5 ms·

The flaws of macOS Containers and defaults

34 points by pcr910303 6y ago

GekkePrutser 6y ago
Thanks for the pointer on the full disk access thing. Don't agree with the final point though: > The third and final moral to the story is that SIP and sandboxing are terrible and ought to be abolished. I don't think they're terrible. But I do think the user should be able to override somehow in all cases. macOS is becoming too much like iOS for my liking too. I like locking things down for security but I really to be able to make exceptions. As long as things like SIP can still be turned off or much rather: if I can make specific exceptions without turning it off fully, they're a good thing in my book. But when macOS becomes as locked down as an iPhone it's no longer viable as a computing platform for me.
- lupinglade 6y ago
  SIP/sandboxing is quite terrible for developers in many ways too - this is why we don’t see the kind of great apps we used to have on the Mac platform anymore. All of these security features and artificial limitations effectively dumb down just about all applications and make many more unfeasible.
  - Philadelphia 6y ago
    We made the same argument about system extensions in the MacOS 9 days. The trend has long been towards stability and security over access and customization.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - _qulr 6y ago
      This seems like kind of a strange telling of history. Were extensions ever abolished in OS 9? Mac OS X was an open platform for its first 10 years. It only started to get locked down in 2011 and 2012 with the Mac App Store and Gatekeeper.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- bartvk 6y ago
  Amen. I getting a bit tired of this endless raging on security features. The blog is decent enough and delivers good information. Then it closes off with that final point and I'm disappointed. We're talking about a webbrowser here, which nowadays has to run untrusted code from internet strangers. Yet the blog says that "SIP and sandboxing are terrible and ought to be abolished", because changing a setting didn't work.
  - mantap 6y ago
    Because we can see where this is all headed. SIP is part of a decade-long plan by Apple to transform the Mac into a platform where people's computers are ultimately controlled by Apple and not the users. And if you don't believe it, try to play the latest Fortnite on the Mac. It is impossible to discuss SIP as "just a security feature" and ignore the context. If this were a feature in Linux then we could discuss it as such.
    - bartvk 6y ago
      That may or may not be true, but still it's a good idea for a browser to be supported by OS sandbox features.
  - _qulr 6y ago
    > because changing a setting didn't work That's not why. I've been a Mac developer for 14 years and a Mac user for longer. I've seen the Mac platform enfeebled, dismantled, locked down before my eyes. The conclusion didn't follow from the blog post, it followed from my long-running frustration. Mac software doesn't grow on trees. It needs people like me, who care deeply about this "niche". But people like me are a dying breed. You can have (the illusion of) a "secure" platform, but eventually you'll be left with nothing except apps ported from iOS. At that point, what's the Mac except an extremely overpriced iPad?
    - machello13 6y ago
      There are plenty of Mac developers who don’t have the hard line stance you do. Please, please don’t speak for all of us. Sand boxing has made some things a lot harder or impossible but don’t pretend like the Mac has been incredibly crippled or something. Compared to using Tiger in 2006, the only functional difference is a few more password dialogs and some weirdness like this.
- EricE 6y ago
  MacOS isn't locked down, though. He even explains how to work with it. Is it as convenient? Nope. Is it good? Yup! Security or convenience. You get one, but not both. The statement they are terrible and ought to be abolished is stupid and self serving. Yes, as a programmer it ads more steps - but the benefits they bring for everyone else who isn't a programmer (and of who there are a LOT more users) are significant and incredibly beneficial. I used to chafe at the idea that software developers should have to be formally accredited like structural engineers and that software development should have more formality and rigor. But the more whining like I see in posts like this is starting to make me think some rigor and formality is is exactly what we need.
_qulr 6y ago
The submission title is editorialized. The linked article's title is simply "macOS Containers and defaults".
marviio 6y ago
I was warned about upgrading to Catalina and held out for almost a year. Too long it seems. Since upgrading, I think I have got five or six popups asking if process X is allowed to read directory Y. And I am a power user with tons of brew packages, developer tools and utility apps. I think Apple is keeping a good balance between convenience and security.

34 points by pcr910303 6y ago

Thanks for the pointer on the full disk access thing. Don't agree with the final point though: > The third and final moral to the story is that SIP and sandboxing are terrible and ought to be abolished. I don't think they're terrible. But I do think the user should be able to override somehow in all cases. macOS is becoming too much like iOS for my liking too. I like locking things down for security but I really to be able to make exceptions. As long as things like SIP can still be turned off or much rather: if I can make specific exceptions without turning it off fully, they're a good thing in my book. But when macOS becomes as locked down as an iPhone it's no longer viable as a computing platform for me.

lupinglade 6y ago
SIP/sandboxing is quite terrible for developers in many ways too - this is why we don’t see the kind of great apps we used to have on the Mac platform anymore. All of these security features and artificial limitations effectively dumb down just about all applications and make many more unfeasible.
- Philadelphia 6y ago
  We made the same argument about system extensions in the MacOS 9 days. The trend has long been towards stability and security over access and customization.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - _qulr 6y ago
    This seems like kind of a strange telling of history. Were extensions ever abolished in OS 9? Mac OS X was an open platform for its first 10 years. It only started to get locked down in 2011 and 2012 with the Mac App Store and Gatekeeper.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
bartvk 6y ago
Amen. I getting a bit tired of this endless raging on security features. The blog is decent enough and delivers good information. Then it closes off with that final point and I'm disappointed. We're talking about a webbrowser here, which nowadays has to run untrusted code from internet strangers. Yet the blog says that "SIP and sandboxing are terrible and ought to be abolished", because changing a setting didn't work.
- mantap 6y ago
  Because we can see where this is all headed. SIP is part of a decade-long plan by Apple to transform the Mac into a platform where people's computers are ultimately controlled by Apple and not the users. And if you don't believe it, try to play the latest Fortnite on the Mac. It is impossible to discuss SIP as "just a security feature" and ignore the context. If this were a feature in Linux then we could discuss it as such.
  - bartvk 6y ago
    That may or may not be true, but still it's a good idea for a browser to be supported by OS sandbox features.
- _qulr 6y ago
  > because changing a setting didn't work That's not why. I've been a Mac developer for 14 years and a Mac user for longer. I've seen the Mac platform enfeebled, dismantled, locked down before my eyes. The conclusion didn't follow from the blog post, it followed from my long-running frustration. Mac software doesn't grow on trees. It needs people like me, who care deeply about this "niche". But people like me are a dying breed. You can have (the illusion of) a "secure" platform, but eventually you'll be left with nothing except apps ported from iOS. At that point, what's the Mac except an extremely overpriced iPad?
  - machello13 6y ago
    There are plenty of Mac developers who don’t have the hard line stance you do. Please, please don’t speak for all of us. Sand boxing has made some things a lot harder or impossible but don’t pretend like the Mac has been incredibly crippled or something. Compared to using Tiger in 2006, the only functional difference is a few more password dialogs and some weirdness like this.
EricE 6y ago
MacOS isn't locked down, though. He even explains how to work with it. Is it as convenient? Nope. Is it good? Yup! Security or convenience. You get one, but not both. The statement they are terrible and ought to be abolished is stupid and self serving. Yes, as a programmer it ads more steps - but the benefits they bring for everyone else who isn't a programmer (and of who there are a LOT more users) are significant and incredibly beneficial. I used to chafe at the idea that software developers should have to be formally accredited like structural engineers and that software development should have more formality and rigor. But the more whining like I see in posts like this is starting to make me think some rigor and formality is is exactly what we need.

_qulr 6y ago

The submission title is editorialized. The linked article's title is simply "macOS Containers and defaults".

marviio 6y ago

I was warned about upgrading to Catalina and held out for almost a year. Too long it seems. Since upgrading, I think I have got five or six popups asking if process X is allowed to read directory Y. And I am a power user with tons of brew packages, developer tools and utility apps. I think Apple is keeping a good balance between convenience and security.