Tom Bishop wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Warren Young <wyml@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Jul 29, 2015, at 5:40 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Warren Young <wyml@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Security is *always* opposed to convenience.
>> >
>> > False. OS X by default runs only signed binaries, and if they come
>> > from the App Store they run in a sandbox. User gains significant
>> > security with this, and are completely unaware of it. There is no
>> > inconvenience.
>>
>> You must not use OS X regularly, else you’d know there is plenty of
>> inconvenience in this policy. There’s a whole lot of good software that
>> is both unsigned and not in the App Store. Examples:
>>
>> a. Most open source software. Many of these projects (e.g. KiCad) can
>> barely manage to serve community-provided unsigned binaries on OS X as
>> it
>> is. Signing apps and managing the App Store submission process is out
>> of the question. The next version of OS X will block all the third-party
>> app epositories (e.g. Homebrew) by default, in order to provide better
>> security:
>>
>> http://www.imore.com/os-x-el-capitan-faq
>>
>> b. Most network monitoring software, because putting en0 into
>> promiscuous mode violates the Gatekeeper rules. (Wireshark, etc.)
Some App Store
>> networking software (e.g. RubberNet) manages to get around this by
>> offering a second app download from the author’s web page. You don’t
call that
>> inconvenient?
>>
>> c. Low-level utilities, such as Karabiner and Scroll Reverser, since
>> they also need to bypass the sandbox guidelines to do their job.
>>
>> On top of all that, to bypass Gatekeeper, you need to right-click an app
>> and disable Gatekeeper for it on the first launch. Another
>> inconvenience.
>>
>> I’m not saying Gatekeeper and such are bad, only that they are in fact
>> exemplars of the rule: better security always causes greater
>> inconvenience.
>>
>> > What is the inconvenience of encrypting your device compared to the
>> > security?
>>
>> I can’t hook my iPad up to my PC and browse it as just another
>> filesystem, as I can with any other digital camera or MP3 player.
>> Apple must do this in order to prevent sideloading malicious apps.
>>
>> Did you see my exchange with James Byrne? His bogus counter to my claim
>> that iPads
>>
>
> +Snip+
>
> Can someone mod this thread, I'm sure everyone has an opinion about this I
> know I do and obviously so do other but I think the fedora mail list would
> be more suited to this discussion.
>
> I think enough points and counter points have been said, lets move onto
> more relevant Centos Topics.
>
Seconded. All this appears, in the few I've glanced at for a while, seem
to be Apple fan stuff.
mark
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
