AppleInsider Staff
When Apple's OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion launches this summer, it will feature the new Gatekeeper security system which requires that apps be certified through the Developer ID program to ensure seamless installation.
Gatekeeper is a new anti-malware feature that, according to Apple, will filter out malicious third-party applications and prevent OS X users from "unknowingly downloading and installing malicious software." To that end, the system implements a hierarchy of security that is based on digital certificates embedded in a software's code.
At its highest securty setting, Gatekeeper will only allow the installation of content from the Mac App Store, however the default setting also allows for third-party downloads from "identified developers" or those code writers who have signed up with the Digital ID program.
Gatekeeper works by verifying digital signatures that are generated by the Developer ID program after Apple checks the validity of an app and can be inserted into a program's code with Xcode 4.3.
By using the free Digital ID system, Mac developers can distribute their wares outside of the Mac App Store, and subsequently pass through Gatekeeper's security protocols.
Mac OS X users will soon have the option of turning on Gatekeeper, a new Mac OS X security feature. When a user does this, the system provides an additional measure of safety: it blocks that user from opening newly-downloaded applications that are not Developer ID–signed. In this scenario, the same user is easily able to launch downloaded applications that are Developer ID–signed.
With Gatekeeper and Developer ID, Apple is looking to stop the growing number of Mac-targeted malware.
For users, the system is nearly invisible as warning messages only appear when an unsigned app attempts installation.
Charles Martin
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
98 Comments
Hmm . . .
A fully curated environment on the desktop?
Seems like a bit of a solution in search of a problem, to me. I've not encountered malware or a virus on any of my Macs in at least 15 years.
I don't even care for the $99 a year fee for developers. Seems to discourage development of freeware and OSSW, if you ask me. What good are computers if we can't even tinker with them if we want?
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with transparency and accountability. I just don't care for a totally locked down environment. A fully curated environment seems more sensible with the iPhone, and possibly with non-phone iOS devices. But for the Mac? Sorry I need more flexibility.
It will be interesting to see how this evolves.
Hmm . . .
A fully curated environment on the desktop?
Seems like a bit of a solution in search of a problem, to me. I've not encountered malware or a virus on any of my Macs in at least 15 years.
It?s called nipping the problem in the bud
Most serious developers pay for the support. There is still a free membership and Xcode is still free
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with transparency and accountability. I just don't care for a totally locked down environment. A fully curated environment seems more sensible with the iPhone, and possibly with non-phone iOS devices. But for the Mac? Sorry I need more flexibility.
It will be interesting to see how this evolves.
This is not a mandatory system. Nobody is locking down the OS - you can still install whatever you want and that is not going to change. Apple has said as much.
I don't even care for the $99 a year fee for developers. Seems to discourage development of freeware and OSSW, if you ask me. What good are computers if we can't even tinker with them if we want?
From the article… "by using the free Digital ID system"…
And in the (undoubtedly vain) hope that people will stop talking about a "fully curated" Mac OSX environment, I'm going to put this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
Hmm . . .
A fully curated environment on the desktop?
Seems like a bit of a solution in search of a problem, to me. I've not encountered malware or a virus on any of my Macs in at least 15 years.
I don't follow how it's searching for a problem? Sounds to me like they are being proactive instead of reactive and meeting devs halfway by allowing signed apps that aren't controlled by the App Store.
You have to consider most 'PC' users aren't very computer literate so having some sort of barrier to protect them will make them more comfortable. This may even drive more sales if users feel more secure with installing 3rd-party apps.
Is the $99 only for using Apple's App Stores and for getting access to Betas, not for signing up for a free account and getting the latest stable builds of Xcode?