Solution for improving stability of Word, Excel and Safari on Mac OS Catalina??

Thank you for all who responded to my post. I'm hesitant to install any more 3rd party apps, especially when it is not available to download from the Apple store. I tried safe mode. Same issues I reported are still in existence with that user profile. BTW, my issues are with a standard user profile, not admin level. I would not use an admin level user for day to day computer use due to the increased risk of complete iMac compromise.

This problem with Office has been there during the time of the stability of OS Catalina, as a reminder. I created another user profile on my iMac Catalina 10.15.7. All issues are non-existent in that profile! So, this issue is solved like back in the day of Windows 7, creating a new user profile would be a quicker solution to a potentially difficult to assess condition of the only other standard user profile.

So........ that means my problem as I posted it is due to the concept of user profile data that is either cluttered/corrupt/link libraries out of sorts, or other similar things that are ONLY found in a SPECIFIC user profile. Caps added for understanding.

It's really interesting that a new user profile has no issues. That really proves the point of it being profile related. Same apps are installed on both profiles.

So, it's not about some non-Apple app causing a problem. If it were systemic issue like that, it would show up on all user profiles. This means if I were to upgrade to Monterey right now, since an upgrade does not return a user profile to a pristine state, but keeps data/settings etc., and upgrades things "in place" I would likely have the same issues with that user profile, while other user profiles would be great. And there is a risk upgrading a problematic user profile could cause more issues with it.

As I stated in my post, this is a production machine, I use it for teaching, being an independent music teacher with online students. So I must have a level of predictable stability, and take a conservative viewpoint on assuming risk. Obviously creating a new user profile is extremely low risk to existing user profiles. Having Word, Excel and Safari that freeze up is manageable until I finish getting that new user profile completely ready.

So, part of my issue is having a solution that can be done in place without changing the entire machine, as in an upgrade to Monterey in the iMac's present state was suggested. Business continuity is paramount here. :)

Once I move the large amount of data from the old user profile to the new one, I'll delete the old one. And then I can consider upgrading to Monterey.

Is there an Apple approved way of keeping one's profile maintained so such problems do not resurface in the future? Without buying a third party app?

I do not like following scripting I find in some solutions because I do not understand the Mac OS architecture well enough, as it pertains to script commands. So, if there is a character out of place in a posting I might consider using, there is a risk of unintended consequences that could compromise the stability of this my production machine.

I want to show that this issue was solved by creating a new user, as I suspected might solve it. But thanks to all of you who contributed! I appreciate your feedback and perspectives!

So, if anyone knows of an Apple approved way of keeping a user profile from becoming problematic, please let me know. Again, I would not use an app if Apple did not develop it directly.

Hello,

I'm responding to everyone who has contributed ideas here. I want to thank all of you. In researching the current security climate, looking at CISA and US CERT bulletins and reading the security issues OS Monterey solves compared to staying with Catalina, and for that reason alone of improved security on my iMac, I decided to upgrade my iMac OS from Catalina to Monterey. That was late February.

I decided security was more important than the issues I described, and if I had to I would reinstall Office and/or live with the annoyances I described since my system was still dependable "enough" to get by, and maybe, pay Apple support to get things back on track, if I needed to, since my iMac support is expired. That's what I was ready to do, after considering my security posture with this system. But I would not install a system evaluation app on my iMac and upload that to a website, at least not from home. I mean that EtreCheck app mentioned in here. God no. (You'll understand in a minute or two in this letter.....) Maybe within an Apple support office that might be okay with me, if it were an only or last resort.

That upgrade to OS Monterey was done February 26-27.

I have had zero issues that I posted here since then. So, all performance problems with Microsoft Office and Safari are non existent. The OS upgrade went smoothly with no issues whatsoever. So, I'm on Monterey 12.2, its been stable, and will upgrade to 12.3 soon to complete the increased security. Thank you again to all who posted ideas here.

FYI, I have been running Sophos Home Premium on this System the whole time, with default settings, minus camera/mic alerts - except I stopped an automatic weekly scan, prior to the OS upgrade. The weekly scan is still disabled and will stay that way for a while. I'll find a way to exclude MS Office template files from any future scans before I run any future scan, since "if" Sophos contributed to my past issues with Office 365 products, this would be the likely cause, scanning the Word and Excel template file when in use. At least it's a known issue from my past, with other security programs on Windows and Linux (Red Hat and other purchased varieties) based systems.

You may ask why I have Sophos Home Premium on a Mac OS? Or why put a security program on a Mac OS at all? I'll just say that since the years of my role as an IT Security Admin in a corporate Windows environment, (2002-2014), before I went back to my career as a music teacher in 2015, Apple has published a noticeable increase in security patches for all their computing/device products, so that is a concern in light of the rhetoric I had been hearing for years that a Mac OS is so much more secure than Windows that one does not need a security program on it, (well it is by design but more secure does not mean secure enough). I would say those days are past. The internet bad guys are way more inventive now, and more and more "talent" from any country in the world is growing as a presence out there; white or black hat. Ostrich time is over I feel.

