Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just search for example "apple backpedals" and it's pretty clear that Apple is not immune to the effects of publicity (like all companies)
The iPhone Headphone Jack has entered the chat.
Followed by the EarPods
Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
261–270 of 354 posts
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#262I am glad that the public backlash forced them to fix a deliberate BACKDOOR that they had introduced (by design) in the Network Extension Framework that macOS Big Sur now forces all the firewalls to use. (At least, they claim to have removed it). But it is hard to trust them again, and I would prefer to use a firewall that uses its own kernel extension to manage the network than using Apple's API again. (Obviously th…
Apple has no love for privacy nor ever had. They are in a market position where their main competitors - Google primarily, Microsoft and Amazon - are highly dependent on revenue streams extracted by monetizing personal information. Apple is in a position to cut that stream without affecting its bottom line, so it does it and claims privacy as a core value. I won't look a gift horse in the mouth, but I have no doubt t…
Apple is leaving a massive amount of money on the table by not monetizing user data or using it to serve ads. They are by far the most privacy focused of the large tech companies, though they're obviously not perfect.
The only way to do better than Apple is a full FOSS stack, and that comes with different challenges and is more of a hassle to maintain.
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the M1, that's by design. If you install macOS on an external volume it doesn't have that behaviour. On the internal disk, it's there because they carried over the iOS infrastructure, where your login password is the FDE one. macOS also now boots before asking for your password, like iOS. (the OS volume itself isn't encrypted and is read-only, the data volume is encrypted with your password)
> (the OS volume itself isn't encrypted and is read-only, the data volume is encrypted with your password) Wait, WHAT? Can someone with an M1 encrypted volume Mac check this directory and see if you see thumbnails? > $TMPDIR/../C/com.apple.QuickLook.thumbnailcache/ A full writeup of this is at the link [1]. This has been a well-known thing in computer forensics for many years, which is why *full* disk encryption is s…
The OS volume is a read-only image now - just system files only, and is signed etc
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be good news when it’s finished ( If it will be finished at all) but it is not the case so far. Also, from the same source: “ Will this make Apple Silicon Macs a fully open platform? No, Apple still controls the boot process ...” Without open firmware and bootloader ... well, is it really Own OS?
There are very few if not zero modern computers with completely open source firmware and boot loader. Including computers with open source as their primary selling point.
Some people find it psychologically easier to sit in the shit when they discover they are not alone. Some even go further and trying to justify the shit when there is a lot of it.
I am not one of them, so for me shit is still shit and I prefer to see it for what it is.
Besides, can two wrongs make something right ?
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are very few if not zero modern computers with completely open source firmware and boot loader. Including computers with open source as their primary selling point.
Some people find it psychologically easier to sit in the shit when they discover they are not alone. Some even go further and trying to justify the shit when there is a lot of it. I am not one of them, so for me shit is still shit and I prefer to see it for what it is. Besides, can two wrongs make something right ?
I am not suggesting it is perfect, but that it may be a little hyperbolic to say any os you load on a Mac is not it's 'own OS' because it relies on closed bootloaders/firmware. If that is the case, then what does every other computer run? Is Linus's own operating system not his own because he loads it on an Intel or AMD processor?
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has no love for privacy nor ever had. They are in a market position where their main competitors - Google primarily, Microsoft and Amazon - are highly dependent on revenue streams extracted by monetizing personal information. Apple is in a position to cut that stream without affecting its bottom line, so it does it and claims privacy as a core value. I won't look a gift horse in the mouth, but I have no doubt t…
When Apple launched iOS 6, it was the first operating system to include per-app privacy controls around access to things like microphone, camera, photos, etc. Controls we consider fundamental today. It did not mention it a single time in any of its PR or marketing at all. The first reference you find to it will be from Apple blogs who were surprised to stumble upon it in the iOS 6 beta. It took Android two more years…
That's not true at all. Even early Nokia (Symbian) or Blackberry phones had fine grained permission prompts. As did early Android, actually, but they were deemed to annoying for users.
Apple does deserve credit for leading and influencing Android in this regard, but neither the concept nor the implementation is new.
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Apple knew it could make more money in say for example, arms dealing, wouldn't it be obliged to pivot to serve the shareholders? I guess it's somewhat democratic as shareholders could vote against it for moral reasons
No. The case in question is Dodge vs. Ford and rather than believe memes about it just read the darn wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co .
> The case in question is Dodge vs. Ford and rather than believe memes about it just read the darn wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
I'm all for pointing someone to the sources, but let's not instill the idea that consulting Wikipedia is doing substantially more diligent research than looking at memes.
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
By choosing which markets you operate in and which products you develop you have a fair bit of influence which things are in your "financial interest". E.g. creating a company with a business model which benefits from taxing CO2 emissions (Tesla) is morally great. Whereas having a business model which benefits from cheap oil (VW) is less so. Product decisions (electric vs. fuel engines) have a large effect on your lo…
If Apple knew it could make more money in say for example, arms dealing, wouldn't it be obliged to pivot to serve the shareholders? I guess it's somewhat democratic as shareholders could vote against it for moral reasons
No. The common refrain of "but publicly-traded corporations have to maximize shareholder value" is a myth, not a law.
There are bits in the law about management having a fiduciary duty to shareholders, but that mainly means that they aren't supposed to be stuffing their own pockets at the expense of investors. There's a wide birth for management to decide what kinds of profit are and are not worth it.
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
I expected that Wayland isolates the applications by default, not just when they allow it. So you might be interested in Qubes OS, which provides a very strong isolation through virtualization.
XWayland is essentially a translation layer consisting of Xserver and Wayland client [0]. Therefore it has all the same problems a normal Xserver has, which they do acknowledge: > A Wayland compositor usually spawns only one Xwayland instance. This is because many X11 applications assume they can communicate with other X11 applications through the X server, and this requires a shared X server instance. This also mean…
That does not sound different from what Windows does. By default all programs running under the same user can access all windows of other applications (except UAC elevated ones). It's a relic from when OLE and Clipboard in Windows 3 just was (very simplified) a pointer to RAM.
Re: Apple removes first-party firewall exemption in macOS 11.2 beta 2
#270I am glad that the public backlash forced them to fix a deliberate BACKDOOR that they had introduced (by design) in the Network Extension Framework that macOS Big Sur now forces all the firewalls to use. (At least, they claim to have removed it). But it is hard to trust them again, and I would prefer to use a firewall that uses its own kernel extension to manage the network than using Apple's API again. (Obviously th…
I will not assume anything. When they roll official update and people do proper testing (Wireshark etc), may be I will update. But for me the romantic days of "trust us we care for users privacy" are over. Period.
I read Apple actions, not intents. And reading actions for me is: "Mac OS is a valuable part of vertical integration map of Apple services". When I buy something - I own something. If idea of ownership is problematic for Apple they must state it openly and rename all the hardware store buttons from "Buy" to "Rent".