4 ms·
>The installer application simply installs the app. It doesn't in itself run any of the app's code. The installed app doesn't need to be codesigned and notarize
by unclebucknasty 5y ago
>The installer application simply installs the app. It doesn't in itself run any of the app's code. The installed app doesn't need to be codesigned and notarized
Wait, then doesn't that mean Apple's intent there is broken? I mean if you can bypass its controls on installing unsigned apps by merely wrapping an unsigned (possibly malicious) app in a signed installer, then what's the point?
- absove 5y agoVery naive question but is it different from what npm, pip, etc. let you do already? Does the app installed this way get more permissions coming from a signed installer? I'm not familiar with OSX security model.
- shannah78 5y ago> Very naive question but is it different from what npm, pip, etc. let you do already? npm, pip, etc.. are CLI install tools. jDeploy supports CLI app distribution using npm also. But the key difference is that jDeploy provides double-clickable installers for the apps. If you're distributing a desktop app, it should be installable in the desktop (IMO). Making users go to the command-line to install the app is actually prohibitive for the average user. Even when your userbase is programmers, I find that making them go into the command-line loses them. > Does the app installed this way get more permissions coming from a signed installer? I'm not familiar with OSX security model. Since Catalina, you can't download and run a Mac app in any form unless it is signed and notarized. Using the signed and notarized installer allows you to get around this limitation.