I’m very glad this advice has been as niche as it has been. It’s awful advice unless you really know what you’re doing and why you’re doing it.
Anyway, I still run 10.15 daily and the only thing that I’d call slow by design is the thermal design of the laptop it runs on. Even so I think just thoroughly clearing dust out of it gave it at least another few more years of being a pretty decent laptop.
Nice you found out and mention it here.
It has been like that since new generation x86 CPUs provide compatibility with the previous generation with more speed... Pushing an uncalculable number of tons of perfectly working hardware to the trash, most of the time to keep executing the same tasks with an updated software.
When the software performance/optimization declines, the hardware is accused of being too old. Even if hardware speed never declines with age. I understand we need new hardware for new usage; but not for a new version of Windows, Office or MacOS.
Just check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law
It goes the same with webpages load, library number and sizes... always a declining optimization with faster hardware.
However, seems SIP can only be disabled temporarily (until next reboot?), at least according to https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/disabling... but it's unclear for how long it is disabled.
SIP is personal preference. Personally I find that Mac OS is too buggy with SIP enabled. I had an issue where disk space was disappearing into a directory that was hidden by SIP, because the OS was leaking update images.
These two OS’s have very different types of user and attacker (speaking in generalities), and thus different security trade-offs during design.
The main risk with Mac is that someone downloads a “Mac cleaner” or something similar which installs malware, or that malware is hidden in a legitimate looking app, and this is what SIP protects against. Even informed power users can make these mistakes - it only takes downloading one compromised utility!
IMO for most ‘home’ use where it is used as a main OS by a person without too much familiarity with computers, Ubuntu and many Linux distros are probably less secure than Mac - for instance the average user is conditioned to run random terminal commands they find on the internet and give them sudo permission. Obviously I’m excluding the majority of use-cases such as routers, consoles, tvs, servers where users access to the underlying OS is heavily restricted.
That wasn't related to SIP, so I don't think we can just throw random unrelated security issues against SIP to justify it being a bad thing.
Bedsides, is the moral of the Zoom story really that application Developers should be given unfettered access to the OS and the freedom to do whatever they want? It sounds like the opposite - an example of exactly why security has to be built into the OS and can't be left to companies like Zoom.
Plus, some categories of technical users like sysadmins are probably the worst possible people to disable SIP because even though the probability of attack is much lower, the potential impact is orders of magnitude higher.
I always ignore spam text messages, but got a phishing attack message made to look like a USPS update about 2 months ago they almost fooled me because I had a legitimate package that was missing. I clicked the link, and even entered my email address in the landing page form and was about to enter credit card details for a $2 ‘redelivery’ charge - which I was also primed for because I’d recently paid USPS a similar amount to redirect my mail after moving.
I was creating a one-time use virtual card to make the payment when my thoughts caught up with me and I realized it wasn’t a legitimate page.
Good old Apple, slowing my(?) Computer down daily to protect me from myself.
Does anyone tally attacks by type? i suspect most successful attacks against sysadmins are via social engineering/xss/token stealing on their perfectly uncompromised machines rather than malware.
Either 1) we say that Mac-using developers are stupider than Linux using-developers, and it’s irresponsible for Mac-using developers specifically to turn it off.
Or 2) we say that Linux is “horribly” insecure and it’s irresponsible for developers to use Linux whatsoever and they should go out and buy a Mac immediately to save themselves.
Or 3) we say that Mac-using developers are not stupider than Linux using developers and it’s fine to turn it off if they want.
Personally I’ll go for #3.
SIP does not protect you against installing and running malware.
SIP protects certain system components on the Mac, that's all.
Also on Windows, the first thing I do is disable the Windows Defender. And believe it or not, I haven't had any viruses for as long as I can remember using computers.
On the other hand, half a year ago I've investigated a compromised macOS system at work where the user clicked a wrong button on some innocently looking dialog and ended up with a rogue extension in Google Chrome which was not possible to uninstall. Why didn't SIP prevent that from happening?
Prove it.
Try for yourself: prove your have not done [X] in the last 10 years.
They've claimed to have never gotten a virus. They have no way of knowing if this happened, as a virus isn't going to demonstrate it's presence.
1. I never downloaded malware
2. Windows Defender is useless and doesn't catch anything.
Because a Chrome extension is not part of the system. The clue is in the name, System Integrity Protection. Were Chrome extensions something that interacted withe kernel, or other system functions, you'd have a point. Arguably XProtect could've kicked in, but now would expect the software running the extension to have reasonable protection agains that sort of thing.
Linux doesn't have SIP, or Gatekeeper, or XProtect, but you know it doesn't have any of those features. The developers know it doesn't have any of those features, so the absence of those features are part of the attack surface that the vendor (in this case the Linux OSS community) is aware of in the threat model.
If you have SIP disabled, no-one is trying to solve any problems that this causes for you. Anyone writing malware to target a SIP-disabled system knows Apple isn't trying to patch those issues because having SIP disabled is not a valid system state they're trying to protect. There won't be patches for you, and given that it's closed source, it's not like you can fix it yourself.
I don't think that running malware on your computer is a good idea. Just don't do it.
I don't think that having vulnerabilities on your computer is a good idea. Just don't do it. /s
> SIP does not solve any problems.
Of course it does. We might disagree with the tradeoffs it's making, it might not be worth it at all, it might be a wrong approach from the start. But saying it does not solve any problems is disingenuous at best.
SIP absolutely solves a specific problem. It prevents rogue software from writing to protected areas. Whether that matters to you is your business, but to suggest no-one else should want to prevent any old homebrew package or DMG installing a keylogger is a bit silly.
This is a misreading of the linked document. Disabling SIP is permanent until re-enabled. That's why the document is warning you to only disable it temporarily and then re-enable it. The warning wouldn't be necessary if it automatically re-enabled.
"Warning
Disable SIP only temporarily to perform necessary tasks, and reenable it as soon as possible. Failure to reenable SIP when you are done testing leaves your computer vulnerable to malicious code."
> The main task of SIP on Mac is to protect the safety and integrity of the system files and directories, preventing them from modifications or attacks from unauthenticated processes. It brings a high level of security to the entire system.
The feature has only existed for around 7 years and macOS wasn’t horribly broken before that time.