Apple's macOS Catalina is first to require app notarization by default

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    George IVGeorge IV Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    What will the impact be on old versions of software, or software no longer maintained by the original developer? Will users lose access to these apps or be forced to upgrade ($$$) to new versions just to meet this requirement?
    dysamoria
  • Reply 22 of 34
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 2,255member
    No one has answered the very basic and important question: will power users still be allowed to override this security feature to run old apps or other apps that aren’t run through Apple?
  • Reply 23 of 34
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,408member
    dysamoria said:
    No one has answered the very basic and important question: will power users still be allowed to override this security feature to run old apps or other apps that aren’t run through Apple?
    Apps build locally will run of course (so you can run all that has a source package).
    Apps already on the system before upgrading will also run.
    Apps that don't need an installer will almost certainly run.
    Someone suggested that unsigned apps can be installed, that does make sense because no claim is made about the owner (maker) of the software.
    It is probable that the authorization mechanism can be disabled or circumvented, but thats something unknown right know.
  • Reply 24 of 34
    bagpiperbagpiper Posts: 9member
    I am installing the beta on one of my macbooks as I am reading this article- very disappointed with the potential issues of  the apps that I regularly use that do not come from the app store

    Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    serniko97elijahg
  • Reply 25 of 34
    bagpiperbagpiper Posts: 9member
    razorpit said:
    Apple doesn't force you to run MacOS on their hardware....
    No but they sure as hell nag the sh*t out of you until you do.
    If are forced to use MacOS if you want to buy new hardware going forward, so your new $25k Mac Pro wont be able to run a 3rd party app that Apple wont sign because of political or religious conflicts with Apple board ? and not because if malicious code ?
    razorpitelijahg
  • Reply 26 of 34
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,173member
    ouy97778 said:
    Soli said:
    Not unexpected, but that's a lot of whining over something small. If you don't want to have your app notarized then don't sign it.
    Do you know for a fact that unsigned apps do not need to be notarized? It seems like it but I haven't seen any confirmation of this.

    Also there is a lot of applications that are signed out there that will not work unless the developer decides to get it notarized and publish a new release.

    I hope there is some kind of defaults override for users who know what they are doing.
    This seems very clear to me.



    watto_cobrajony0fastasleepkevin kee
  • Reply 27 of 34
    bagpiper said:
    I am installing the beta on one of my macbooks as I am reading this article- very disappointed with the potential issues of  the apps that I regularly use that do not come from the app store
    Have you any news? Is it possible to bypass this “feature”? Thanks.
  • Reply 28 of 34
    sirozhasirozha Posts: 571member
    sirozha said:
    If you don’t understand how this would be useful you are not a power user. I use software written by so many entities, and some of them no longer update the software. The new macOS would make my life a complete hell trying to chase every developer to see if they would release a new version authenticated by Apple. A percentage of the software will not be able to run on the new macOS at all. You know what that means? For the first time in my life I will not be upgrading to the new macOS. 

    If you have the app installed already you will not be affected obviously and the developers will only bring out a new version when they comply, and if they no longer support the app it is not even an issue, so your routine does not have to change..  

    Only thing prevented is that you install an app that tries to trick you into believing it is from a trusted developer even though it isn't..
    Are you sure that the already installed unauthenticated apps will run? Even if they do, what happens if I need to reinstall the system from scratch? 
  • Reply 29 of 34
    knowitall said:
    pigybank said:
    I hope there’s a way to manually override it.  I don’t want Apple deciding what I can or cannot run on my Mac. 
    The article explains that notarization means that if developer X makes an app that you want to install, that your Mac will verify that the app you are installing is indeed from developer X..

    So, your reaction to that is 'I hope I can override it'... i.o.w. you want to be able to install an app that pretends it is from developer X but in fact isn't?  Yeah, I can definitely see how that would be useful..

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 
    Your logic if failing: not signing doesn't exclude kosher apps.
    I don't see your point. Unsigned apps are not affected by this new policy.
  • Reply 30 of 34
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 3,078member
    From WWDC 2019, session 701:




    mattinoz
  • Reply 31 of 34
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 987member
    michelb76 said:
    How will this impact open source software, homebrew, etc?
    Homebrew and other unix utilities are not 'Mac apps, installer packages, and kernel extensions' so they should work just fine.
    They are still executables though, and they need to be signed otherwise they won't work; unless you explicitly allow them with right click > allow.

    Apple unfortunately seems to be blindly marching down a road to slowly closing off Mac OS, with this and the dropping of 32-bit bit support, their mould is fitting less and less people. 

    "You can always choose to run any software on your system" until we decide you can't.
    edited June 25
  • Reply 32 of 34
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 3,078member
    elijahg said:
    michelb76 said:
    How will this impact open source software, homebrew, etc?
    Homebrew and other unix utilities are not 'Mac apps, installer packages, and kernel extensions' so they should work just fine.
    They are still executables though, and they need to be signed otherwise they won't work; unless you explicitly allow them with right click > allow.

    Apple unfortunately seems to be blindly marching down a road to slowly closing off Mac OS, with this and the dropping of 32-bit bit support, their mould is fitting less and less people. 

    "You can always choose to run any software on your system" until we decide you can't.
    You only need to do that once, it's not a big deal. You can also disable Gatekeeper altogether if it bothers you. 

    The "no more open source on Mac!" fearmongering has been around for years. It's not true until it is; until then it's just FUD.
  • Reply 33 of 34
    Apple is removing support for 32bit app, but is it in general or only for the App Store ones?

    Also, I know this is controversial but... will the Gatekeeper thing means that pirated software will be impossible to install?

    I still don’t understand if we can bypass it.
  • Reply 34 of 34
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 3,078member
    serniko97 said:
    Apple is removing support for 32bit app, but is it in general or only for the App Store ones?

    Also, I know this is controversial but... will the Gatekeeper thing means that pirated software will be impossible to install?

    I still don’t understand if we can bypass it.
    In general.

    You can install whatever you want, as long as it’s 64 bit.
Sign In or Register to comment.