4 ms·

For instance, supposing they want to show you a welcome screen with all of your documents from your Documents folder (or anywhere else) - I don't want some asin

For instance, supposing they want to show you a welcome screen with all of your documents from your Documents folder (or anywhere else) - I don't want some asinine popup asking me for permission. Word is a well-known application. I installed it. I trust it and the corporation that wrote it. That's enough for me. But this is not how it works. Word from the App Store is sandboxed. If you open a document in Word, this is done using the native file opening dialog. This is a separate, privileged process. The file is symlinked into Word's sandbox as a result. This means that Word has access to that file from that point onwards. So, it can show a welcome screen with documents that you have previously opened (which is what applications typically do, very few applications will show all documents). This is how things have worked ever since Apple required sandboxing for App Store apps. The problem is non-App Store apps that are not sandboxed. They have unfettered access to every file. I guess these extra permissions are to provide a certain level of protection against such apps, which is good. Word is a well-known application. I installed it. I trust it and the corporation that wrote it. There are many well-known incidents of trusted applications being compromised and backdoored. E.g.: https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-analysis/mac-threat-analysis/2017/05/handbrake-hacked-to-drop-new-variant-of-proton-malware/ https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-analysis/mac-threat-ana... To make things worse, the hash was updated in Homebrew cask. So even if you used a package manager, you would have installed a compromised application. Trusting applications may have been ok in the age of shrink-wrapped software. But now that applications are distributed over the web, allowing unfettered access is insanity. More people will move to Linux. The Linux ecosystem is also moving towards immutable base systems (Fedora Silverblue, NixOS) and restricted, sandboxed applications (Flatpak). Sure, it will always be possible to install a 70ies UNIX-style distribution. But the world is moving to sandboxing and putting up more restrictions, because the computing world became more hostile. macOS is slowly but surely being turned into iOS. This is getting tired and old. People said the same thing ten years ago and yet here we are, macOS is still an OS for 'general purpose computing'. I think Apple is finding a nice balance between securing the average user through sandboxing and SIP, while keeping giving the knobs to disable protections to advanced users. I say this as someone who currently uses Linux 95% of the time, but I wish Linux was as far as macOS with application sandboxing and system integrity protection.

Crinus 7y ago
> People said the same thing ten years ago and yet here we are, macOS is still an OS for 'general purpose computing'. Well, the "slow" part can be slower than ten years. It might just still not be there, but compared to how macOS was 10 years ago, it does have more iOS-like restrictions nowadays even if it isn't full-on iOS.
wayneftw 7y ago
> But this is not how it works. Word from the App Store is sandboxed. Yes, that is how it works. Sandboxed apps can absolutely request access to an entire folder. See here: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Security/Conceptual/AppSandboxDesignGuide/AppSandboxInDepth/AppSandboxInDepth.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40011183-CH3-SW16 https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Se... > An app-scoped bookmark provides your sandboxed app with persistent access to a user-specified file or folder. But all of that isn't really relevant to what I was saying. You're bringing up technical details about how sandboxed apps work. I'm saying that sandboxes suck and I don't want them, particularly from Apple who will just use security as an excuse to take away more of my freedoms. > I guess these extra permissions are to provide a certain level of protection against such apps, which is good. I would rather not trade my freedom and liberty for even more annoying and absolutely useless security measures. You see the top comment on this thread now right? It's about how useless these dialogs are and how Apple has actually argued against them in the past. > There are many well-known incidents of trusted applications being compromised and backdoored. So? Don't update right away if your OS manufacturer can't be bothered to run a properly curated package management system that vets packages before anyone installs them. > But now that applications are distributed over the web, allowing unfettered access is insanity. I've been using desktop software for 30 years and for 25 of them, I've been downloading it from the Internet. My simple security measure are to verify sources, turn off automatic updates, don't update right away and read the news. Haven't had a problem yet. > The Linux ecosystem is also moving towards immutable base systems (Fedora Silverblue, NixOS) and restricted, sandboxed applications (Flatpak). Some Linux distributions are moving towards that. Anyway, I'm fine with immutable base systems. I'm even fine with sandboxed apps, as long as the permissions request infrastructure isn't annoying as it is in iOS and now macOS. And, as long as I can still install non-sandboxed apps without any further useless annoyance. > This is getting tired and old. No it's not. It's getting one tick closer with every release and if you want, we can certainly detail each time that macOS has changed to become more like an iPhone. Some part of you must realize that this is exactly what Apple would love to do as quickly as possible but they won't risk alienating users just yet. Do you really not see how Apple has been moving towards a less general purpose computer? I mean, I wouldn't even call macOS "general purpose" to begin with because you can only really install it on Apple hardware. Right from the very start with Apple, their OS has always been more like "Apple purpose" - software that you can only use for Apples purposes. > macOS is still an OS for 'general purpose computing'. Yes, for now. Just a little bit less with each release. > I wish Linux was as far as macOS with application sandboxing and system integrity protection. No thanks. The world needs less security theater, more actual security and more freedom to use our own bodies and properties as we wish.

