7 ms·
From a security perspective, I would assume that signed binaries should not have additional restrictions that are also not in place for unsigned binaries. Would
by raimue 9y ago
From a security perspective, I would assume that signed binaries should not have additional restrictions that are also not in place for unsigned binaries. Would this exploit also work with a signed app as well, but avoiding the user confirmation?
- teilo 9y agoThere is no difference between a signed and unsigned app once it has been allowed to launch the first time. The permission model is the same for both. Normally you would have expected to see a system dialog asking if you would like to grant an app permission to access the keychain once or permanently. EDIT: As another commenter pointed out, an app is also only granted access to one key at a time, each requiring an independent confirmation (with password). There is no way (normally) to grant cart-blanche access to the entire keychain.
- anyfoo 9y agoFalse. Signed apps can have entitlements, unsigned apps cannot. Some entitlements grant access to keychain items.
- teilo 9y agoCompletely wrong. Entitlements are for sandboxed apps, and grant a sandboxed application access to other parts of the system. Unsigned apps are by definition, not sandboxed, and have no such restrictions. They are granted access, not by a sandbox entitlement, but by the Keychain API.
- mikeash 9y agoThere are both sandbox and non-sandbox entitlements. iCloud storage and push notifications are examples of the latter.
- teilo 9y agoGranted. In any case it is not relevant in the context of this discussion. Access to the local keychain does not require an entitlement. Even the "keychain-access-groups" entitlement only applies to the iCloud keychain.