3 ms·

Of course if you'd looked at the web page you'd see that you can do exactly the same here. https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew/releases/tag/v1.0.2 https:/

Of course if you'd looked at the web page you'd see that you can do exactly the same here. https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew/releases/tag/v1.0.2 https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew/releases/tag/v1.0.2

abalone 12y ago
Why so condescending? I looked at the web page. The binary download is from cakebrew.com, not GitHub. You have to trust cakebrew.com. Again, nobody has answered what the problem is with signing the installer. What gives?
- autodidakto 12y ago
  You're saying that an Apple killswitch would be a good thing that users would want?
  - filmgirlcw 12y ago
    No, OP is saying installing an unsigned binary that is a package manager that has access to all of your system files is uncomfortable for some people. I'd gladly fork it and replace it with a signed binary, but I'd want to ensure there isn't anything suspect in the project. And seriously, I've never even heard of the kill switch being used for anything that wasn't malicious. Especially if it's not distorted in the Mac App Store.
  - abalone 12y ago
    Yes, it is definitely a good feature. It's part of their security architecture. They figured out a way to allow developers complete freedom in distributing their software directly / outside of the App Store while still offering users protection against malware. The point of the killswitch is to disable malicious software that someone tricked you into downloading off the internet and installing. That is the only thing it would be used for (and I'm not aware if it ever has.. maybe because it's a good deterrent). It is not the same as the broader App Store approval guidelines. This is specifically for disabling malware, e.g. a bad actor tricking 10% of Hacker News into installing a malicious fork of brew. I also want to make it clear I have no reason to believe this developer is anything but trustworthy. I just am curious why they decided not to sign it.
- cenhyperion 12y ago
  Sorry, this was overly harsh on my part.

abalone 12y ago

Why so condescending? I looked at the web page. The binary download is from cakebrew.com, not GitHub. You have to trust cakebrew.com. Again, nobody has answered what the problem is with signing the installer. What gives?

autodidakto 12y ago
You're saying that an Apple killswitch would be a good thing that users would want?
- filmgirlcw 12y ago
  No, OP is saying installing an unsigned binary that is a package manager that has access to all of your system files is uncomfortable for some people. I'd gladly fork it and replace it with a signed binary, but I'd want to ensure there isn't anything suspect in the project. And seriously, I've never even heard of the kill switch being used for anything that wasn't malicious. Especially if it's not distorted in the Mac App Store.
- abalone 12y ago
  Yes, it is definitely a good feature. It's part of their security architecture. They figured out a way to allow developers complete freedom in distributing their software directly / outside of the App Store while still offering users protection against malware. The point of the killswitch is to disable malicious software that someone tricked you into downloading off the internet and installing. That is the only thing it would be used for (and I'm not aware if it ever has.. maybe because it's a good deterrent). It is not the same as the broader App Store approval guidelines. This is specifically for disabling malware, e.g. a bad actor tricking 10% of Hacker News into installing a malicious fork of brew. I also want to make it clear I have no reason to believe this developer is anything but trustworthy. I just am curious why they decided not to sign it.
cenhyperion 12y ago
Sorry, this was overly harsh on my part.