So? Users expect basic OS functionality (like the App Store, Maps, etc) to function.
Do people really install Little Snitch (which I've used since 2005 or so) for blocking Apple's own apps?
Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
11–20 of 649 posts
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#12The solution is simple, just look at the tricks these apps are using and use them to implement malware.
I bet they have feature flags that are signed and validated by Apple. You wouldn’t be able to run your app without their approval (which they won’t give).
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#13This is one of those tough cases where software cuts both ways. Some people are smart, informed developers that install a trusted tool to monitor their traffic and have legitimate reasons to want to inspect Apple traffic. They're dismayed. Most people are the opposite and this move protects the most sensitive data from being easily scooped up or muddled in easily installed apps, or at least easily installed apps that…
If I install Little Snitch, it's because I trust Little Snitch to be responsible for my computer's network traffic, over and above anyone else. I recognize that this won't necessarily apply to all users or all apps, but there needs to be a way for the user to designate trust. Apple services and traffic should not get special treatment.
They provide the OS. If you don't trust them, then you shouldn't trust anything running on top of it either...
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#14This is one of those tough cases where software cuts both ways. Some people are smart, informed developers that install a trusted tool to monitor their traffic and have legitimate reasons to want to inspect Apple traffic. They're dismayed. Most people are the opposite and this move protects the most sensitive data from being easily scooped up or muddled in easily installed apps, or at least easily installed apps that…
[deleted]
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#15Hasn't this always been a bit of an issue? Apps with root privileges have been able to get around Little Snitch for as long as I can recall. Some software relies specifically on that ability.
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#16This is a big breach of trust in terms of Apple always being on the side of user privacy. If someone knows enough to install these firewall apps, then they know enough to figure out what they want to enable/disable even for Apple applications. If Apple thinks certain rules cause issues, they certainly could work with the developer of these apps to educate users of adverse effects when certain things cause unintended…
I would love if there would be a small appliance based on a raspberry pi zero or something of similar size, that could be controlled/configured from an app on your phone. This device would be powered through a usb cable (no data) from your laptop, and act as a WiFi hotstpot that you can use to route all your traffic via the VPN or network of your choice. Even if your laptop would be infected by malware or a rootkit, it would be impossible to avoid the little physical VPN/firewall.
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#17This is one of those tough cases where software cuts both ways. Some people are smart, informed developers that install a trusted tool to monitor their traffic and have legitimate reasons to want to inspect Apple traffic. They're dismayed. Most people are the opposite and this move protects the most sensitive data from being easily scooped up or muddled in easily installed apps, or at least easily installed apps that…
If I install Little Snitch, it's because I trust Little Snitch to be responsible for my computer's network traffic, over and above anyone else. I recognize that this won't necessarily apply to all users or all apps, but there needs to be a way for the user to designate trust. Apple services and traffic should not get special treatment.
If you don’t trust Apple then you need something more than little snitch. Apple is responsible for both hardware and OS. What delta in security or trust is little snitch going to offer over Apple?
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#18This is one of those tough cases where software cuts both ways. Some people are smart, informed developers that install a trusted tool to monitor their traffic and have legitimate reasons to want to inspect Apple traffic. They're dismayed. Most people are the opposite and this move protects the most sensitive data from being easily scooped up or muddled in easily installed apps, or at least easily installed apps that…
I'd argue this opens up a giant attack surface where malicious software will try to route its command and control communication through a protected service. Do we really want to trust that Apple will keep all 50+ of these privileged services fully protected?
I think it makes the "world" slightly worse in that it will be harder to discover malware. Little snitch has a small user base, but it's been used to identify many forms of malware and protect many more people once the threat is identified.
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#19So? Users expect basic OS functionality (like the App Store, Maps, etc) to function. Do people really install Little Snitch (which I've used since 2005 or so) for blocking Apple's own apps?
It is a firewall, i should be able to decide what goes in and out of my computer
Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I install Little Snitch, it's because I trust Little Snitch to be responsible for my computer's network traffic, over and above anyone else. I recognize that this won't necessarily apply to all users or all apps, but there needs to be a way for the user to designate trust. Apple services and traffic should not get special treatment.
They provide the OS. If you don't trust them, then you shouldn't trust anything running on top of it either...
You could (and perhaps would) make the same argument about Intel (for providing the processor) or Broadcom (for providing the wifi chip) or Comcast (for providing internet service). And it's true, all of these parties have the ability to use their positions for nefarious purposes.
However, I would like to limit that potential as much as possible, partly by creating a stigma against practices that remove control from the user.