Apple provides so many services for different parts of macOS that it’s hard to keep track of them. If you want to see a short summary, this article lists all service connections for enterprise network administrators, although it doesn’t detail which services use which servers, for example referring to “macOS updates” in many entries.
Many of you seem surprised to learn that Sequoia’s new XProtect updates come from iCloud, although Apple has been using iCloud for similar purposes for at least the last five years.
One good example that’s used every day on your Mac are the notarization checks sometimes run by Gatekeeper when macOS launches executable code, such as an app. In that case, com.apple.syspolicy processes the app’s notarization ticket looking up ticket: <private>, 2, 1
by trying to fetch its record from iCloud using CloudKit. That’s followed by log entries indicating the network access required to connect with iCloud and check the ticket. Success is reported by com.apple.syspolicy in CKTicketStore network reachability: 1, Mon Aug 26 09:15:45 2024
looking up ticket: <private>, 2, 0
and further lookups. I first reported those checks with iCloud back in Catalina, in 2019.
A simple way to illustrate the differences between this and using the general softwareupdated service is to compare what happens in the log when you ask if there are any updates available.
softwareupdate
When SilentKnight does this, it uses the only supported method, the softwareupdate tool, as used to keep XProtect up to date in all versions of macOS prior to Sequoia. That command hands over to the softwareupdated service to run the check. That in turn uses components of com.apple.SoftwareUpdateController to summarise the update state of that Mac, connect to the Software Update Server, check all the current versions and build numbers of macOS and its ancillaries, and arrive at a list of updates required. This is even more complex than it sounds, as com.apple.SoftwareUpdateController has to check key settings such as whether the root volume is sealed or not.
You can trace this through several thousand log entries, and after around 4.4 seconds and multiple network connections, softwareupdate finally informs SilentKnight that there are no updates available.
xprotect
Running the command sudo xprotect check
in Sequoia is far simpler and quicker, as it checks for just one component’s updates through iCloud. The command connects to XProtectUpdateService in the XprotectFramework private framework in macOS, which in turn fires up CloudKit to connect to iCloud. That fetches a database record and returns the result to XProtectUpdateService, and so back to the xprotect tool as its result. Total time taken is 0.5 second.
As Apple’s intent in changing the management of XProtect and its data appears to be to facilitate more frequent and macOS-specific updates, iCloud is an ideal platform to host this on.
Pinniped with tusks
There is, though, one last thing: what is the walrus? As that might seem an odd question, read these two log entries encountered when browsing what happened with the xprotect check command:
12:08:00.919841 com.apple.cdp XPC Error while fetching walrus status: Error Domain=NSCocoaErrorDomain Code=4099 "The connection to service named com.apple.cdp.daemon was invalidated: failed at lookup with error 3 - No such process." UserInfo={NSDebugDescription=The connection to service named com.apple.cdp.daemon was invalidated: failed at lookup with error 3 - No such process.}
12:08:00.919845 com.apple.cloudkit CoreCDP reports that walrus is undetermined for the logged in account. Error: Error Domain=NSCocoaErrorDomain Code=4099 UserInfo={NSDebugDescription=<private>}
The prospect of an undetermined walrus that can’t be fetched from inside my Mac might seem worrying
Signing and notarization of apps and other executable code is a controversial topic. Over the last decade and more Apple has steadily introduced increasingly demanding standards, now requiring developers to notarize apps and other code they distribute outside the App Store. This article tries to explain why, and how this contributes to Mac security.
I would hope that what we all want is confidence that all executable code that our Mac runs, in particular apps, is exactly as was built by its developer. In addition to that, in the event that any code is found to be malicious, then macOS can promptly protect us by refusing to launch it. The first requirement is thus about verification of apps and code, and the second is about having a system that can block code from being launched in the first place.
CDHashes
The well-proven way to verify that files and bundles haven’t changed is using cryptographic hashes of their contents. Compute a hash, save it in a way that can’t be tampered with, and you can verify a bundle by recomputing its hash and confirming that it hasn’t changed. Apple has been using this for a long time, and its approach is a little more complex, as explained in detail in this excellent tech note.
When an app is signed, hashes are computed for different parts of its contents and assembled into a code directory, a data structure rather than a folder/directory. That data structure is then hashed to form the cdhash, or CDHash with mixed case to aid its reading. Because it’s a hash of hashes, it uniquely identifies that app, bundle or other executable code. CDHashes are thus part of the signing process, and the signature contains those CDHashes. They are also part of the notarization process, in which Apple’s Notary Service signs the CDHashes for code when it undergoes notarization, and that forms the notarization ticket that’s issued for that app, and normally attached or ‘stapled’ to it.
Between them, code signing and notarization thus provide two levels of verification, in a signature attached to the code itself, and in a record kept by Apple following successful notarization.
Unsigned apps
An unsigned app has no CDHashes, so its contents are uncontrolled and no verification is possible. It can change its own contents, morph itself from benign to malicious, forge its identity by posing as a completely different app, or be hijacked to run malicious code. While macOS could compute its CDHashes and Apple could try to track them, there’s no way to verify its identity, so external checks aren’t feasible, and there’s no way to block the code from being launched, as all it would need to do to evade that would be to change itself so its CDHashes changed.
