If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , android
wrote: yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. The point is that root access, if "achieved" will have no power over critical parts of the system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System...ity_Protection I've been running this iMac without a root account for nearly 3 years. Prior Mac's root account was used exactly twice over a period of nearly 6 years and only because I was doing things out of curiosity and experimentation that weren't "needed" to be done. Sudo is enough. The article that you refer to implies that SIP can be disabled. only by rebooting into recovery mode, disabling sip and then rebooting back to the system. do you think malware is going to somehow be able to do all of that without the user being involved? not a chance in hell. apple has also said the way to disable it may change. that's how it's currently done so that developers can update their software to be fully compatible in the event they need to do something that is affected by it. once 10.11 is released, it might become harder. nobody knows that yet. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 8/6/2015 1:17 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: It strikes me as being bad form to let users have physical access to their computers and even worse form to allow them permissions to install anything on them. Bring back the mainframe I say. Many software publishers would like to see that happen. Except, what you call mainframe, they call the cloud. no they wouldn't. The all knowing speaks again, for all publishers. as if you do? Never claimed that, you proposed to speak for all. selling apps is big business. apps use the cloud. apps are not going away. twisting. there is no twisting. Cough! cough! you said 'many software publishers would like to see that happen' (quoted above), referring to users not being able to install apps. Yep! that is flat out *false*. How do you KNOW that. One of your biggest problems is your total failure to distinguish fact from opinion. You have absolutely no proof of what all software developers although industry is definitely moving to the cloud, it still requires the user to have and install native apps to access the cloud. apps are *not* going away nor do 'many software publishers' want that. Nope! -- PeterN |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 8/6/2015 1:17 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , sid wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. thus the nickname 'rootless', which means means root can do less. the official name is system integrity protection. only code that's codesigned to make system modifications can do so, such as what happens during a system update. the only way around that would be to crack the codesigning and then spoof it so that it has the proper credentials. good luck on that one. the end result is that it's for all intents, not possible to hack. nothing is truly impossible, but the bar is *extremely* high, *much* higher than before. hackers will go after easier targets. like android. Is this the same nospam who, about a few year ago, that OSX was not subject to hacker attacks. Too bad our government doesn't listen to you. All those data stealing attacks would have been prevented. -- PeterN |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article ,
PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2015 1:17 PM, nospam wrote: In article , sid wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. thus the nickname 'rootless', which means means root can do less. the official name is system integrity protection. only code that's codesigned to make system modifications can do so, such as what happens during a system update. the only way around that would be to crack the codesigning and then spoof it so that it has the proper credentials. good luck on that one. the end result is that it's for all intents, not possible to hack. nothing is truly impossible, but the bar is *extremely* high, *much* higher than before. hackers will go after easier targets. like android. Is this the same nospam who, about a few year ago, that OSX was not subject to hacker attacks. Too bad our government doesn't listen to you. All those data stealing attacks would have been prevented. Well, the creator of the original PC (unless you count CP/M stuff), the Big Blue has decided to shovel in thousands of Macs to protect their Big Data... -- teleportation kills |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
nospam wrote:
In article , sid wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. So the root user is not really root then. So what they are doing is changing roots name to "something else" and giving "something else" an encrypted password. Ace! if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. That's because you're not root. -- sid |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
Alan Browne wrote:
Sudo is enough. Absolutely! -- sid |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
On 8/6/2015 5:36 PM, android wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2015 1:17 PM, nospam wrote: In article , sid wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. thus the nickname 'rootless', which means means root can do less. the official name is system integrity protection. only code that's codesigned to make system modifications can do so, such as what happens during a system update. the only way around that would be to crack the codesigning and then spoof it so that it has the proper credentials. good luck on that one. the end result is that it's for all intents, not possible to hack. nothing is truly impossible, but the bar is *extremely* high, *much* higher than before. hackers will go after easier targets. like android. Is this the same nospam who, about a few year ago, that OSX was not subject to hacker attacks. Too bad our government doesn't listen to you. All those data stealing attacks would have been prevented. Well, the creator of the original PC (unless you count CP/M stuff), the Big Blue has decided to shovel in thousands of Macs to protect their Big Data... I am not arguing that OSX is not more secure than Windows. I am simply pointing that certain folks here overstate the case for OSX system security. -- PeterN |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , PeterN
wrote: selling apps is big business. apps use the cloud. apps are not going away. twisting. there is no twisting. Cough! cough! take some medicine. you said 'many software publishers would like to see that happen' (quoted above), referring to users not being able to install apps. Yep! that is flat out *false*. How do you KNOW that. because i'm a software developer and know far more about what goes on in the industry than you ever will. One of your biggest problems is your total failure to distinguish fact from opinion. You have absolutely no proof of what all software developers i never said anything about all software developers. more of your lies and twists. you said 'many software developers' want it, which is totally false. it's as simple as that. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , PeterN
wrote: yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. thus the nickname 'rootless', which means means root can do less. the official name is system integrity protection. only code that's codesigned to make system modifications can do so, such as what happens during a system update. the only way around that would be to crack the codesigning and then spoof it so that it has the proper credentials. good luck on that one. the end result is that it's for all intents, not possible to hack. nothing is truly impossible, but the bar is *extremely* high, *much* higher than before. hackers will go after easier targets. like android. Is this the same nospam who, about a few year ago, that OSX was not subject to hacker attacks. i never said anything even close to that. that also has absolutely nothing to do with what i wrote above about rootless. more of your twists and bull****. Too bad our government doesn't listen to you. All those data stealing attacks would have been prevented. straw man. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Mac users - be aware
In article , sid
wrote: Since the weakest link in the chain is always the user unsuspectingly installing malware, Apple's next major iteration of OS X will have so-called rootless operation making it near impossible for the user to let in the worst malware. yep. even if an exploit can crack root, it won't be able to do anything. How will that work then? Surely, if root access is achieved it's game over. because in 10.11, root can no longer modify system files and other critical files. So the root user is not really root then. So what they are doing is changing roots name to "something else" and giving "something else" an encrypted password. Ace! completely wrong. if you crack root or even intentionally use sudo to run as root, you still can't compromise the system. it won't work. That's because you're not root. also wrong. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple-Verizon's latest ingratiating, self-aware, pandering iPhone ad | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 4 | May 14th 14 01:29 AM |
Are you aware about your health?? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 1 | May 21st 07 06:53 PM |
ICM-aware image viewer? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 7 | April 20th 06 07:59 AM |
ACDSee 7 ICC Aware? | Nathan Gutman | Digital Photography | 5 | January 6th 06 05:59 PM |
viewer/album software that is version aware and can tag photos? | peter | Digital Photography | 6 | August 12th 04 09:50 PM |