I pretty much consider myself a tech expert and that is the reason why I WANT notarised software. Why take unnecessary risks? I can't do code review of every piece of third-party code I install on my machine. If Apple can do it for me, excellent.
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.
Notarization Required for Mac Apps Created With New Developer IDs Starting in macOS 10.14.5
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I pretty much consider myself a tech expert and that is the reason why I WANT notarised software. Why take unnecessary risks? I can't do code review of every piece of third-party code I install on my machine. If Apple can do it for me, excellent.
For most people it's useful. Like my parents, my coworkers, most of my friends who just use their stuff.
Wonder if it apply for us with old Developer ID? or what does Apple mean ??
"and all software from developers new to distributing with Developer ID"
"and all software from developers new to distributing with Developer ID"
Recent news regarding enterprise certificates should be an indicator that an app is not safe just because it has a certificate. This will only stop the most basic malware.
It gives Apple a bit more power than I'm comfortable with. They are making themselves gatekeepers and give themselves the power to say what you can and can't run.
It gives Apple a bit more power than I'm comfortable with. They are making themselves gatekeepers and give themselves the power to say what you can and can't run.
I guess it means that if you’re already distributing macOS software using AppleID signing you’re fine and can continue to do so without having to have that software notarized. For now.
Still, a clear list of possible cases would have been more helpful than that prosaic description. In the case at hand
Looks to me like another step to force developers to the mac app store. Does this cost the developers any more money then if they didn't have to do this?
The question would be more about what kind of software you will be able to distribute in the long term when Apple implements this additional censoring hook.
Whether the store will allow for notarized software that is not allowed in the store as of today or if there will be a “admin store” or “adult store” of any kind is not clear.
The least problematic interpretation would be an additional check of any kind of signed macOS software in regards to it’s API usage and data access but not in respect to its functionality. Unfortunately nobody believes that Apple is able to keep themselves from censoring the content/functionality for very long.
Also there’s is the fear that the OS and hardware will make it impossible to circumvent this additional check at all at some point.
This is certainly a vey dangerous slippery slope... Even if they don't force devs to distribute through the MacAppstore ( I don't think they will ), they might decide to start refusing to notarize apps or games for which they disagree with the content.
That's my thinking in all honesty, its a subtle but intended move to force oversight on apps with an eye to making the MAS a requirement.
I guess it means that if you’re already distributing macOS software using AppleID signing you’re fine and can continue to do so without having to have that software notarized. For now.
Still, a clear list of possible cases would have been more helpful than that prosaic description. In the case at hand
True, but everyone signs apps with an Developer ID since 10.7, so they probably mean everyone using xcode 10.2
It can still be malware. Apple is probably just vetting the app with a virus detection tool like that which Users have had access to for years. If the malware code isn't in a library of known threats, it will slip through until Users or researchers discover it later.
Apple's app vetting and privacy assurances are mostly marketing exaggeratios.
So what about the FDA checking for things like E.coli in your salad? Is that also unacceptable?
And a Mac is probably way over kill for these people. They would be better off with an iPad..
hah, never heard of that "feature" my self, always went through system preferences. so right click open circumvents gate keeper? Sounds like a bug to me...
[doublepost=1554820886][/doublepost]
This is absolutely false.
https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threa...hacked-to-drop-new-variant-of-proton-malware/
https://securityzap.com/bittorrent-client-transmission-infected-os-x-malware/
https://www.macworld.co.uk/feature/mac-software/mac-viruses-list-3668354/
[doublepost=1554821351][/doublepost]
this is exactly what will happen.
2 years max and latest macOS will require purchase over App Store, and devices be locked down like a PS4 especially with proprietary ARM chipset.
It's a slow slow approach. Each release of Mac OS makes running non-MAS apps all that more awkward, and the screw tightens.
When Mac OS is exclusively MAS, a lot of applications will be digital doorstops. Unable to run because they just cannot technically meet MAS requirements. At this point, it will be bye-bye Apple, sadly, and my employer will ditch the platform as well for it's employees, as will many other companies who enjoy using Mac OS. We will not be able to use Mac OS for our daily jobs.
I think what he meant to say was:
All your personal things ARE belong to us. Get your memes right!
I suppose it's possible, but I think it's unlikely Apple will ever force developers to only use the MAS. It'll probably be the default setting, but I think the Open Source community is too influential for Apple to exclude them entirely.
It's not a bug. Right clicking to open offers the option of ignoring the GateKeeper warning, but doesn't really "bypass" it. You still get the GateKeeper check and a dialog if the source is an unidentified developer.
You’re smart, you think fast, but here, maybe too fast. You can pales a second and think in reverse. Maybe, iOS apps can be distributed outside of App Store with a notarization process.
It is written all over the walls: In due time, nobody will be able to install whatever app they want in THEIR overpriced Macs. Apple will centralize the software distribution just like they did from the beggining on iOS; that really sucks. If this is the future of the Mac, then my machine goes on eBay and I am going back to Windows. I am sure Apple can do that with iOS given its strong market position in this segment, but the Mac does not have such an upper hand. Hopefully the EU declares the App Store a monopoly and force their hand.
If this locking down is done properly, i think it will be for the better. I like having control over my computer but i dont think going to custom arm stuff and MAS exclusivity necessarily entails losing control and diversity in workflows. You still have direct access to the file system and ability to create custom scripts and keyboard shortcuts and the like with a sophisticated windowing environment. What you mostly lose out with arm and mas is legacy support. Which is a huge pain in the ass. It means that you have to keep an old computer running an old version of mac os to use your old stuff, which is wholly ****. But thats very much the ideology apple operates under. Notarization is just a middle ground compromise between apples goal of futuristic clean integration and users current pragmatic desire to get work done
Why not? They do that for their other products. By forcing the use of the MAS they guarantee more $$ since they get a slice of the sale.
They are not trying to protect anyone. They want to control the whole ecosystem. If an app does not fit well within their business model, they just ban it from the App Store, just like they have done in the past with iOS. Eventually they will start charging developers 30% of their apps revenue when the centralization of app distribution is complete. F**k them. Is my overpriced computer. I dont need Nanny Cook to tell me what I can or can't install on it.
[doublepost=1554831549][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1554831895][/doublepost]
So Apple is now the government Great analogy. Only that they will charge developers 30 percent for "checking" for E. Coli.
[doublepost=1554832011][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1554831549][/doublepost]
But they cant
[doublepost=1554831895][/doublepost]
.
So Apple is now the government Great analogy. Only that they will charge developers 30 percent for "checking" for E. Coli.
[doublepost=1554832011][/doublepost]
Only 30 percent of their revenue. Just that.
Last edited:
Your links are the ones which are the problem/FALSE.
There is no virus for OS X/macOS, don't confuse a virus with malware, a virus is malware, not the other way around.
There's also no keyloggers, your links proved absolutely nothing.
Oh, and then this, on one of your links I get a WOT warning.
Forcing developers to use the MAS means they get a cut. Right now any apps that are not in the MAS, apple gets nothing. That's why Apple is intent on forcing developers to move to the MAS imo.