Although macOS running on Intel Macs long tolerated this, from their release four years ago, Apple silicon Macs have refused to run such unsigned code.
Ad-hoc signed apps
Since Apple required code to be signed for Apple silicon Macs, all self-respecting build systems for macOS have automatically signed the code they generate. However, unless the developer has a certificate issued by Apple, by default they use ‘ad hoc’ certificates that are created locally and lack any chain of trust. That enables anyone to create CDHashes at any time, without any traceability to a trusted root certificate.
This is a slight improvement on completely unsigned code, and does enable an app to be identified by its CDHashes, but as they’re so easy to create, there’s no reliable way to verify that the app hasn’t changed since its original build. Although Apple could try to collect those CDHashes, there’s no useful way to block code from being launched, as all an adversary needs is to resign the code to change its CDHashes: they’re simply too labile to be trustworthy.
Certificate signed apps
For many years, before Apple introduced notarization over six years ago, this was the standard expected, but not required, of apps distributed by third-party developers. Although in theory developers could have used certificates provided by other authorities, not all Certificate Authorities are equal in their diligence, and Apple rightly wanted to be responsible for all revocations.
Certificates add control and verification, within limits determined by the certificate user. CDHashes gathered from code can be collected, but again their provenance relies on their user. At one time, they were commonly abused by those distributing malicious software. Although abused certificates were revoked by Apple, before that could happen, the malware had to be detected and identified, which could allow it to be run by many users for long before it could be blocked.
Certificate checks were another problem with this approach. It isn’t practical to check each certificate every time code is to be launched, so approvals have to be cached locally, adding to the delay before any revocation becomes effective.
Notarization
To address the limitations of signing code using developer certificates, Apple introduced the process of notarization. In this context, it adds:
CDHashes from notarization are known to Apple, and stored in its database, for quicker online checks, and more rapid revocation.
Apple screens apps being notarized to detect those that may be malicious.
Apple has a complete copy of every app that has been notarized, and already knows its CDHashes.
This finally checks the provenance of all code being run, through its CDHashes; if they’re not already known to Apple, then that build of the app can’t have been notarized, and can be blocked from launching, provided the user doesn’t disable notarization checks. Screening for malware forces those trying to get malicious code notarized to adopt techniques of obfuscation, but even if those are successful, Apple already has a copy of that app and its CDHashes. That eliminates much of the delay incurred by certificate-signed apps. Together these have proved sufficient disincentive to malware developers to try to abuse notarization.
Key features of notarization are thus:
Verification that the app or code hasn’t changed since it was built by its developer, up to the moment that it’s run.
Independent verification against Apple’s database.
Rapid blocking if the app or code is discovered to be malicious.
Apple is provided with a full copy of the app or code, to aid any further investigation.
All apps or code are checked independently for evidence that they’re malicious, before they can be released.
If you can come up with a system that achieves those and could replace notarization, I’m sure that Apple would love to hear of it.
Modern Macs and macOS feature multiple layers of protection, most of which I have recently described. This article tries to assemble them into an overview to see how they all fit together, and protect your Mac from startup to shutdown. There are also many additional options in macOS and third-party products that can augment security, but I’ll here concentrate on making best use of those that come with a modern Mac and macOS. My recommendations are for the ‘standard’ user, as a starting point. If your needs differ, then you may of course choose to be different, but should always do so in the full knowledge of what you are doing and what its penalties are.
Startup
Whether your Mac has a T2 or Apple silicon chip, it’s designed to boot securely, which means that every stage of the boot process, from its Boot ROM to running the kernel and its extensions, is verified as being as Apple intends. To ensure that, your Mac should run at Full Security. For a T2 model, that means disabling its ability to boot from external disks; for an Apple silicon Mac, that means no third-party kernel extensions. If you need to run your Mac at reduced security, that should be an informed decision when there’s no good alternative.
A vital part of the Secure Boot process is the firmware loaded by the Boot ROM. That needs to be kept up to date by updating to the latest minor release of the major version of macOS. That doesn’t prevent your Mac from staying with an older supported version of macOS, as Apple supplies the same firmware updates for all three supported versions of macOS.
The System volume should be signed and sealed, as the SSV created by a macOS installer or updater. System Integrity Protection (SIP) should also be fully enabled, as without it many macOS security features work differently or not at all. Some need to disable specific SIP features, but again that should only be set when you’re fully aware of their effects and consequences, and should be the minimum needed for the purpose.
User Data
Having got the system up and running, the boot process moves to what is in mutable storage on the Mac’s Data volume. In the internal SSD of a modern Mac, that’s always encrypted, thanks to the Secure Enclave. Although that might appear sufficient, you should always turn FileVault on if your Mac starts up from its internal SSD. That ensures the encryption is protected by your password: an intruder then has to know your password before they can unlock the contents of its Data volume. They have limited attempts to guess that password before the Mac locks them out from making any further attempts. As FileVault comes free from any performance penalty, there’s no good reason for not using it.
