Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not nonconsensual, you can literally block it with itself.
It transmits telemetry non-consensually before you even get a chance to tell it not to. That is, unless you know of this beforehand and are also tech-literate enough to understand this can be circumvented by disabling your internet connection before you first open the application - something you cannot reasonably expect from all users, seeing as how this telemetry gathering is not advertised anywhere and had to be fo…
Little Snitch Mini
261–270 of 276 posts
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#262Re: Little Snitch Mini
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just one more reason 3'rd party stores should exist.
If you think corporations will buy from the third party store that isn't built into the Apple Business Manager (plus MDM of choice) that lets you open shrink-wrapped Macs and hand them to the employee with all their apps self-installed, think again.
Apple likes their walled garden.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#264"The full feature set, including connection blocking, extended traffic history time ranges, advanced display and filtering options and more is available as an in-app purchase." So this means as a company using MDM, I cannot purchase it for all my employees. MacOS devs who see IAP and subscriptions as the only purchase paths are leaving corporate purchases on the table. We choose software we can pay for. We are fine i…
I have the same exact same issue. Managed Apple IDs are a joke, the only use I have for them is to backup the contacts of my users so that when they get a new device they get their email autocompletion back. Keychain sync is disabled. Using the App Store in any capacity is impossible. There's absolutely no way to use in-app purchases/subscriptions. I got almost laughed at by an Apple rep the other day when I asked if…
No way to purchase >5GB of iCloud storage for staff using these IDs
WTF!? Is anyone aware of a workaround for this?
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#265Is there an equivalent for Linux?
opensnitch is the most popular. you can also roll your own. on my github is tinysnitch (nfq based, no pid info) and mighty-snitch (lsm based, with pid info). picosnitch is also very cool, though slightly different.
I noticed this is pretty new and a couple things caught my attention
> the primary advantage is that it has direct access to the pid, executable, and commandline of the process making the request.
Does this mean it is guaranteed to be able to open a copy of the executable no matter how short lived it is? This was quite a challenge for me when trying to grab it in time for hashing. I ended up settling on simply opening /proc/pid/exe as early as possible, marking it with fanotify, then putting it in a queue to read later and reporting it if it was modified before being read.
> the systems fails closed. when snitch isn't running, network requests are not possible.
This is a pretty impressive feature which I haven't seen elsewhere. I'm not familiar enough with lsm to know what's possible and I see you use a custom kernel. What sort of guarantees does this provide and have you come across any limitations?
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
opensnitch is the most popular. you can also roll your own. on my github is tinysnitch (nfq based, no pid info) and mighty-snitch (lsm based, with pid info). picosnitch is also very cool, though slightly different.
> mighty-snitch (lsm based, with pid info) I noticed this is pretty new and a couple things caught my attention > the primary advantage is that it has direct access to the pid, executable, and commandline of the process making the request. Does this mean it is guaranteed to be able to open a copy of the executable no matter how short lived it is? This was quite a challenge for me when trying to grab it in time for ha…
no, it just means it knows the name and path as reported by the kernel at that time.
i originally had wanted to monitor the filesystem in addition to network, since lsm allows that. however the filesystem implementation was tricky, and i couldn’t find a good solution to the problem you described: verification by hash or some other means that the path being executed is a known trusted binary.
all mighty snitch knows is the path of the executable and the argv array as reported by the kernel at the time the lsm hook is called. it’s not the best, but it’s better than nothing.
> This is a pretty impressive feature which I haven't seen elsewhere. I'm not familiar enough with lsm to know what's possible and I see you use a custom kernel. What sort of guarantees does this provide and have you come across any limitations?
i think failing closed is more inconvenient than difficult, which is why things often fail open. when using a mighty-snitch kernel, the network is inaccessible until you start the userspace process. better security might involve only allowing userspace to start once, or other such restrictions.
then again you also have to secure the filesystem, since that is where permanent rules are stored.
in reality, it depends on your threat model. i find network monitoring to be tremendously useful both for debugger and for more feeling secure. hopefully also for being more secure.
nfq, which tinysnitch uses, can also fail closed. then again you have to use iptables or nftables for that, which may in fact fail open.
> I'm not familiar enough with lsm to know what's possible and I see you use a custom kernel. What sort of guarantees does this provide and have you come across any limitations?
lsm is only usable with a custom kernel, which probably why most people don’t. basically it returns block unless it can talk to userspace, in which case it returns block or allow depending on which userspace chose.
as for limitations, currently we can’t reliably read the remote ip for inbound connections. it would be nice to have that information as well.
just looked up your username. picosnitch is cool! email me if you want to discuss further, and keep building cool things!!
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
It transmits telemetry non-consensually before you even get a chance to tell it not to. That is, unless you know of this beforehand and are also tech-literate enough to understand this can be circumvented by disabling your internet connection before you first open the application - something you cannot reasonably expect from all users, seeing as how this telemetry gathering is not advertised anywhere and had to be fo…
Installing it is consent.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
It transmits telemetry non-consensually before you even get a chance to tell it not to. That is, unless you know of this beforehand and are also tech-literate enough to understand this can be circumvented by disabling your internet connection before you first open the application - something you cannot reasonably expect from all users, seeing as how this telemetry gathering is not advertised anywhere and had to be fo…
Installing it is consent.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#269People 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…
Little Snitch is great, but it does a bit too much for my liking. I've been using LuLu [0] which is a free product from Patrick Wardle, and I'm pretty happy with it. It mostly stays out of the way and I just need to approve new connections the first time I run an app. [0] https://objective-see.org/products/lulu.html
He has very good stuff there, love it!
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Installing it is consent.
This is false in multiple ways (one of which would be legal for this - I believe - Spanish organisation), but I suspect you know this and are simply just trolling now.