But, really that depends on how one uses the system, as to level of risk, as it touches the internet in various ways, or how much your system is exposed to wardrivers and the like if you live in a populated area. WiFi specs, including bluetooth, has greater range than 6-7 years ago ya' know. Unless one has an air-gapped system, one needs a security program or its equivalent from a home grown solution, IMO. Each path outward is also a possible attack vector back in. With an ioT, our home networks are more burdened with inbound traffic. Speaking metaphorically: You can bet the more criminals that can drive by your house looking for an unlocked door, or window, or hole in the wall, creates more likelihood one will be found. Just the concept alone is food for thought.

I had also been a (Symantec) SEP 12.xx administrator (actually since SEP 10.xx) in the same Windows environment, and after my research on a security product for my iMac, I decided upon Sophos for a balance of performance and security. Definitely Symantec would not be a good choice, for my needs, with its high overhead, and frankly I have a slight bit, and that is "slight", more trust from a UK derived product than USA derived.

Thought I might throw this security stuff in the mix to see what you guys experience is within this realm! And at least since just prior to Stuxnet and its subsequent variations, we've actually been in WW3 on the cyber level though nations don't want to admit that. I worked for a company that maintained government contracts as a mainstay, in my IT days, so I was boots on the ground with all that. Things are often different than the way they appear as I'm sure all of you have seen one way or another.

Go team! :)

Good luck to all!

Kind Regards,

JH

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Interesting. The question that occurs to me is how much security is enough, is necessary, for any particular user. I'm not in an organization but a one computer guy. Yes, of course, backups, multiple are needed - iCloud, "other" cloud service and static to an attached physical external drive or internal network source. At least these three. Plus offsite full backups to make it four.

I was not familiar with the built in security things you mentioned in your post. So, I have been looking into them. Below, when I remark "Am I missing something" it is not rhetorical, but an actual question to you.

The read only system exists in Windows, so no real advantage there. Even so its an improvement compared to say, 10-15 years ago. So yes its helpful.

Effectiveness of the built in layers of security the Mac OS has, is not as protective as laid out by Apple, from what I have read, I'm sorry to report back to you. Yes, it is helpful but I will make a case why it is not nearly enough. This is concerning App Store, gatekeeper, Notarization, XProtect and MRT.

Replying on gatekeeper and App Store seems not that practical, as a feature for reliance, for many, like me. To function with a Mac OS it is often necessary to install software not available on the App Store, and gatekeeper is informational as a function not protective. User decision bypasses this layer easily. As we know over 90% of data breaches occur due to users, not defenses in place, even the best defenses in depth get the run around from errant user decisions. So, expecting all users to use software only from the App Store is plain silly and not practical. I see no management tool, for a single Mac computer to remedy this lack of forced compliance. Or have I missed something?

Notarization requires an app be submitted to Apple to function as intended. Notarization is intended to be a malware scanning service, however app behavior, outside of apps submitted to Apple is not evaluated in the security environment but requires the app be "known" by Apple. Many apps that function on a Mac OS have never been submitted to Apple for notarization, and won't be. Malware definition updates through Notarization are only possible for apps from the App Store. Yes, a nice idea but it does not go far enough for me. Again, am I missing something?

XProtect, while a nice idea, is not able to be evaluated in real time as to its functionality. We just "trust " it is working. There is no management, no follow up, no logs, no administration of this I see. Again, am I missing something? Using YARA signatures is great in concept, and can be effective, BUT, again we cannot verify its effectiveness since there is not a management tool to evaluate its effectiveness. "We need to see results, people. Verify, verify, verify" to take a phrase out of a Jason Bourne movie.

If you are a financial company, do you use your own internal auditors to assess your compliance with best financial accounting practices, or is it more responsible to hire an outside firm to asses that for you? If you are a CFO, do you not want another opinion than your own for the sake of the continued viability of your company? Applying this concept to XProtect, there is an apparent conflict of interest due to lack of real follow up. It is hidden in the OS as to how it functions and real administration is apparently not possible. Again, am I missing something?

MRT does not appear to have verifiable signatures for malware nor reference to a database a security administrator can evaluate, nor administration for latest updates related to the current threat environment in the US or other parts of the world. So, again, this is fairly hidden in the OS, and we just "trust" is it working. That does not seem to be a good security posture in my view. I need a higher standard of verification and evidence it is actually working as designed.

If your layers of security are not reporting at least a minimal false positive, then they are not diving deep enough into the security systems and subsystems that relate to evaluating behavior deeply enough. This is why too much of a good thing is necessary, at least in a small measure, in systems security.

None of these built in security layers seem adequately capable of addressing ransomware unless is it old, and Safari seems incapable of any defense in depth. It did not detect an attempted drive-by that Sophos quashed easily.

To give a number evaluation on a scale of 1 to 10, it appears to me these built in security items score a 6 out o 10 in my view.

I will be keeping Sophos on Mac OS Monterey for now and appreciating it. Again, Mr. Hoffman, thanks for your response. And if in my complaints above, if one can do what I report is not able to be done, such as administration, follow-up, verification and the like, in your opinion, please do issue your view on that. I am appreciating that in advance.

Thank you,

JH