You do know that they are just trying to lock it down like iOS and to ensure all apps come from the app store right? This is step 1
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.
macOS Sequoia Makes It Harder to Override Gatekeeper Security
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Was hoping that the right-click to "Open Anyway" option not working was a bug in the earlier betas, but now that its removal has been officially confirmed to have been an intentional change, they MUST (!!!) add a message that appears when people try to use the old way to inform about the new way.
The web is full of information instructing users to use this method to open apps, if there is no guidance for where the "Open Anyways" option has been moved for people that try to use the old way that has worked for the past decade then this change will most certainly lead to frustration for years to come.
The web is full of information instructing users to use this method to open apps, if there is no guidance for where the "Open Anyways" option has been moved for people that try to use the old way that has worked for the past decade then this change will most certainly lead to frustration for years to come.
I know anyone can be hacked but I’m more talking about “you need to click this link and download adobe flash player for this video to work”. That still gets peopleIt has nothing to do with being smart. I run a Linux workstation, the amount of rogue libraries in Linux is a huge problem. They all creep in to distributions pretty easily. Just recently, a Microsoft researcher was troubleshooting delay in login on Linux, found a Critical Vulnerability. My Linux workstation doesn’t have any confidential personal info, but if I was using it for banking and others, I would be very careful.
Microsoft employee accidentally saves global Linux meltdown from CVE-2024-3094 XZ backdoor
A curious Microsoft employee has saved the world from a potential global meltdown as several Linux distros were found vulnerable to an XZ backdoor tracked under CVE-2024-3094 (CVSS score of 10.0).www.neowin.net
It's YOUR Computer and You can't do what YOU want to do with it. You have to beg Apple to run apps they don't approve. Pitiful.
i'll admit that a few years ago i was legitimately worried that Apple was fixing to go down the path of locking down macOS at level closer to iOS....the transition to Apple Silicon was their actual chance to do that and looks like they chose not to....and sure they may continue to implement additional nanny-layers that will annoy most power user a couple times...theres no shot they go full iOS lockdown to macOS. I guess we should be thankful that the Mac App Store sucks as much as it does since that may be one of the main detractors from them going that route
Without a shadow of doubt. This could be a show stopper.
Yes you can actually install Linux on a Mac now. You own the hardware but you don’t own the OS. You only have a license to use it within the terms of the license agreement. So many don’t understand that
yup, same. This isnt a disaster, but it is irritating, and what I'm worried about is it telegraphs a potential move to even more restrictions in the future
also this
You can trust Apple to charge the $99 developer fee and
They checked and validated the developer‘s payment - and automatedly scan for malicious content.
I guarantee you that this will never happen. The Mac is very much aimed at IT and professionals and they will lose a huge part of their market by losing those. For now they're just sticking with annoying us, making our workflows harder and giving us bad value. Of course this move is just a small example of all that's been going on both with hardware and software, but that's how it feels nowadays. Macs were universally loved for just doing the thing you want them to do like a proper UNIX machine. But they are now becoming just as whiny and "to do this pls disable windows defender security++ copilot" as Windows computers.
The result of this will be that people will look up how to bypass it and they'll find a tutorial on how to completely disable Gatekeeper or SIP which leaves them even less protected than initially.
This is kind of silly. Control + Click + Open is a workaround not known by the general public. Hiding this option doesn't really protect people, it just makes the rest of us a little more annoyed while accomplishing the same task that we ultimately would have done anyway. But that seems to be a common theme with Apple.
Mac/Avid Reboot Issue: Bug in Google Chrome Update Is Likely to Blame - Studio Daily
A widely reported problem Avid users have been having this week with their MacOS Media Composer systems failing to boot apparently wasn't an Avid issue
www.studiodaily.com
Remember when Google Chrome's auto-update process accidentally deleted an important file on machines where SIP was disabled, and prevented those machines from rebooting?
I feel like this "Apple will eventually lockdown macOS like iOS" narrative gets pushed most by people who are power users and very proficient in executing their specific "workflow"...but not the same type of power user that enjoys running around in iTerm for hours....i am curious if anyone who is at least semi-proficient in managing file attributes in terminal believes that Apple will eventually lock it down
This is a GOOD thing. For experienced users like us, its a minor inconvenience, but for my parents and uncle....this is badly needed to protect themselves from installing something bad.
The goal is to make it harder to socially engineer someone to install malware, such as remote monitoring/control software during scam calls with someone "from your bank".
If one is bothered by this restriction/speed bump, just go into settings and lower the protection option and NEVER worry about it again. Your hardware, your choice!
This is bad news for every developer out there.
They should reconsider this change. Before Sequoia it was difficult enough for a regular user to install unknown software on a Mac. This is a loss of freedom
They should reconsider this change. Before Sequoia it was difficult enough for a regular user to install unknown software on a Mac. This is a loss of freedom
Will the next version of Mac OS also make your device THINNER?
Cook is doing a good job of pissing off power users and developers...
Cook is doing a good job of pissing off power users and developers...
I believed that to be the case when they first introduced the feature to lock down where your apps came from. Why even offer that option if you're not going to eventually require all apps originate from your store or are signed/notarized?
I believe eventually that there will be no exceptions and so no open-source software will work any longer that isn't included with macOS. Same with any other non-commercial applications.
thank you!!! you were able to articulate this general point much better than I just tried to do in another reply. 100% agree with this take. I personally have zsh-autosuggestions enabled so I just need to xattr -rd com.apple.quarantine one time and its not even an annoyance so much anymore
We can still disable Gatekeeper (for now), but it now happens through a profile from what I see. Why they have to change how permissions work with every update is beyond me though. It's annoying for regular users too when they get asked for the n-th time after an update whether they allow Zoom to record their screen.
At least there's a workaround, but I did think having the Control-click method was safe and secure enough. Why not have the Control-click+Open bring the System Security Settings forward? Why send the user on a wild goose-chase?
That wasn't Apple's language, and likely doesn't have the meaning the author expected (most people get this wrong).
A trusted system is one that is relied upon to a certain extent. You make a decision to rely on it and accept the consequences, and then it is considered trusted.
Apple doesn't take on the decision process to trust the software (as you might see say for a soldier's equipment in the military, where their life depends on that gear). Instead they create a higher level of baseline confidence for you to make your own trust decisions as a user.
This also is (for instance) why Microsoft eventually adopted the nomenclature Trustworthy Computing vs the existing Trusted Computing.
There will absolutely be more restrictions in the future. That doesn't mean those will be user-hostile decisions.
I find this to be developer-hostile, not user hostile. Specifically, it is most hostile to a certain class of open source developer who throw builds of Mac software over the wall, without running them themselves.
This will help prevent old people from falling for those popups saying their computer needs to be repaired. Then suddenly they're ransom locked out or their computer is being controlled by an "IT Expert" in India.