What's the exact data being sent? There is a lot of arguing going on here, but what is the data?
Seems to be a hash of the executable.
Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
71–80 of 182 posts
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#72Why don't companies come out and tell people what they're doing these days? Telemetry is getting to the point where people such as doctors and lawyers might be violating the law by using a modern computer. And people in the defense industry? Doesn't Apple employ thousands of forns? Who's audited their datasystems and ensured that this stuff stays private? Much easier and better to just stop using it all and move to a…
>"99% of people do everything in a browser these days anyhow."
This exaggeration is clearly absurd.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#73Why don't companies come out and tell people what they're doing these days? Telemetry is getting to the point where people such as doctors and lawyers might be violating the law by using a modern computer. And people in the defense industry? Doesn't Apple employ thousands of forns? Who's audited their datasystems and ensured that this stuff stays private? Much easier and better to just stop using it all and move to a…
> "99% of people do everything in a browser these days anyhow." This exaggeration is clearly absurd.
Are you certain about this? I think I was being conservative.
It's easy for us tech nerds in our little gadget bubbles to suppose that everybody is like us. But most people are simple browser users, and Office 365 and Google Docs have all but killed off office software on the desktop for many users.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#74I can't reproduce the exact test specified in the article:
$ echo $'#!/bin/sh\necho Hello' > /tmp/test.sh && chmod a+x /tmp/test.sh
$ time /tmp/test.sh && time /tmp/test.sh
Hello
real 0m0.016s
user 0m0.002s
sys 0m0.010s
Hello
real 0m0.006s
user 0m0.002s
sys 0m0.004s
> Some people try to explain away the delay, e.g., "I would put the 300 vs 5 ms down to filesystem caching", but such hand waving doesn't stand up to further scrutiny.
...but does not provide any "further scrutiny", so for me, occam's razor applies.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what you're seeing, but that's not what I'm seeing. When I Wireshark both app notarization and script notarization, I see 2 packets of encrypted Application Data sent to Apple (567 and 101 bytes), and 1 packet of Application Data (varying length) returned from Apple, in each case. What do you see when you trace a regular app notarization check?
This is odd, my proxy doesn't seem to show this. I will try to load my root cert into Wireshark and check. Edit: Checked and double checked: When I run a new shell script, syspolicyd just makes a connection with no application data
I'd recommend trying this: Download a notarized Mac app, delete any stapled notarization ticket (.app/Contents/CodeResources), and then trace the launch. What do you see, and does the system let you open the app? Does it say it checked for malware?
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#76I can't reproduce the exact test specified in the article: $ echo $'#!/bin/sh\necho Hello' > /tmp/test.sh && chmod a+x /tmp/test.sh $ time /tmp/test.sh && time /tmp/test.sh Hello real 0m0.016s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.010s Hello real 0m0.006s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s I don't believe the 0.01s difference is long enough, and could easily explained by filesystem caching. The article says: > Some people try to explain awa…
> You can verify that there's an online check by taking packet traces
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the other problems with Catalina for you? I ask because every time there is an OS X update someone posts this exact sentiment but then over a few months the issues get resolved. Please don’t interpret this as an attack; I am genuinely curious and want to see if Apple ends up fixing things. I my self have a maxed out 16 MacBook Pro and a for the first few weeks after the upgrade it was literally in usable bec…
Not a Catalina issue per se, but the big problem with Apple nowadays is: 1. Upgrades are not optional. The system will relentlessly nag me until I upgrade even if I don't want to upgrade. 2. Upgrades are crap shoots. An Apple upgrade nowadays is as likely to break things as it is to fix things. 3. Upgrades are difficult and sometimes impossible to revert. If an upgrade breaks something, I'm just screwed. So I'm still…
Although I sympathize, this is one issue, not three. And hardly anything unique to Apple.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#78I can't reproduce the exact test specified in the article: $ echo $'#!/bin/sh\necho Hello' > /tmp/test.sh && chmod a+x /tmp/test.sh $ time /tmp/test.sh && time /tmp/test.sh Hello real 0m0.016s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.010s Hello real 0m0.006s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s I don't believe the 0.01s difference is long enough, and could easily explained by filesystem caching. The article says: > Some people try to explain awa…
It is real; browse the previous thread on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23273247
It pushed me to buy Little Snitch to block it, so I guess somebody won out.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a Catalina issue per se, but the big problem with Apple nowadays is: 1. Upgrades are not optional. The system will relentlessly nag me until I upgrade even if I don't want to upgrade. 2. Upgrades are crap shoots. An Apple upgrade nowadays is as likely to break things as it is to fix things. 3. Upgrades are difficult and sometimes impossible to revert. If an upgrade breaks something, I'm just screwed. So I'm still…
Although I sympathize, this is one issue, not three. And hardly anything unique to Apple.
It seems pretty unique to Apple in my experience. I have an ancient Android tablet. I don't even know how old the OS is on it. It never nags me to upgrade. My Linux boxes never nag me to upgrade. When I do upgrade, things mostly keep working, and if they don't it's pretty easy to roll things back.
Re: Catalina is checking notarization of unsigned executables
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I sympathize, this is one issue, not three. And hardly anything unique to Apple.
It seems pretty unique to Apple in my experience. I have an ancient Android tablet. I don't even know how old the OS is on it. It never nags me to upgrade. My Linux boxes never nag me to upgrade. When I do upgrade, things mostly keep working, and if they don't it's pretty easy to roll things back.
Android never getting updates is not a feature!