"Over 10 years as a professional Mac and iOS software engineer": https://lapcatsoftware.com/main/Resume.html
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Addresses Privacy Concerns Surrounding App Authentication in macOS
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Following the release of macOS Big Sur on Thursday, Mac users began to experience issues with opening apps while connected to the internet. Apple's system status page attributed the situation to issues with its Developer ID notary service, with developer Jeff Johnson specifying that there were connection issues with Apple's OCSP server.
Shortly after, security researcher Jeffrey Paul shared a blog post titled "Your Computer Isn't Yours," in which he raised privacy and security concerns related to Macs "phoning home" to Apple's OCSP server. In short, Paul said that the OCSP traffic that macOS generates is not encrypted and could potentially be seen by ISPs or even the U.S. military.
Apple has since responded to the matter by updating its "Safely open apps on your Mac" support document with new information, as noted by iPhoneinCanada. Here's the new "Privacy protections" section of the support document in full:Apple clarifies that user-specific data is not harvested during the security check and that it plans on removing all IP information from the logs. In addition, it plans on introducing several changes to the system over the next year, including:
Some users have advocated blocking the traffic to Apple's authentication servers, but it appears that Apple will provide this option to end-users in the future as well.
- 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
Article Link: Apple Addresses Privacy Concerns Surrounding App Authentication in macOS
ps. forgot to mention that once the app was running I plugged ethernet lead back in and quickly connected the vpn!
Speaking as someone who has studied big brands and psychology, and as someone who has gone to court against Apple and (fortunately) won, In my experience/opinion Apple is probably a bit more dishonest than average, and at times, even cruel. Not saying the Microsoft is necessarily better, although I don't know, but duopolies are often not significantly different than monopolies. "If you don't like it, use something else" is only compelling if you have ample choices with different policies. As it is, picking which major US company to do business with can be like picking which venereal disease you want to get.
Apple cynically plays on well-known human traits like borrowed self-esteem and conformity, and they prey on people who in all likelihood have identity disorders and attach to the company for reasons which aren't purely technical. Instead of helping these people, Apple exploits them.
When asking about how much memory a device had, I once read on this very form a guy that said "Apple asks me not to care how much memory is in my iPhone, and when Apple asks me to do something, I comply."
This is stuff you don't expect to hear from a healthy adult. Realize they get no consideration for this at all. Personally, I think preying on mental illness, even if it's seen as minor and victimless, is a mean thing to do.
There actually exist people who are convinced that the company feels some kind of love or affection for them, and it's likely not their fault. It's a common human need, and Apple figured out how to exploit it.
In 2020, at least in the USA, the company/customer relationship is a hostile one. The company does everything it can to give the customer as little value for his/her money, and the customer, hopefully, acts in their own best interest and demands as much as they can. This happens because, of course, shareholder and employee interest are almost always in opposition to each other. Unless you happen to be both.
When the company succeeds in convincing the customer that the relationship is actually one of genuine consideration, the result is usually shocking to the observer. We're just not used to seeing grown adults act that way. In fact, the more extreme examples of "fan boy-ism" drives a lot of Anti-Apple sentiment. Much like the notion that homophobic people harbor gay feelings themselves, I think some people worry deep down that it will happen to them, and they turn more hostile toward the company to endure it won't happen to them.
If you are an adult in the USA, in the 2020's, and you don't take everything companies say with a huge dose of skepticism, there's probably something going on that the average person doesn't experience. Mental illness isn't the only explanation. Perhaps you've lived a relatively easy life where most problems are taking care of for you, or perhaps you really have been lucky, and you haven't had to protect your own interests, or perhaps you're just an optimistic, trusting person who likes to believe the best in people/entities.
The more power to them.
But, once they start looking at the others with derision, and start calling them "Apple-haters" while defending the corporation from any charge regardless of evidence, that's when you know that you're no longer in a discussion with someone who can see the company objectively.
Fanboys in and of themselves are not bad, but when thye get to a point where they literally cannot understand the position of the the skeptical, and they start ascribing persecution to healthy skepticism, that person has been victimized by the company. At least in my humble opinion.
Sounds like you had an encounter with lawyers 🤣
You are probably right. However, the main tool Apple uses is, I believe, build trust.
And trust is earned, it is not something you can artificially project on people. The problem is human tendency to follow the lead of others (iSheep?), which results in a vast number of people who trust Apple even when they have been wronged or exploited.
Thankfully it is possible to wake up from the hypnotism 🐑
Yes.
I just take it as a bit of fun.
