Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: David Newsgroups: uk.comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 12:40:14 +0000 Lines: 107 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 1k+31U7vhCt1yGPtpXUphwZP1JVfusezkQZ+NFmjOTMR3ERCzR Cancel-Lock: sha1:B8vRzsvwuJy4qsxw5KNJ3+SmoDQ= sha256:34NX5YkeFVajW+fBCkL3Yeb64V5TDayTMyK4woMbhZU= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com uk.comp.sys.mac:180651 On 12/03/2025 10:00, David wrote: > On 12/03/2025 08:51, David wrote: > >> https://eclecticlight.co/2025/03/12/why-all-this-privacy-protection- >> an- overview/ >> >> //When you run an app, it naturally runs with your full user’s >> privileges, and has access to everything according to the permissions >> set on folders and files. Just as you want your privileges to give the >> Finder and your mail client access to all your emails and their >> enclosures, all other apps that you run enjoy those same privileges. >> But would you also want a third-party note-taking or photo-editing app >> to have that same level of access, even without your knowledge? >> Similarly, while you want FaceTime to have access to your Mac’s camera >> and microphone, would you be happy for any other app to access them >> without your being asked?// >> >> ChatGPT says .... >> >> Howard Oakley's article gives a solid rundown of how macOS has evolved >> its privacy protection — it’s no longer just about file permissions >> but about controlling app access to sensitive data and devices. >> Interesting to see how macOS 15 Sequoia now re-prompts users about >> screen recording permissions. >> >> The focus on consent (like giving apps access to your camera or mic) >> versus intent (like choosing to save a file in Documents) is a smart >> way to break down how Apple handles privacy. And that attribution >> chain concept — tracing what app requested access, especially for >> command-line tools — makes sense, though it must be a headache for >> devs trying to get everything right. >> >> = >> >> I asked - "Can you see how EtreCheck can get around all this protection?" >> >> = >> >> EtreCheck, like any other macOS app, can’t technically "get around" >> these privacy protections — but it can *request* the necessary >> permissions and use clever methods to gather system information. Let’s >> break down how it likely works: >> >> 1. **Full Disk Access (FDA):** >>     EtreCheck guides users to grant it **Full Disk Access** — a >> powerful permission that lets it bypass many of the privacy barriers >> protecting locations like `~/Documents`, `~/Downloads`, iCloud Drive, >> and Time Machine backups. Once FDA is enabled, EtreCheck can gather >> detailed information about your disk, logs, and system configuration >> without constant consent prompts. >> >> 2. **Attribution Chain and Helper Tools:** >>     EtreCheck may use helper tools or command-line utilities (like >> `kextstat`, `ps`, or `tccutil`) to gather data. These tools run under >> the main app’s permissions, so if the app has FDA, its subprocesses >> inherit those privileges through the attribution chain. This lets >> EtreCheck access data indirectly — like running shell commands to >> inspect running processes or kernel extensions. >> >> 3. **Entitlements and Info.plist:** >>     EtreCheck might include specific **entitlements** baked into its >> app signature, allowing it to request camera/microphone access or >> inspect protected folders. The Info.plist likely contains the required >> consent dialog text, so macOS knows what to show users when requesting >> permissions. >> >> 4. **Terminal and Scripting:** >>     If you manually run EtreCheck or any of its tools from Terminal >> (especially if Terminal has FDA), it gains even more power, as >> Terminal itself acts as the "parent app" in the attribution chain. >> >> 5. **Transparency to Users:** >>     EtreCheck emphasizes that it’s "safe" by highlighting its read- >> only nature and the lack of network access — but once you’ve granted >> it FDA, it can access vast amounts of data. It doesn’t technically >> "bypass" protections — it just uses the permissions you give it. >> >> Would you like to dig into how we can check what permissions EtreCheck >> has on your system, or perhaps run a `tccutil` command to reset them? >> Let me know how deep you want to go! >> >> = >> >> No, I'm not running EtreCheck on this iMac - I erased my hard drive to >> eradicate it. I don't trust a Developer who will not communicate with me! >> >> = >> >> ChatGPT said: >> >> That makes perfect sense — trust is key, especially when it comes to >> apps with deep system access like EtreCheck. Let me know if you want >> to dive into other ways to monitor or lock down system privacy and >> permissions on your iMac! > > > Views welcomed! Not everyone seems to like Howard's efforts to help us! https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256004656?sortBy=rank Your thoughts, please. -- David