4 ms·

Could you enlighten me what the gross invasion of privacy and the security risk is for the majority of users that do not hack their machine in a way that preven

by FabHK 6y ago

Could you enlighten me what the gross invasion of privacy and the security risk is for the majority of users that do not hack their machine in a way that prevents those connections? I'm aware of Gatekeeper checking developer certificates upon opening apps over an unencrypted connection (so far; Apple is fixing that), but not sure where the gross privacy invasion or security risk is (in particular compared to existing alternatives, not some platonic ideal). Here, FWIW, is what Apple says about Gatekeeper and Notarization. I'd be eager to hear any evidence that this is incorrect. > Gatekeeper performs online checks to verify if an app contains known malware and whether the developer’s signing certificate is revoked. We have never combined data from these checks with information about Apple users or their devices. We do not use data from these checks to learn what individual users are launching or running on their devices. > Notarization checks if the app contains known malware using an encrypted connection that is resilient to server failures. > These security checks have never included the user’s Apple ID or the identity of their device. To further protect privacy, we have stopped logging IP addresses associated with Developer ID certificate checks, and we will ensure that any collected IP addresses are removed from logs. > In addition, over the the next year we will introduce several changes to our security checks: * A new encrypted protocol for Developer ID certificate revocation checks * Strong protections against server failure * A new preference for users to opt out of these security protections https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202491 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202491

webmobdev 6y ago
> Could you enlighten me what the gross invasion of privacy and the security risk is for the majority of users The same reasons that people use application firewalls on their system - Access to our personal data by Apple - intentionally or "accidently". Malware may be able to hijack Apple whitelisted softwares to do their mischief. (And please don't reply by saying we can "trust" Apple with our data - I don't, and if I have paid for a computer I consider it mine, not Apple's to meddle with it as they please). As for the Gatekeeper incident, the only comment I have to add is that I really don't care about Apple's "apology" after they have been caught ...
- acdha 6y ago
  The services which are exempted either don't access personal data or only do so when you enable a service like iCloud Photos. If you don't trust Apple to not access data when the corresponding service is not enabled, your choices are to not use their OS or not use their OS — a tool like this can trivially be bypassed by anyone who controls the kernel.
  - hobs 6y ago
    Its a firewall, it either works or it doesn't. If you don't allow me to block your services, then your firewall simply doesn't work.
    - acdha 6y ago
      Beyond being technically incorrect (a firewall with a whitelist still works) you're missing the larger point: if you don't trust Apple not to surreptitiously access your data, you can't rely on Apple-managed security mechanisms to enforce it. Run this command to look at the list of applications which aren't subject to the application-level firewall (the lower-level packet filter does still apply): defaults read /System/Library/Frameworks/NetworkExtension.framework/Resources/Info.plist ContentFilterExclusionList That list breaks down into two categories: things which you can't safely be on the Internet without (e.g. security updates) and things which aren't enabled unless you enable them (iMessage, Photos, Music, Find My Mac, etc.) and load some kind of data you care about into them. In the former case, your options are to enable it or switch to a different operating system — you may choose to schedule them but there's no good security policy where you don't install updates promptly. In the latter case, people come up with these hypothetical scenarios where someone finds a way to, say, enable iCloud music or photos without your knowledge and then do … something … sketchy with it. The problem with this line of thinking is that if you use those services, you can't firewall them and if you don't you're trying to come up with a scenario where someone can start a service, login using MFA and deleting the notification emails, load your data without prompting, but somehow doesn't already have control of your system or an easier way to exfiltrate your data. The person I replied to had an even sillier version: “Access to our personal data by Apple - intentionally or "accidently"”. That asks us to believe that there's some way Apple would want to access your data, deploy some kind of attack code which bypasses all of the prompts for each stage, but forget to, say, simply disable the firewall entirely or exfiltrate data through a hostname used for other purposes (such as the software update CDN). It's technically possible but it's so farfetched that Hollywood screenwriters wouldn't touch it. Any time spent playing firewall admin like this would be far better spent enabling MFA on everything you use and reconsidering the other software you install. Defending against the OS vendor is close to impossible and where people in reality lose data it's due to third-party apps / browser extensions, insecure backups, etc. which are both far more important and much easier to make meaningful improvements.

by FabHK 6y ago

webmobdev 6y ago

> Could you enlighten me what the gross invasion of privacy and the security risk is for the majority of users The same reasons that people use application firewalls on their system - Access to our personal data by Apple - intentionally or "accidently". Malware may be able to hijack Apple whitelisted softwares to do their mischief. (And please don't reply by saying we can "trust" Apple with our data - I don't, and if I have paid for a computer I consider it mine, not Apple's to meddle with it as they please). As for the Gatekeeper incident, the only comment I have to add is that I really don't care about Apple's "apology" after they have been caught ...

acdha 6y ago
The services which are exempted either don't access personal data or only do so when you enable a service like iCloud Photos. If you don't trust Apple to not access data when the corresponding service is not enabled, your choices are to not use their OS or not use their OS — a tool like this can trivially be bypassed by anyone who controls the kernel.
- hobs 6y ago
  Its a firewall, it either works or it doesn't. If you don't allow me to block your services, then your firewall simply doesn't work.
  - acdha 6y ago
    Beyond being technically incorrect (a firewall with a whitelist still works) you're missing the larger point: if you don't trust Apple not to surreptitiously access your data, you can't rely on Apple-managed security mechanisms to enforce it. Run this command to look at the list of applications which aren't subject to the application-level firewall (the lower-level packet filter does still apply): defaults read /System/Library/Frameworks/NetworkExtension.framework/Resources/Info.plist ContentFilterExclusionList That list breaks down into two categories: things which you can't safely be on the Internet without (e.g. security updates) and things which aren't enabled unless you enable them (iMessage, Photos, Music, Find My Mac, etc.) and load some kind of data you care about into them. In the former case, your options are to enable it or switch to a different operating system — you may choose to schedule them but there's no good security policy where you don't install updates promptly. In the latter case, people come up with these hypothetical scenarios where someone finds a way to, say, enable iCloud music or photos without your knowledge and then do … something … sketchy with it. The problem with this line of thinking is that if you use those services, you can't firewall them and if you don't you're trying to come up with a scenario where someone can start a service, login using MFA and deleting the notification emails, load your data without prompting, but somehow doesn't already have control of your system or an easier way to exfiltrate your data. The person I replied to had an even sillier version: “Access to our personal data by Apple - intentionally or "accidently"”. That asks us to believe that there's some way Apple would want to access your data, deploy some kind of attack code which bypasses all of the prompts for each stage, but forget to, say, simply disable the firewall entirely or exfiltrate data through a hostname used for other purposes (such as the software update CDN). It's technically possible but it's so farfetched that Hollywood screenwriters wouldn't touch it. Any time spent playing firewall admin like this would be far better spent enabling MFA on everything you use and reconsidering the other software you install. Defending against the OS vendor is close to impossible and where people in reality lose data it's due to third-party apps / browser extensions, insecure backups, etc. which are both far more important and much easier to make meaningful improvements.