macOS Sequoia Makes It Harder to Override Gatekeeper Security

[Shirasaki]

And the slow march toward making these machines as pathetic and hobbled as iOS devices continues. I forgot this was even a feature, though, since I always just disable the Gatekeeper bs entirely.

The next step Apple will take is by removing the disabling feature entirely, or even offer reduced security option. Next time, macOS can no longer be downgraded, just like iOS. And all apps must be on Mac App Store or it will not run. Terminal app removed, alongside all the related features. So on and so forth.

 

[Shirasaki]

Controlling by nature touted as “security”.

“We care about you” so we lock you up.
Sounds reasonable to me.

 

[SpotOnT]

Oh yuck.

Boo.

 

[Shirasaki]

Not only are they not allowing alternative app stores on iOS, but they are cracking down on third party apps on the Mac, something the user should have complete control over. I should be able to select the level of security I want on my third party apps and unsigned applications. This is 100% about diverting people to the App Store for revenue and in a few more iterations of MacOS, we will need to jailbreak it to regain control.

I fear there won’t even be much leeway in terms of jailbreaking when the time comes, cause terminal will be gone for good, alongside all the associated features. The wall will become so tall and so thick that it is nearly impossible to break through unless government steps in and force them to break it open.
Apple is a dictatorship.

 

[Shirasaki]

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.

Umm but last time I checked, I thought apple didn’t care about frustration? like, at all?
When was last time Apple truly cared about end users?

 

[Smigit]

Honestly didn’t even realise I could control click to accept the install. Been going into the Preferences for years.

 

[Starfia]

Sounds good. Control-clicking is a decent safeguard to make you pause and double-think before running something un-gatekept, but for mortals who (understandably) don't fully understand what they're authorizing by using that action, it's good there's some plain language to read in the system's place for informing the user about things like authorizing un-gatekept software.

 

[Semio]

An unnecessary change.

Necessary if you want to create a walled garden like iOS, which is obviously what Apple want..

 

[Shirasaki]

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.

Those scammers just spend more time to teach old people to bypass it anyway.
Educating old people to identify scam and not fall for it is more important.

 

[thebart]

In a year or two, you'll need to issue obscure commands in the shell After that you need to have SIP disabled, which will break some features. Then you'll have to go into recovery mode any time you want to install unsigned app. Then it's off to Linux don't let the door hit you on the way out

I changed OS after 30 years with Windows. I'll change again, it won't take 30 years

 

[Ethosik]

Macs haven't shopped with optical drives for a decade now, I wonder who's still using MakeMKV on MacOS. I have an old Mac Pro 5,1 fitted with a Blu-Ray drive, one of the few models that could read the 4K UHD discs in MakeMKV since that was the only way I could actually watch the movies I purchased in 4K.

Any external drives will work, even blu ray ones. I have four compatible drives that all work with modern macs.

 

[Westside guy]

Macs haven't shopped with optical drives for a decade now, I wonder who's still using MakeMKV on MacOS.

Optical drives are pretty much plug and play in macOS, even now. First thing I do after purchasing a Blu-Ray is to use MakeMKV to rip it.

Side note: For DVDs, I find the old RipIt app still works great! The app Graphics aren't perfect, since the last update to that app was pre-retina; but it does the job.

 

[nottorp]

I'm a power user who is highly tech literate and I didn't know about Control-Click (or at least forgot about it). I don't know every last keyboard shortcut that's available in macOS.

It's not a problem to pull up settings unless you need to do it dozens of times per day.

Right click. Are you using a one button mouse? Did you not enable right click on your trackpad?

 

[Atomicow]

So what if I don’t want to accept the terms of license - say macOS EULA?

I go into a store and buy a Mac, without having been provided a copy of the OS license.
After the seller demonstrating it to me, with seller mentionig my being required to agree to a licence.
I mean… which low-level sales clerk would? They probably never read it either.

I unbox the computer at home, plug it in, turn it on and inevitably get presented a license “agreement” to agree to on screen.
Upon reading the license, I decide I do not want to agree to the license.

Well, I can’t use my computer as advertised then, can I?
Can’t even install an alternative operating system.
It’s literally a dead paperweight without “agreeing” to the license.

👉🏻 So what now?

Do I take it back to the store and demand full refund of the product price for not telling me that I’d have to agree to licensing terms? Well, bad news: the seller, it could be another million dollar corporation with highly paid lawyers, could just as well tell me “sorry - no open box returns”. Or no returns at all. Particularly not for a full refund. And it’s not like there is a legal right to return a product.