Good security is even more important for Data volumes on external boot disks, where FileVault is just as important, but needs additional physical measures to ensure the external disk isn’t mislaid or stolen. That’s a more complex issue, for which the simplest solution is to start your Mac up from its internal SSD with the benefit from FileVault there.
Run Apps
With the user logged in successfully, and the Data volume fully accessible, the next stage to consider is running apps and other software. For this there’s another series of security layers.
When an app is launched or other code run, Gatekeeper will first check it, and in many circumstances run a check for malware using XProtect. Those shouldn’t be disabled, or macOS will still make those checks, but will simply ignore the results. XProtect looks for evidence that the code about to be run matches that of known malware. Although on its own this won’t detect unknown malware, it’s an effective screen against what’s most common. You also need to keep your Mac up to date with the latest security data updates, as those can change every week or two as new malware is identified and included.
Currently, no well-known malware has been notarized by Apple, and most isn’t even signed using a trusted developer certificate. Most therefore attempt to trick you into bypassing checks made by macOS. In Sonoma and earlier, the most common is to show you how to use the Finder’s Open command to bypass the requirement for notarization. As that has changed in Sequoia, those who develop malware have had to adapt, and some now try to trick you into dropping a malicious script into Terminal. Expect these to become more sophisticated and persuasive as more upgrade to Sequoia.
There are simple rules you can apply to avoid getting caught by these. The first time you run any new app supplied outside macOS or the App Store, drag the app to your Applications folder and double-click it in the Finder to open it. If it can’t be launched that way, don’t be tempted to use the Finder’s Open bypass, or (in Sequoia) to enable the app in Privacy & Security settings. Instead, ask its developer why it isn’t correctly notarized. Never use an unconventional method to launch an app: that’s a giveaway that it’s malicious and you shouldn’t go anywhere near it.
macOS now checks the hashes (CDHashes) of apps and code it doesn’t already recognise, for notarization and known malware. Those checks are run over a connection to iCloud that doesn’t need the user to be signed in. Don’t intentionally or inadvertently block those connections, for instance using a software firewall, as they’re in your interest.
Private Data
Traditional Unix permissions weren’t intended to protect your privacy. Now so many of us keep important or valuable secrets in our Home folders, privacy protection is essential. While you might trust an app to check through some files, you may not expect or want that app to be looking up details of your bank cards and accounts.
Privacy protection is centred on a system known as TCC (Transparency, Consent and Control), and its labyrinthine Privacy & Security settings. One of the most tedious but important routine tasks is to check through these every so often to ensure that nothing is getting access to what it shouldn’t.
No matter how conscientious we might be, there’s always the request for access that you don’t have time to read properly, or items that end up getting peculiar consents, like a text editor that has access to your Photos library or your Mac’s camera. Take the time to check through each category and disable those you don’t think are in your best interests. If you get through a lot of new apps, you might need to do this every week or two, but it needn’t be as frequent in normal use, and shouldn’t become an obsession.
There’s some dispute over whether it’s better to leave an app turned off in a category that you control, like Full Disk Access, or to remove it. I tend to disable rather than remove, with the intention of removal later, but seldom get round to that.
Downloaded Apps
While macOS continues checking apps in Gatekeeper and XProtect, there are a couple of other important protections you need to know about. Since macOS Catalina, every 24 hours or so macOS runs a paired set of scans by XProtect Remediator, looking for signs of known malware. If it finds any, it then attempts to remove, or remediate, that. The snag is that it does this in complete silence, so you don’t know whether it has run any scans, and you don’t know if it came across anything nasty, or removed it. I like to know about such things, and have written my own software that lets me find out, in SilentKnight, Skint and XProCheck. One day Apple might follow suit.
Some browsers like Safari have a potentially dangerous setting, in which they will automatically open files they consider to be safe, once they have been downloaded. This can include Zip archives that might not be as innocent as you expect. If you leave that behaviour set, you could discover your Downloads folder with all sorts of items in it. I much prefer to turn that off and handle those downloads myself. You’ll find this control in Safari’s General settings, where it’s called Open “safe” files after downloading.
Bad Links
Most of the protection so far relies more on features in your Mac and macOS, and less on your habits and behaviour. But it’s the user who is the kingpin in both security and privacy protection. Nowhere is this more important than dealing with links in web pages, emails, messages, and elsewhere. If you’re happy to click on a link without checking it carefully, you can so easily end up in the company of your attackers, inviting them into your Mac and all your personal data.
Unless it’s a trusted web page or contact, I always inspect each link before even considering whether to open it. For emails, my general rule is never, and I inspect the text source of each message to see what that really links to. It’s harder on the web, where even ads placed by Google can whisk your browser into an ambush. One invaluable aid here is Link Unshortener, from the App Store, which is a ridiculously cheap and simple way to understand just where those cryptic shortened links will take you. If you can’t convince yourself that a link is safe and wholesome, then don’t whatever you do click on it, just pass on in safety.
Summary
That has been a whirlwind tour through getting the best from macOS security, summarised in the following diagram. Fuller details about each of those topics are easy to find using the Search tool at the top right of this page. There’s plenty more to read, and for deeper technical information, try Apple’s Platform Security Guide.
Login