I'm pleased to say after much to and fro ing with the tech team at Vypr vpn the root cause has been found and , its not Apples fault! Nothing untoward going on. It turns out that Vypr clashes with the new version of Little Snitch , which I also run.Uninstalling Little Snitch cures the crashing ..... so now I'm hoping they can come up with a workaround so I can continue to use both!Ps.Im not anti Apple and will probably give in and buy a genuine Mac when my Hack becomes obsolete... the prices , innovation and benchmarks have persuaded me!
It was clear in the 2018 and 2019 hacker cases that Apple tracks their users' activities at the firmware or hardware level to ID them even when covering their tracks with VPN. That's why the paranoid go as far as to overwrite their BIOS with Libreboot, CoreBoot, etc. to avoid tracking.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/teenager-apple-hacking-case/
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/teenager-apple-hacking-case/
Both teens accessed secure Apple files and hid their identities using a VPN. However, the Apple systems recorded the serial numbers of the MacBooks used in the attacks and were able to trace the hackers’ locations.
That says that they had an Apple account, right? The serial number of your MacBook is registered in iCloud when you set it up.
Do you have any evidence that the firmware or hardware shares your computer details with Apple? A network analysis should answer that.
A few thoughts and considerations.
First, why are some websites so compliant when it comes to distributing Apple's statements? Their due is with the user community first, not with the company. In one website they even presented the news claiming that Apple announced "new steps it will take in the future for greater privacy and flexibility", lol.
I don't know, it would help a lot if these websites started analyzing first the info spread by Apple instead of just replicating their PR bs. The least all these media outlets could do is using some critical thinking and neutral language (kudos to MR for that, at least this time).
Second, Apple has avoided several main issues in their response. They haven't said why they thought collecting your IP and other data they claim are not combining was a good idea in the first place, or why they were sending such info to their servers in an insecure way and not giving a crap... Damn, they even plainly avoided addressing the urgent issue of connections circumventing VPNs.
Honestly, coming from a company that focus so much of their marketing on privacy — and that charges accordingly — this is particularly infuriating.
I mean, this is Google/Amazon/Facebook-low. We are not talking about mere errors here or just one of those typical scandals around bugs and ****** programming that Tim-Cook has gotten us used to. We are talking about Apple deliberately programming these behaviors into the OS, setting them as a non-changeable standard and thinking it would be a great idea.
You know how they say your trust only needs to be broken once? Well, personally I think that while Apple happily collaborating as part of the PRISM program was already fishy, doing this just pop-ups my bubble and confirms that the company might not be that different to Google or Amazon after all, and makes me seriously considering jumping into open source territory for the first time.
I hope some of you guys come to reason too and just say enough of this surveillance crap.
(And Linux/GNU community please, ffs, address once and for all the need of easy-to-use, good-looking UIs for average Joes. Until then, a massive transition on a worldwide level just won't happen.)
First, why are some websites so compliant when it comes to distributing Apple's statements? Their due is with the user community first, not with the company. In one website they even presented the news claiming that Apple announced "new steps it will take in the future for greater privacy and flexibility", lol.
I don't know, it would help a lot if these websites started analyzing first the info spread by Apple instead of just replicating their PR bs. The least all these media outlets could do is using some critical thinking and neutral language (kudos to MR for that, at least this time).
Second, Apple has avoided several main issues in their response. They haven't said why they thought collecting your IP and other data they claim are not combining was a good idea in the first place, or why they were sending such info to their servers in an insecure way and not giving a crap... Damn, they even plainly avoided addressing the urgent issue of connections circumventing VPNs.
Honestly, coming from a company that focus so much of their marketing on privacy — and that charges accordingly — this is particularly infuriating.
I mean, this is Google/Amazon/Facebook-low. We are not talking about mere errors here or just one of those typical scandals around bugs and ****** programming that Tim-Cook has gotten us used to. We are talking about Apple deliberately programming these behaviors into the OS, setting them as a non-changeable standard and thinking it would be a great idea.
You know how they say your trust only needs to be broken once? Well, personally I think that while Apple happily collaborating as part of the PRISM program was already fishy, doing this just pop-ups my bubble and confirms that the company might not be that different to Google or Amazon after all, and makes me seriously considering jumping into open source territory for the first time.
I hope some of you guys come to reason too and just say enough of this surveillance crap.
(And Linux/GNU community please, ffs, address once and for all the need of easy-to-use, good-looking UIs for average Joes. Until then, a massive transition on a worldwide level just won't happen.)