The box itself says that use of the product requires that you agree to the software license and provides a web address to read it before opening it.
If you didn’t read it, that’s on you.
Even still, you would be able to return it to Apple.

 

[AppliedMicro]

No. You give them the source code, and let them compile/build it on their own Macs. Buildable source code is a perfectly good form of distribution. And Xcode to do the build is free to Mac users, not just developers.

Source code isn’t what I’d colloquially call “software” that’s being distributed.
Those are merely “building blocks” or ingredients to build software (applications) that’ll run on hardware.
Just like flour, yeast and salt aren’t foods people eat.

But I take your point. 🙂

 

[Minghold]

"...Gatekeeper ensures that Macs only run "trusted" software in order to protect users from malware, viruses, and other security risks complete the transformation of the MacOS into an Android-style walled garden when the user's every move is dutifully observed by the corporation's intelligence entity patron..."

 

[msackey]

As soon as this starts impacting use of MacPorts and Homebrew and self-written software, this sort of Big Brother protection will move rapidly out of the "mildly annoying" bin into the "hell no" bin.

That’s exactly what I was thinking. This new change would hinder self-written software or software from small developers. And what about software from GitHub?

I think it’s fine to have an option to only open notarized software with also another level of security that allows non-notarized software to be opened. But not ok to have no option at all.

 

[svish]

Should not be an issue. Good to know about the change in the upcoming macOS

 

[SKB_1965]

Another Apple money making scam. PS. I used my first Mac in 1993.

 

[koil]

I'm completely unbothered by this change and I use this feature fairly often. It's only a slight additional inconvenience for experienced users and it's a huge barrier for scammers.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but I'd like a (complicated) way to revert the change for myself. From recovery or something maybe, like how System Integrity Protection is currently managed. That should make everyone happy no?

 

[simply258]

It’s funny how most Apple fanboys and fangirls go up in arms when it’s about restricting what people can do on their Macs, but they’re all for Apple doing the same on iPhones and iMacs.

 

[AppliedMicro]

What do you think happens when you buy a video game and open it then refuse to accept the EULA? Not only you can’t return it, but you can’t play the game.

What else did I buy that game for, it not to play it?

I have a reasonable expectation to play the game, if I bought it. So I’ll just click on and ignore the EULA - just as “they” ignored me when not presenting the “agreement” to me prior to purchase (and no, that doesn’t mean I have to jump through hoops to acquire it somewhere else due to small print on the box) - and get on with my life.

Actually, yes, you return it and Apple will take it back

Oh, yeah, I was almost waiting for that.
Cause I also vaguely remember such wording when having set up a Mac.

But here’s the thing: I may not have bought it from Apple. In fact, I didn’t buy my last Macs from them.
So why should I return my computer to them?

So sue Apple, using this line of thought, and have the entire industry overturned. But that requires too much work, doesn’t it. Complaining is far easier.

Yes, it actually does.
It would require too much effort.

Suing third parties does take too much effort, just so that I can use a hundreds-of-Euros product that I have a reasonable expectation of being able to use? You can keep that stance in the lawsuit-happy United States of consumer Abuse - thank you very much.

The box itself says that use of the product requires that you agree to the software license and provides a web address to read it before opening it.
If you didn’t read it, that’s on you.

The box wasn’t even handed to me before having paid in store. And I’m not obliged to read things to obtain and read things that may be available “somewhere else” - particularly when said “agreement” can and does change over time.

Even still, you would be able to return it to Apple.

Unless Apple is the seller (they aren’t for my Macs), they’re just a third party that supplied my seller.
I certainly won’t spend any more money or time to take or ship my Mac to a third party like Apple..

I have a reasonable expectation to be able to use my computer. They can’t legally enforce EULA presented after purchase to me, and clicking a button does not constitute such consent or agreement (that is also prevailing legal opinion in a sizeable part of the EU - other jurisdictions certainly may view that differently).

 

[Kazgarth]

It's the reason I switched to Windows desktop PC instead of Mac (awful experience installing 3rd party apps).

Seems with this change I may switch my MacBook to Windows laptop too.

 

[rumagent]

As a big fan of Homebrew, I must say I am not a fan of the direction Apple is taking.

 

[peterlandwalker]

You are correct. macOS isn’t the OS you want if you don’t want some form of hand holding. Same with Windows. If you’re smart enough to go out on your own and not need someone to protect you then it’s Linux.

Exactly. There's always politics and business strategy involved in corporate decisions. If you don't know why to trust it, maybe you shouldn't. To me it's simple, i trust them more than any other major company currently available, but promoting alternatives and competition is the way to improve the current state of affairs.