Re: [Littlesnitch-talk] configuring littlesnitch from shell

[cv]

Tom R. no spam wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Arno S Hautala wrote: . . . I agree. Just last week I finished remotely installing lynx only to be confused as to why I could not access any websites. Of course LS was blocking the new app. A command line interface to LS would have been wonderful here. A script that requires root access should be enough and only available as an option during install or from the PrefPane. Require that the GUI specifically allow command line changes before installing the script and beginning to accept changes. . . . Wasn't there a recent security issue about root-access CLI'ish stuff in OSX? (I'm being a little vague on purpose.) Maybe a few months ago? _______________________________________________ Littlesnitch-talk mailing list Littlesnitch-talk@obdev.at http://at.obdev.at/mailman/listinfo/littlesnitch-talk As long as UNIX has existed, people used command line interface. Having a GUI on top on UNIX does not mean CLI does not exist. If there is a security issue, you'll be vulnerable even if you use your  beautifull  desktop manager. That said, you have security issues with many peaces of an OS, sometimes without knowing it, and the best thing you can do is protect your computer agains external or internal attacks, be aware of known issues and only install what need to be. Graphicals interfaces are known to add new potential security issues, and are really harder to code than CLI :) This is basic UNIX/computing behavior, and have nothing to do with LS command line request. I'm sorry but from my point of view, there is no security consideration in adding a CLI to LS. The only consideration is "how" and "how to have it secured". -- Prune