So, from a user's viewpoint, if your app talks to blah.serv.direct.data.com how do you know whether it actually needs that server for its main functionality or not? I don't see how this snitch tool will not just generate a lot of noise.
[deleted]
Little Snitch Mini
41–50 of 276 posts
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#42I use LS. Mini wouldn't work for me at work or home. It's probably targeted and useful for non-developer users. I also use Objective See's LuLu, OverSight, ReiKey, and RansomWhere. https://objective-see.org LuLu + LS makes any app using telemetry shriekingly obvious and selectively denyable. Work additionally deploys YARA, MS MDE, Malware Bytes, and an MDM. There are other internal tools for password projection, DLP…
LuLu itself sends telemetry to Sentry by default
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#43When I first saw the headline I assumed they made an iOS version and worked with Apple to do it. I would’ve insta-bought!
Unfortunately just an easier to use Mac version.
iOS really needs this functionality.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#44How is this different from the traditional version of Little Snitch?
https://obdev.at/products/littlesnitch-mini/compare.html Basically a lot fewer filtering features, and only monitoring for free.
Imagine putting IP blocking behind your paid product.
And here we have every problem with the Mac software ecosystem summed up.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#45I use LS. Mini wouldn't work for me at work or home. It's probably targeted and useful for non-developer users. I also use Objective See's LuLu, OverSight, ReiKey, and RansomWhere. https://objective-see.org LuLu + LS makes any app using telemetry shriekingly obvious and selectively denyable. Work additionally deploys YARA, MS MDE, Malware Bytes, and an MDM. There are other internal tools for password projection, DLP…
LuLu itself sends telemetry to Sentry by default
This is why I pay for LS. The whole point of the software is to avoid nonconsensual phone-home; if it does it itself, how or why would you ever trust the developer?
I'd literally rather pay for proprietary software than maintain a fork of LuLu.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#46I would happily pay $20 or $30 for a version of this, but I will absolutely not pay a subscription fee for extra features. I have too many subscriptions...
I want to support this developer but not this way. Uninstalling :(
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What does that mean? They now play by the same rules as other software Yes. Here's the developer of LuLu explaining it: https://www.patreon.com/posts/46179028
I think I saw that Little Snitch itself doesn't show all its own connections as far as I know EDIT: Source was old posts on alt.hackintosh saying that you have to block one specific IP to prevent the call home and another one regarding LS4 saying that you have to nullroute some some Hetzner hosts. My guess was that if you had to add some hosts to prevent LS to check its own license online, that it means that LS has i…
Yes, it does.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#48People are probably going to be confused between this and the "full" version of Little Snitch. My take on it is that Little Snitch Mini is something you can install on a non-technical friend or family member's computer whereas power users may want to stick with the existing offering. I say this as a long time heavy user of Little Snitch. It's very annoying when you first get it installed, but it provides really usefu…
I've always thought this should be a feature in an OS for advanced users. Combined with some OS level security optimizations it could be quite a powerful security feature for the paranoid and at-risk. I haven't tried mini but there's probably plenty of UX gains in between the standard Little Snitch fine control approach and the UBlock Origin style community curated defaults where control/customization is optional/on-…
Yes, but these days commercial OSes are seeing a hefty uptick in "first party malware," so to speak, making a third party audit attractive for reasons completely independent from technical integration.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What does that mean? They now play by the same rules as other software Yes. Here's the developer of LuLu explaining it: https://www.patreon.com/posts/46179028
I think I saw that Little Snitch itself doesn't show all its own connections as far as I know EDIT: Source was old posts on alt.hackintosh saying that you have to block one specific IP to prevent the call home and another one regarding LS4 saying that you have to nullroute some some Hetzner hosts. My guess was that if you had to add some hosts to prevent LS to check its own license online, that it means that LS has i…
> Though Little Snitch itself doesn't show all its own connections as far as I know
It does. You can even block the Little Snitch Software Update process if you want.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#50It seems as if you can only have a single network filter in mac os. And because a DNS profile already counts as one, you can't have both.