Better than what, is the question. Where people stand on this question ultimately lies in whether they trust what Apple says. For example, Gatekeeper / OCSP,

Better than what, is the question. Where people stand on this question ultimately lies in whether they trust what Apple says. For example, Gatekeeper / OCSP, the service mentioned in the GP. Apple says the following: > 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 using on their devices. https://support.apple.com/en-us/102445 https://support.apple.com/en-us/102445 That's either true or it isn't. If it's true, then the GP comment is wrong about "Hey Siri who is using Tor", if it's not true, they are correct. Blocking the service using a hosts file works, and does not prevent applications from opening, a case can be made that this should be even easier with a system preferences setting, but we come back to the same question: if you trust what Apple says about the service, making it easy to disable (and blocking a DNS entry is not especially difficult) would be foolish, because the threat landscape does include malware, and does not include Apple sharing information (they claim that) they don't have, about what programs users open. If Apple is lying, or one thinks Apple is lying, then the problems do not end with Gatekeeper. They could be logging every key I type, faking E2EE through some clever obfuscated code, and so on. Blocking the OSCP server will do nothing, they can exfiltrate anything they want from an operating system which they alone control. I happen to believe Apple's privacy claims are honest. This is based on a couple of things: primarily, privacy is a valuable (to them) and emphasized part of their brand, and any discovered breach of trust would be hugely detrimental to their bottom line. Also, there's a dog which didn't bark, in the form of an absence of whistleblowers reporting on how Apple's privacy claims are bullshit and they actually pwn everything. TL;DR there are OSes which claim to offer more privacy than Apple, but now you're trusting ~everyone who has contributed software to those operating systems instead. I also happen to think that e.g. Qubes and Tails do improve on privacy over the macOS etc. baseline, but I can't prove that, anymore than I can demonstrate that Apple isn't lying. It is physically impossible to audit all the code we run personally. It just can't be done. So trust is a non-optional component of making decisions about privacy and security. It will always be thus.