecting their users' privacy and security in this fearless manner.
I still think Apple products are built on human rights abuses. I am currently trying to parse their most recent conflict minerals disclosure. It doesn't explicitly say "yes" but also doesn't clearly say "conflict-free" either.
Sure, Apple has more leverage, considering their size, but that also comes with its own set of problems. Plus, their customers have nowhere to go to in protest - all other phones are full of conflict minerals too.
Wasn't there once a company with the motto "Don't be evil."? If that motto is abandoned, Apple should claim it since they genuinely try do their best to live by it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm fine with this. I can always leave Apple and go to Linux if they do something drastic.
After years of pouring thousands of dollars into Apple's coffers you expect that Linux will still be there when you need it... Real principles would involve switching now.
b) Linux seems pretty solid, no...?
c) I'd argue that a better position might be 'support Linux now, in case you need it in the future'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed a company's "morals" are better exposed when it has to make inconvenient choices.
I would say true morals lead to structuring your company in such a way that you don’t have to rely on business people making ethical decisions moment to moment, because they won’t.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has done silent updates for Gatekeeper, the macOS code signing/file quarantine/light anti-malware framework ever since Yosemite. These are done silently unless you explicitly disable all updates and only show up as a visible item when you manually list updates using the softwareupdate command line tool, I think. AFAIK these are just config files and hash databases or similar. You can view the history of these i…
> These are done silently unless you explicitly disable all updates You can turn off silent security updates from System Preferences without affecting software update checks for other components.
The option is called "Automatically: Install system data files and security updates" in the Software Update advanced settings.