So, you didn’t read the article

Yeah, I read it. That’s kind of the point. Apple’s adding more guardrails because people will click Allow on damn near anything without thinking about what they’re actually giving access to. 🙄

Or an update adds it without your knowledge…

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think an app could give itself Full Disk Access without the user explicitly approving it, even during an update.

I read the article, and I think DickHertz’s comment is pretty much right. The article’s example illustrates the point:

For example, Inc. columnist Jason Aten recently discovered that Meta’s Muse AI assistant somehow had synced his entire local Messages database and was using those messages as context for its tasks.

Aten did not understand that the Messages database is stored on the disk (presumably) unencrypted and readable by anything with full disk access. He got a result he didn’t want because he did not understand the implications of granting that permission, and Apple seeks to add more friction to the process to protect users from making that mistake.

Even if it was encrypted, it could be unlocked because with full disk access it can read the local private key, which probably doesn’t need a passphrase because it’s be a pain in the ass for the user to retype that every reboot or more

Starting to see why you shouldn’t let any corporate AI loose on your daily driver yet?

Macs have a hardware secure enclave that apps can use to store keys where other apps can’t access them. Apple itself does not seem to be making adequate use of it here.

I think his point was that apple would abuse it, like they are already doing. Good thing if implemented properly, bad thing if implemented the apple way.

MacOS is an open platform, I am glad you have to jump through a few hoops to put yourself in danger unlike windows

An “open” platform?

Edit: Of course, here come the fanboys lol it’s ok. I was one of you once. You’ll grow.

I can run anything I want on it, what is closed about it?

Being able to run a program on an OS is the bare minimum. Anything not signed by Daddy Apple, you have to add an exception. The moment the exceptions are no longer enough to “protect the user against themselves,” you can’t do a thing. Why? Because it’s a fully closed, walled platform.

It’s like being in prison and being told you’re free because you can walk in the yard.

Downloaded apps that are unsigned just need to be approved in settings

It is clear you don’t know what you are talking about

You own the keys? It is actually extremely clear that you have no clue about what you are talking about. Re-read what I said.

I read it, none of makes sense to anyone that understands how computer work

You argued I couldn’t run anything I wanted, I proved you can

Go learn how an operating system works

No. I said the platform is closed. Not that you could not run anything. I argued that while you still CAN run whatever you want, that does not make it an open platform. Apple is one flag away from removing that right from you, and you won’t be able to do jack shit about it if (when) they do. And thank you, but I know very well how a computer works. I also happen to know macOS very well too, and you, you just don’t my friend. You understand marketing.

It’s ok. Not arguing more than that with a fanboy. I was one of you back in the days. You’ll eventually understand. In the meantime, good luck.

I saw your deleted comment

You are acting dense on purpose and equating security controls to a walled garden

You can disable the controls if you go in to system recovery mode (which will disable protections for the whole OS)

Give it up

you are cute

The Source?

All of computing beyond programming with switches is “protecting the user from themselves.”

“Why use a language? Aren’t you able to perfectly program in binary? I’m not going to waste time building something just because you’re stupid.”