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

Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 649 posts

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#621

Post by horsawlarway »

darthrupert wrote: post #269
horsawlarway wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second this - XPS machines on Wayland are basically spot on for trackpads. Honestly - just Wayland in general has dramatically improved my linux desktop experience. 10/10, will never go back to X.

Did Wayland start being good recently? Its glacial progress is one of the reasons I switched to macs a few years ago.

Yes, at least in my experience over the last two years with Arch running Gnome as the DE.

Wayland's trackpad support is excellent, I can switch from my mac for work to my personal machine without noticing.

Multi monitor support is MILES (I literally cannot emphasize how much better it is) better. Different scaling ratios for different monitors, much better automatic detection and configuration.

There are two remaining problems in my opinion

- Screen sharing is still rather hit or miss. Pipewire is functional for me on latest versions of chromium, but does not work for some electron apps that package older versions (Slack, in this case).

- X-Wayland applications still make you feel the hurt from Xorg. Most times I don't care, but the default builds of chromium and chrome both rely on X-Wayland. There are AUR builds of chromium that have moved to Ozone and have native Wayland support, though (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chromium-ozone/)

----

Long story short, Wayland is why my personal machine no longer has windows on it. It's genuinely much better, and I don't spend any time at all dicking around with xorg config files (literally not once have I touched a config file related to monitors or user input devices on my current linux box in the last year. It feels very nice.)

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#622

Post by dylan604 »

jiveturkey wrote: post #498
dylan604 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one of the older MacBookPros, the left hand USB port was USB3 while the one on the right hand side was USB2

T3 vs USB3, not USB3 vs USB2.

I said OLDER MBPs. This was before TB3 was even a thing

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#623

Post by jasonv »

dylan604 wrote: post #615
jasonv wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on, or link to, multiple GPUs for photo and video editing?

https://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/ConfigGuides/DaVinciR... There's an entire guide provided by BMD that tells you exactly what products are compatible with your OS and particular computer. It even comes as included documentation with the installer. You know, those PDFs in the folder with the install app that nobody looks at? After Apple's nixing Nvidia from their platform, you're limited to AMD GPUs for Mac. For…

Thanks!

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#624

Post by fsflover »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #169
adambatkin wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux on the desktop and Linux on the laptop (heh) has definitely improved. It _sometimes_ needs a little tweaking to get it right, but KDE/Plasma also happens to offer that level of "tweakability" that should satisfy almost all semi-mainstream users (at least anyone coming from Windows or Mac). Compared to my first Linux laptop (a Sony Vaio circa 2000), my current XPS 13 works as well as any Mac laptop I have ever o…

I try the major DEs every few years to see if they fit me, most recently trying the newest KDE and GNOME versions in a VM about a month ago. Both have improved for sure, but they still have a long way to go… GNOME actually came closest but its customizability level is even lower than that of macOS, even factoring in extensions. Both suffer from a laundry list of minor annoyances that snowball into something that's ha…

This is so vague that I want to downvote this comment as irrelevant.

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#625

Post by saagarjha »

Aerroon wrote: post #579
3pt14159 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I agree with your first part. There are real drawbacks. But it's like installing a custom HTTPS cert in your OS to inspect potential traffic that malware may use through, say, a Google Doc or Sheet. It's helpful to true professionals dealing with highly sensitive information, but it's ultimately a bigger source of compromise for the vast majority of software users. I don't think there is an easy answer here. That…

Why not just give additional permission levels? I don't really get why so many permission models on what software can do are effectively "admin mode" or "user mode". Why can't you get a very strong warning when software tries to snoop on traffic, but you can still do it? Or maybe you have to go into settings and allow it or something like that. When you rent space in a building, do you get access to every single apar…

Apple's argument is typically "users ignore strong warnings".

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#626

Post by saagarjha »

wool_gather wrote: post #620
Spivak wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's not really "hiding the URL" despite what all the outrage bloggers tried to make it seem. It's by default (i.e. until you tap/click it) hiding the parts of the URL that the site controls. So paypal.amazon.citibank.scamsite.biz/secure/login/trustus will just show scamsite.biz.

Safari does not behave as you've described. The subdomain (for example, 'gist' in 'gist.github.com') is displayed.

I suspect that Safari uses Public Suffix or similar for that.

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#627

Post by saagarjha »

sneak wrote: post #602
saagarjha wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple could stop allowing you to load kexts they don’t sign, like they do on iOS.

It’s my understanding (and I imagine yours is better than mine) that at least at present, the macOS kernel is open source, which would mean that unless they forked it, disabling firmware security and SIP would mean that you could replace it with a compatible one compiled from open sources that skips such a check. They can, of course, remove that option a number of ways: closed source kernel, disable the disablement o…

The kernel is open source, but compiling it is non-trivial (over the years there's been a couple of hardcore people from the Hackintosh or jailbreaking community who do it, and sometimes Apple engineers write guides from time to time). But if they really wanted to stop this kind of thing they could go the iOS route and make it impossible to load that kernel.

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#628

Post by kitsunesoba »

fsflover wrote: post #624
kitsunesoba wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try the major DEs every few years to see if they fit me, most recently trying the newest KDE and GNOME versions in a VM about a month ago. Both have improved for sure, but they still have a long way to go… GNOME actually came closest but its customizability level is even lower than that of macOS, even factoring in extensions. Both suffer from a laundry list of minor annoyances that snowball into something that's ha…

This is so vague that I want to downvote this comment as irrelevant.

Apologies, it's deeper than it seems at first glance. If I were to elaborate, the resulting writeup would be better suited for a blogpost than an HN comment.

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#629

Post by Polylactic_acid »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #590
Polylactic_acid wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the worst. So many people seem to forget their apple ID password but remember their screen unlock password. I saw a case recently where someone had an attacker get access to their apple account as well as everything else. I was able to do a fresh install of their windows laptop but I was unable to reset the persons iphone because the attacker had changed the apple id password. I have also seen many android de…

Yep we have a whole box full of perfectly good phones and that's just for one office :( However Apple does unlock them if you can prove ownership. You need an invoice with serial number. It's a lot of hassle but it works. The reason for that box is that we didn't get serial numbers on the invoices for a long time :( It's another one of those things that are supposedly for the benefit of the consumer but also really s…

How old are the phones? Everything up til the X can be hacked now to bypass that I was told. If the company has no use for them you could probably make a huge profit unlocking all of them.

Re: Apple's apps bypass firewalls like LittleSnitch and LuLu on macOS Big Sur

#630

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

hilbert42 wrote: post #497
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows doesn't bypass 3rd party firewalls.

'Windows doesn't bypass 3rd party firewalls.' Sorry WarOnPrivacy, Windows does bypass 3rd-party firewalls and has done so since at least XP onwards (however, I am uncertain if this was the case with Windows 2000). Microsoft has programmed into Windows dozens of addresses that 'dial home' to Microsoft's servers. As you will be aware, many of these addresses change with the various versions of Windows. Normal program s…

None of what you've posted has anything to do with firewalls, 3rd party or otherwise. Similarly, bypassing the Hosts file is strictly a DNS resolution issue and - again - has nothing to do with firewalls.

Please feel free to post info about actual firewalls, info that isn't about DNS/Hosts.

Post reply on HN