Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

eclecticlight.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 175 posts

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#21

Post by big_toast »

jasonjei wrote: post #7

The problem with Mac’s sandbox system is that it’s giving me some PTSD of Windows UAC. It’s inventing a solution to a problem that might exist in small doses, but instead gives users permission fatigue. I personally think the traditional *nix model has served us quite well, and elective sandboxing using containers (à la Docker and so on) is quite good. The Mac sandbox model is probably ok for most normal users, but f…

I feel like I can mostly use containers on macOS. Is there a different sense that people are using containers on *nix? Or are you referring to all the macOS specific software footguns?

I would like to be able to run arbitrary code with gradual/granular privilege escalation. (e.g iOS/android with more affordances and escape hatches. macOS is getting there, but it's been a pretty bumpy/potholed road). Right now if I download a random github repo, I'd put it in a docker container and give it ports/volumes/etc.

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#22

Post by nroize »

nullpoint420 wrote: post #16
nroize wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t find any reference to File Vault being cracked in the Rawls case. Source? Edit: I saw they accessed his Mac but they had his password. File Vault 2 wasn’t bypassed, and afaik has never been cracked.

Why crack it when you have silicon level backdoors?

In T2? Source?

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#25

Post by mh8h »

layer8 wrote: post #17
Angostura wrote: post #12

I think I’m probably being dumb, but the gotcha here seems to be - ‘if I give an application permission to access a folder, it has access to the files in that folder’ - which is what I would expect??

Yes, you need to read more carefully. In particular: “8. Confirm that Documents access for Insent is still disabled in Files & Folders. “9. Whatever you do now, the app retains full access to Documents, no matter what is shown or set in Files & Folders.” […] “Access restrictions shown in Privacy & Security settings, specifically those to protected locations in Files & Folders, aren’t an accurate or trustworthy reflec…

"6. Click on Open from folder and select your Documents folder there. Confirm that works as expected and displays the name and contents of one of the text files in Documents."

It's because in step 6 the user explicitly selected the Documents folder.

The app can access the Documents folder because the user chose that directory in the native file browse dialog during the same run of the app. IMO that's a reasonable trade-off.

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#26

Post by swiftcoder »

yAak wrote: post #20
Angostura wrote: post #12

I think I’m probably being dumb, but the gotcha here seems to be - ‘if I give an application permission to access a folder, it has access to the files in that folder’ - which is what I would expect??

The gotcha is “I gave it permission, then revoked permission in the UI, but it still has permission.”

That's not quite it either. It's more along the lines of "I revoked access via one mechanism, then granted it via a different mechanism, and the setting UI for the first mechanism doesn't reflect the second action".

There's no privilege escalation here, but there is a misleading privacy settings UI, which offers no obvious way to audit/revoke permissions in the second case

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#27

Post by DrammBA »

Angostura wrote: post #12

I think I’m probably being dumb, but the gotcha here seems to be - ‘if I give an application permission to access a folder, it has access to the files in that folder’ - which is what I would expect??

TFA intro (emphasis mine):

> In this Friday’s magic demonstration, I’m going to show how what you see in Privacy & Security settings can be misleading, when it tells you that an app doesn’t have access to a protected folder, but it really does.

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#28

Post by lugoues »

post-it wrote: post #10
throwaway290 wrote: post #6

It seems that author basically found a 0day and published it. It's for sure better than selling it on the dark web but maybe it's better first tell it to Apple?

Not really, just an unintuitive security feature. You still need the user's permission to access that folder, but that permission is then persistent. I consider it a UX bug for sure but not an exploit.

I agree, it's a ui/ux problem. It would seem that using the open file dialog should also request access but I'm guessing that was too intrusive and the user action is seen as implicit authorization. Security is one of those things that should aways be explicit though.

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#29

Post by relaxing »

Angostura wrote: post #12

I think I’m probably being dumb, but the gotcha here seems to be - ‘if I give an application permission to access a folder, it has access to the files in that folder’ - which is what I would expect??

It’s really poorly written. After reading it all I still can’t figure out what’s the mechanism by which revoked permissions are hanging around, which is what would actually be interesting here.

Re: You can't trust macOS Privacy and Security settings

#30

Post by shantara »

jasonjei wrote: post #7

The problem with Mac’s sandbox system is that it’s giving me some PTSD of Windows UAC. It’s inventing a solution to a problem that might exist in small doses, but instead gives users permission fatigue. I personally think the traditional *nix model has served us quite well, and elective sandboxing using containers (à la Docker and so on) is quite good. The Mac sandbox model is probably ok for most normal users, but f…

One of the worst cases happens immediately after logging into a fresh Mac, or after upgrading one. You’re instantly hit with a barrage of requests from all the installed apps and their various permissions. It makes for such a terrible initial user experience, it’s utterly baffling someone at Apple has signed it off. They used to poke fun at Windows in their ads, but UAC has never been that terrible in my experience.
Post reply on HN