Crinus 7y ago

> People said the same thing ten years ago and yet here we are, macOS is still an OS for 'general purpose computing'. Well, the "slow" part can be slower than ten years. It might just still not be there, but compared to how macOS was 10 years ago, it does have more iOS-like restrictions nowadays even if it isn't full-on iOS.

wayneftw 7y ago

> But this is not how it works. Word from the App Store is sandboxed. Yes, that is how it works. Sandboxed apps can absolutely request access to an entire folder. See here: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Security/Conceptual/AppSandboxDesignGuide/AppSandboxInDepth/AppSandboxInDepth.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40011183-CH3-SW16 https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Se... > An app-scoped bookmark provides your sandboxed app with persistent access to a user-specified file or folder. But all of that isn't really relevant to what I was saying. You're bringing up technical details about how sandboxed apps work. I'm saying that sandboxes suck and I don't want them, particularly from Apple who will just use security as an excuse to take away more of my freedoms. > I guess these extra permissions are to provide a certain level of protection against such apps, which is good. I would rather not trade my freedom and liberty for even more annoying and absolutely useless security measures. You see the top comment on this thread now right? It's about how useless these dialogs are and how Apple has actually argued against them in the past. > There are many well-known incidents of trusted applications being compromised and backdoored. So? Don't update right away if your OS manufacturer can't be bothered to run a properly curated package management system that vets packages before anyone installs them. > But now that applications are distributed over the web, allowing unfettered access is insanity. I've been using desktop software for 30 years and for 25 of them, I've been downloading it from the Internet. My simple security measure are to verify sources, turn off automatic updates, don't update right away and read the news. Haven't had a problem yet. > The Linux ecosystem is also moving towards immutable base systems (Fedora Silverblue, NixOS) and restricted, sandboxed applications (Flatpak). Some Linux distributions are moving towards that. Anyway, I'm fine with immutable base systems. I'm even fine with sandboxed apps, as long as the permissions request infrastructure isn't annoying as it is in iOS and now macOS. And, as long as I can still install non-sandboxed apps without any further useless annoyance. > This is getting tired and old. No it's not. It's getting one tick closer with every release and if you want, we can certainly detail each time that macOS has changed to become more like an iPhone. Some part of you must realize that this is exactly what Apple would love to do as quickly as possible but they won't risk alienating users just yet. Do you really not see how Apple has been moving towards a less general purpose computer? I mean, I wouldn't even call macOS "general purpose" to begin with because you can only really install it on Apple hardware. Right from the very start with Apple, their OS has always been more like "Apple purpose" - software that you can only use for Apples purposes. > macOS is still an OS for 'general purpose computing'. Yes, for now. Just a little bit less with each release. > I wish Linux was as far as macOS with application sandboxing and system integrity protection. No thanks. The world needs less security theater, more actual security and more freedom to use our own bodies and properties as we wish.