301–310 of 354 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True but it's a slightly different category as he wouldn't leave his system on but locked in a potential high risk scenario.
You mean he would shut down a MacBook every day after us? That’s blasphemy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most users don’t want a separate password for disk encryption though, so I’m not sure it’s a huge problem?
Most users probably also didn't care about the first-party firewall exemptions. They could have asked people if they wanted a separate password for disk encryption (e.g. a small checkbox).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know it's "by design"? By default macOS was always using this encryption scheme, but there was always possibility to have an optional FDE. Now this is broken and I can't even manage to get macOS installed when any encrypted partition is present since it's also cause installer to fail. I obviously find it being absolutely terrible "design" decision since there no way on earth anyone can count disk encryptio…
Apple Silicon Macs use per-file encryption tied to the credentials: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/security/secf6276da8a/... Was carried over from iOS. A way to bypass it _should_ be possible, but will entail having the System volume of the volume group to have different properties than the Data part. Otherwise the OS will fail to load. (on Apple Silicon Macs, macOS is fully booted already when you input the p…
What is the privacy implications of two users (both with administrator accounts) sharing an Apple Silicon Mac?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You've got in backwards. The ContentFilterExclusionList was itself a hack. It never should have existed. It might or might not be a hack, but that's orthogonal to the functionality or whether it uses a ContentFilterExclusionList. The fact that it wasn't there before, or that it is a misguided feature idea, doesn't mean it was done as a quick and dirty implementation or that it's hastily made feature done via cuttin…
> doesn't mean it was done as a quick and dirty implementation or that it's hastily made feature done via cutting corners. I wasn't implying that. The ContentFilterExclusionList was already present in the first WWDC beta and could have been there internally for many months prior, who knows. I was using "hack" more in the sense of bypassing a security system. I said "It never should have existed", which is not a comme…
Isn't it also tiresome when people on HN assume we know who they are from their handle, or that we are somehow obliged to have followed them outside HN, and remember/know who they are?
I might recognize pg, or patio11, or tptacek, and a few more, but not everybody. And most handles, I just glaze over, they are not the important part in the discussion. I'm pretty sure most of us on HN have dozens of HN handles that we don't otherwise know who they are, or even keep tabs on from one HN thread to another.
I wouldn't try to "Macpslain" if your comment didn't seem to me to imply that this is just some an isolated thing with ContentFilterExclusionList, that can just be reversed like that, or if it mentioned that this is part of an extensive change to how network filters / kernel extensions work (or rather, don't work anymore) in Big Sur.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> True, but this just proves my point. It still doesn't take 6 months to fix this issue... if they wanted to fix it. Just because it was reported as an issue doesn't mean it was thought as a bug (or an issue to fix) by Apple. That's what they wanted to do. People coded it explicitly. > Deprioritizing it was a deliberate choice by Apple. Of course. Why wouldn't it be? > From my perspective, the explanation is simple:…
> What I'm saying is "why this took 6 months" doesn't make much sense as a question. Why wouldn't it? For the 2nd or 3rd time in this thread, I have to remind that I was replying to a comment saying this: "That's why Apple has the Developer and Public Beta releases for iOS/OSX so that external users can provide feedback. And on this occasion just like on many other they will take action if necessary." So, maybe you s…
Well, to that I agree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> doesn't mean it was done as a quick and dirty implementation or that it's hastily made feature done via cutting corners. I wasn't implying that. The ContentFilterExclusionList was already present in the first WWDC beta and could have been there internally for many months prior, who knows. I was using "hack" more in the sense of bypassing a security system. I said "It never should have existed", which is not a comme…
> It's incredibly tiresome when HN commenters try to "Macsplain" to me. Isn't it also tiresome when people on HN assume we know who they are from their handle, or that we are somehow obliged to have followed them outside HN, and remember/know who they are? I might recognize pg, or patio11, or tptacek, and a few more, but not everybody. And most handles, I just glaze over, they are not the important part in the discus…
No, I don't expect people to know who I am. However, I do expect people to avoid assuming that I'm ignorant of the subject at hand. This ought to be the default approach you have toward anyone.
In this same thread, I was referred to as "My sweet summer child", as if I didn't understand software development at all. This shouldn't happen, regardless of whether you know me or not. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25771925
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This definitely is a feature. You can use sandboxing if you want to. See kernel namespaces (used by Docker), Ubuntu's snaps, etc. But breaking almost all software by default just because some incompetent users keep choosing to install malware is not a great strategy.
It isn't the dichotomy you set it up to be. macOS solved this without "breaking almost all software by default" using per-app, per-directory permissions for the file system, over and above the decades-old POSIX file modes model. You're making excuses for the lack of security innovation on Linux workstations. They've fallen behind.
I am the sysadmin and owner of my machine, not Apple or some other organization. They have no business telling me what software I can and can't run, or what files that software can access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Factory installed CIA snoop software on Macs is news to me, especially bearing in mind most of the factories are in Taiwan. Where can I find out more? Also if the spyware is installed in firmware at the factory, how is Linux going to help you?
Well I think it's mac specific software. I learned about it from wikileaks. Eg https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_2359301.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's inaccurate; the IC pays the data providers (presumably for implementation/overhead) for receiving the FAA702 (PRISM/FISA) data. Which data is picked by the US government, and no warrant is required. Apple provided data on 30,000+ users to the US government without a warrant in 2019, per their own transparency report. If they received money for the program, they are indeed "selling user data to [the…
A reimbursement for effort/overhead is not the same as selling for profit. Again, there *really are companies who sell consumer data to law enforcement for profit*, so it's important to use the correct language and make the appropriate distinction. Do I like that Apple does that? No. Do I think the actual policy conversation is best served by accuracy in language? Yes.
Nitpicking about whether they made a profit has no bearing on the statement “Apple selling user data to US government”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
This comment has no basis of truth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39iKLwlUqBo Jobs @ D8 People are quick to forget because back then everyone (including HN) was praising Google for everything under the sun.
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/corelocation/clloc...
EDIT: Oh, I see, if you are referring to the PR or marketing portion, I think it is certainly clear that Apple had a pro-privacy stance, but that did not make its way into the company's _consumer_ marketing:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120718122643/http://www.apple....