3 ms·
> let the readers draw their own conclusions That's not how this works. A system-level background process is not going to be 'concluded upon' by random readers
by oneplane 4y ago
> let the readers draw their own conclusions
That's not how this works. A system-level background process is not going to be 'concluded upon' by random readers on the internet.
The only thing you should have written is: "a process made a connection, but I don't know what the process is for or what the connection is for, and I do not know how to investigate it". Your readers could then conclude a bunch:
- You use little snitch
- But you don't really know how noisy an OS can be
- Noise seems scary to you
- But you don't know why
- And you don't know how to find out
You could have made your position more credible by doing some extremely basic tests, like checking for strings inside the binary, or finding out what frameworks and libraries it is linked to. That's 2 built-in commands you can run as a normal user, with no arguments or ordering to think about. But if you did that, your position wouldn't be what it is.
- sneak 4y agoI have an entire blog post about how noisy macOS is, with pcaps: https://sneak.berlin/20210202/macos-11.2-network-privacy/ https://sneak.berlin/20210202/macos-11.2-network-privacy/ I'm not interested in projecting credibility, only disseminating facts for analysis.
- oneplane 4y agoWell, that's not what you did, no matter your intentions. > Apple Has Begun Scanning Your Local Image Files Without Consent Begun? Nope, ancient process and system that has been there for many major releases. Consent? Definitely gave consent, both at the macro and the micro level. You can't actually get up and running or use Finder unless you gave that consent, because it's the first thing that you have to do when you boot up for the first time. So both of your key statements are measurably false, and your blog is riddled with fantasies and propositions that don't have the facts to back them up.