←back to thread

MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

(sigpipe.macromates.com)
2031 points jrk | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
usmannk ◴[] No.23275922[source]
It seems like there is a lot of confusion here as to whether this is real or not. I've been able to confirm the behavior in the post by:

- Using a new, random executable. Even echo $rand_int will work. Edit: What I mean here is generate your rand int beforehand and statically include it in your script.

- Using a fresh filename too. Just throw a rand int at the end there. e.g. /tmp/test4329.sh

I MITMd myself while recording the network traffic and, sure enough, there is a request to ocsp.apple.com with a hash in the URL path and a bunch of binary data in the response body. Unsure what it is yet but the URL suggests it is generating a cert for the binary and checking it. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Certificate_Status_Prot...

Here's the URL I saw:

http://ocsp.apple.com/ocsp-devid01/ME4wTKADAgEAMEUwQzBBMAkGB...

Edit2: Anyone know what this hash format is? It's not quite base64, nor is it multiple base64 strings separated with '+'s but it seems similar...

Edit3: Here is the exact filename and file I used: https://gist.github.com/UsmannK/abb4b239c98ee45bdfcc5b284bf0...

Edit4 (final one probably...): On subsequent attempts I'm only seeing a request to https://api.apple-cloudkit.com and not the OCSP one anymore. Curiously, there's no headers at all. It is just checking for connectivity.

replies(13): >>23275956 #>>23276180 #>>23277591 #>>23277808 #>>23278027 #>>23278103 #>>23278258 #>>23278367 #>>23278388 #>>23279695 #>>23281103 #>>23284359 #>>23420492 #
rurban ◴[] No.23279695[source]
It's called lockdown for a reason. Apple was just the very first to implement centralized binary blacklisting, revocation. They call it notarization.

Problem is, that they did it unannounced. There must be really some weird stuff going on in those managers heads. How can they possibly think to go away with that?

replies(9): >>23280072 #>>23280091 #>>23280191 #>>23280553 #>>23281072 #>>23281321 #>>23281656 #>>23282265 #>>23290257 #
kevinh456 ◴[] No.23280191[source]
There was nothing "unannounced" about it. Notarization was introduced at WWDC 2018 and announced as required at WWDC 2019. Every macOS developer should have been aware of this requirement. It was a special project for my apps.
replies(2): >>23280447 #>>23284943 #
ghayes ◴[] No.23280447[source]
I believe the concern here is that this is affecting not just macOS developers, but all developers who use macOS. That's an important distinction.
replies(1): >>23280723 #
pjmlp ◴[] No.23280723[source]
Developers who use macOS as shiny GNU/Linux replacement are only getting what they deserve, they should have supported Linux OEMs to start with.

Those that show up at FOSDEM, carrying their beloved macBooks and iPads while pretending to be into FOSS.

I use Apple devices knowingly what they are for, not as replacement for something else.

replies(3): >>23281407 #>>23282093 #>>23282123 #
fluffything ◴[] No.23282093[source]
I've partially switched from MacOS X to Linux now that wayland pipewire is reaching a mostly functional state and am quite happy with it.

It took me maybe 150 hours to do the switch though during quarantine, and I still haven't managed to be able to properly connect to SMB at work...

replies(2): >>23283123 #>>23284533 #
vetinari ◴[] No.23284533[source]
What problem do you have connecting to SMB?

It's one of the things that work better for me on Linux than on MacOS (no problem with browsing shares, no disappearing shares, no problem with non-normalized unicode filenames).

replies(1): >>23298988 #
fluffything ◴[] No.23298988{3}[source]
It just doesn't connect / mount at all. Last time I tried to debug it, this was caused due to a too old samba protocol version being used on the Windows side.

On MacOSX, I just click on connect to server, and it works for me "as is".

replies(2): >>23299802 #>>23309939 #
1. bwat49 ◴[] No.23309939{4}[source]
> Last time I tried to debug it, this was caused due to a too old samba protocol version being used on the Windows side

IIRC, the only smb version that would be considered too old is smbv1 (which I'd hope they are not using on the windows side... its quite insecure and is deprecated by microsoft).