Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #180651

Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy

From David <David.is@home.today>
Newsgroups uk.comp.sys.mac
Subject Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy
Date 2025-03-12 12:40 +0000
Message-ID <m3ddleFjcm1U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <m3d08sFhm6rU1@mid.individual.net> <m3d4adFi7j6U1@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw


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

Back to uk.comp.sys.mac | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-12 10:00 +0000
  Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-12 12:40 +0000
    Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-12 20:52 +0000
      Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy John Hill <watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk> - 2025-03-13 12:00 +0000
        Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-13 15:00 +0000
          Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-13 15:23 +0000
  Re: Howard Oakley - his article on Privacy David <David.is@home.today> - 2025-03-19 14:15 +0000

csiph-web