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

Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

blog.kronis.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 299 posts

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#151

Post by suzzer99 »

Barbing wrote: post #44
novafunc wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rather than just having the options "Done" and "Move to Bin", give me an option to actually run it without having to manually go into System Settings each and every time without disabling security features? The added friction feels more like a way to force developers to pay Apple an annual fee for distributing rather than for my safety. Not saying it doesn't help with safety, just that it's more weighed to the former…

Posit it saves a decent number of folks who are unable to follow the scammer’s necessary instructions: “Press command space, no no hold down the command key - gosh it’s in the bottom left - okay, now type “privacy”, now scroll, no you scrolled too far …”

Lol I would love to see a scammer try to get my mom or dad to do anything other than press the power button. He's in for a world of hurt.

The other day my mom got a text saying she had a $399 charge on Apple, and to call the number if it wasn't her. So she called, because of course, why wouldn't you? Apparently the scammer finally got frustrated and hung up on her because she couldn't understand his accent.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#152

Post by F7F7F7 »

Nevermark wrote: post #148
dangus wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should read up on how secure boot works with macOS and alternate operating systems before speaking this negatively about the implementation. Apple is already giving you exactly what you’re asking for. It’s not really even that different than a PC motherboard that gives you “Windows UEFI” and “enroll my own keys” as options. https://asahilinux.org/docs/platform/security/ As far as code signing, again, what…

This is that false dichotomy. You can turn off all protection, as you point out. So who Apple markets Neo's to isn't a factor. > Apple’s fault if nobody else decided to make their own trust repositories and the only alternative on the market is to have no safeguard at all. Does Apple provide a means for enabling third party trust systems, without disabling Apple's protections in general? If not, that is a serious pro…

Sounds like you should pick something other than MacOS.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#153

Post by vor_ »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #5

Any user who does not like Gatekeeper can turn it off on their machine in ten seconds by running this in a Terminal: sudo spctl —-master-disable People will say, no, that’s too big a hammer, it’s not safe… but then, like, what do you actually want? Either you keep Gatekeeper because you like the friction it introduces, or you don’t like that friction and you should go turn it off. Pick one, you obviously can’t have b…

> what do you actually want?

I want to be able to right-click on an app and choose "Open" to run the program with an authentication dialog. You used to be able to do this, but Apple removed it in favor of an incredibly annoying process of having to go into System Settings every time.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#154

Post by babymetal »

nicklo wrote: post #147

Cortisol spit curve tests are pretty cheap, so I was disappointed to see the title claim not substantiated with real data. Consider biometric testing next time you distribute!

Probably in the minority here but I, too, went to the article hoping for objective quantification of the change in cortisol levels corresponding to the input, i.e. trying to distribute Mac software from scratch.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#156

Post by bkdbkd »

musicale wrote: post #94
hermitcrab wrote: post #37

I have been developing software for Macs and PCs as an Indie for 20 years now. I sympathize with the author of the post. You get the feeling that Apple thinks you should be grateful that they allow you to develop apps for their platform. The author didn't mention Apple's contempt for backward compatibility. Apple like to regularly nuke their entire developer system from orbit. Try running an app developed 10 years ag…

> Apple's contempt for backward compatibility This is absolutely correct. Instead of maintaining any sort of ABI and API stability, Apple offloads a constant burden of maintenance updates across thousands of developers, just to keep existing apps from breaking every year with a new iOS version. This takes time which could be spent in more productive ways such as fixing bugs, adding features, or developing new apps. I…

Contempt. use any apple device 2 updates back or more. you're screwed.

You would accept this in no other place in life, except that apple gives it for free, and puts a 'security' sticker on the box.

It's a racket. Planned obsolescence 2.0 - Users forced to update, update removes features, breaks working apps, breaks paid for ip ( literally removed from phones), apple blames the devs. bullshit.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#158

Post by wlesieutre »

F7F7F7 wrote: post #152
Nevermark wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is that false dichotomy. You can turn off all protection, as you point out. So who Apple markets Neo's to isn't a factor. > Apple’s fault if nobody else decided to make their own trust repositories and the only alternative on the market is to have no safeguard at all. Does Apple provide a means for enabling third party trust systems, without disabling Apple's protections in general? If not, that is a serious pro…

Sounds like you should pick something other than MacOS.

Right, all they need to do is convince every end user they’re trying to distribute software to that they’re using the wrong OS and should replace their MacBook with something running Linux. No problem at all.

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#159

Post by wpm »

Nevermark wrote: post #148
dangus wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should read up on how secure boot works with macOS and alternate operating systems before speaking this negatively about the implementation. Apple is already giving you exactly what you’re asking for. It’s not really even that different than a PC motherboard that gives you “Windows UEFI” and “enroll my own keys” as options. https://asahilinux.org/docs/platform/security/ As far as code signing, again, what…

This is that false dichotomy. You can turn off all protection, as you point out. So who Apple markets Neo's to isn't a factor. > Apple’s fault if nobody else decided to make their own trust repositories and the only alternative on the market is to have no safeguard at all. Does Apple provide a means for enabling third party trust systems, without disabling Apple's protections in general? If not, that is a serious pro…

If you can enable a third party trust system you completely open it up for abuse. If I put my threat actor hat on, I love your idea because now I have an alternative codepath to try and exploit (where you do store third-party trusted roots for code-signing/notarization evaluations that cannot be tampered with, how do you load them, verify them, etc), but now instead of having to dance around bypassing Gatekeeper, I can just try and convince the user to install my certificates and voila, my malware behaves like a legitimate app.

Apple's root of trust for the OS and thus anything that passes AMFI/Gatekeeper scans is built into the hardware. There is no safe mechanism for introducing other roots of trust that is worth the effort.

If you don't trust Apple, why the hell are you buying their computers at all?

Re: Distributing Mac software is increasing my cortisol levels

#160

Post by elisbce »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #5

Any user who does not like Gatekeeper can turn it off on their machine in ten seconds by running this in a Terminal: sudo spctl —-master-disable People will say, no, that’s too big a hammer, it’s not safe… but then, like, what do you actually want? Either you keep Gatekeeper because you like the friction it introduces, or you don’t like that friction and you should go turn it off. Pick one, you obviously can’t have b…

If you want to take the risk and install some unsigned software on your machine, go ahead, but don't blame Apple, who is gatekeeping for the entire ecosystem for making the decision to keep the restrictions in place so that the other 2.5 billion users don't fall victims to malware defenselessly. Also, as a rule of thumb in cybersecurity, never underestimate human flaws or overestimate your ability to overcome them. Even the most brilliant experts cannot possibly know everything and make zero mistakes, let alone "the users" you are talking about. It is pure illusion that "the users" know exactly what's running on their machine under the hood. We should be thankful that Apple is willing to hold the lines and go this far to tighten security up when nobody forces them to. It is probably one of the best thing coming out of Jobs' relentless push for privacy and security on the iPhone.
Post reply on HN