![]() ![]() Now, if the user intent is to simply monitor outgoing connections (Lulu ONLY monitors outgoing Little Snitch and Hands Off monitor both directions), any of these protects will probably do if the intent is to have a product that is one brick as part of an overall security and protection wall, then LIttle Snitch and Hand Off are more appropriate. We're not talking about the source code to a text editor, people, we're talking about source code to a firewall product that is supposed to tell you what/who/where the software on your Mac is talking too (servers in China? Russia? Central Europe?) ![]() Don't make it any easier for the bad guys. Yes, if an app wanted to bypass Little Snitch and Hands Off, etc, it could try as well, but again, at least the source code for those products isn't out there to pick over. " He also says, ".by design LuLu (currently) implements few self-defense mechanisms." ![]() Can you make it any easier? Even the developer of Lulu says on the website: "Note, as with any security tool, direct or proactive attempts to specifically bypass LuLu's protections will likely succeed. The idea is to make it as hard as possible for the evil-doers why give them the advantage of seeing the source code. The idea is to protect from malicious activity and be informed of what other software is doing, and maintain a staunch defense against attack. One major area where i do not support open/shared source is security related products. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |