Why is XProtectUpdater contacting AKAMAI on startup?

I use system prefs->network for that. it's free too.

masc88 wrote:

I use system prefs->network for that. it's free too.

What do you do, turn it off completely?

Csound1 wrote:

What do you do, turn it off completely?

some random stuff. there's plenty of buttons for the uninformed user.

masc88 wrote:

Csound1 wrote:

What do you do, turn it off completely?

some random stuff. there's plenty of buttons for the uninformed user.

Your advice is to do 'some random stuff' in Network Preferences?

much easier to just unplug your router. That'll stop those pesky kids messing about with the internet. Just keep the cable on you at all times and your worries are over. 👿

LittleSnitch is extremely useful to fight with spam. Just deny forever all sources of images and other trash the spam message tries to load and you save much more time and processor power than without it.

Go lecture the people that constantly ask why they can't browse the adobe website while running pirated Photoshop. LS is remarkably lightweight and stable considering how deep it is embedded in a rather tempermental OS.
Bottom line... If you find little snitch annoying after using it for a couple days, by all means ger rid of it. As most users on LS know, the notifications decrease in proportion to how long one has run it because of the rule making/saving process. If yall don't like everyone and their mom (and the US govt.) knowing what kind of Pron you like (as well as when you like to like it), use lil Snitch and other precaustions... If you don't mind, by all means go it alone. I will say however, it is a heck of a lot more convienient than editing hosts files and all of the LS clones are not even close to as good as the OG.

Mountain Lion is not AT ALL temperamental. It is absolutely rock-solid: I haven't had a kernel panic or anything else on a GM version of OS X in 9 or 10 years.

It gets "tempermental" when users install lots of kernel extensions for anti-virus software and sound software that uses cruddy kernel extensions for DRM and licensing. And those are the cause of about 75% of crashes posted here, where about 24% more are due to hardware failures. Probably less than 1% of kernel panics in OS X are due to "temperamental" OS X software; it's mostly stuff shimmed in which causes crashes. Little Snitch, again while good software by a GREAT software company, can cause these problems.

If yall don't like everyone and their mom (and the US govt.) knowing what kind of Pron you like (as well as when you like to like it), use lil Snitch and other precaustions...

It's important to understand that Little Snitch has absolutely nothing to do with hiding your internet activity from others. If you believe that it does, you're mis-using it and are under a false sense of security.

I just wiped my hard drive and reinstalled everything from scratch (Mountain Lion), so I was happy to find this conversation when I was wondering what XProtectUpdater was and why it was connecting to that IP.

softwater wrote:

ds store wrote:

By the way, softwater is way off base about LittleSnitch, it's good to have Mac users being aware of what is going on with their machines as this is how malware is discovered and the rest of the non-techie side of the Mac community (and Apple) informed of the dangers.

Keep running LittleSnitch, your doing a good thing asking questions, being alert and not remaining a ignorant sheep.

No, you're 'off base', not me.

You see, its a matter of opinion.

Yours just happens to be wrong... 😉

He is correct and you are incorrect. You are wall off base about Little Snitch.

Looking at your recommendation, I'm sure that I have far more knowledge and experience in computer security than you do -- so you can trust me on that.

However, if you wish to remain combative, post your professional credentials when you respond. Have you ever designed a computer security architecture and presented/defended it to an evaluation team from NSA? Have you ever co-authored a paper presented at a professional security conference about a security architecture that you created? Have you been employed in a position where your sole responsibility was designing and implementing computer security? Have you ever been offered a job heading up a computer security lab for a major computer security firm?

In closing, your recommendation about Little Snitch was completely incorrect. Little Snitch does not exhibit false positives. It says that a specific process is trying to communicate, and to where, and then lets you choose whether to deny it or allow it. It doesn't make any judgments about whether the communication is good, bad, or indifferent. Running with no outgoing firewall leaves you vulnerable to applications and malware that may be attempting to send your private information where you do not want it going.

Right or wrong, you're arguing about a conversation that took place in 2012, involving one participant who hasn't been active here for a while. There's not much point in continuing this.

thomas_r. wrote:

Right or wrong, you're arguing about a conversation that took place in 2012, involving one participant who hasn't been active here for a while. There's not much point in continuing this.

Unfortunately, this conversation is where people land when when they do certain Google searches. And the dangerous misinformation about computer security contained herein is not something that should be left uncorrected.

There is no "dangerous misinformation" there, simply differing opinions. Thing is, neither opinion is really wrong. Little Snitch can be useful, but it also has some potentially serious disadvantages. Anyone using it would be well-served to be aware of both points of view.

thomas_r. wrote:

There is no "dangerous misinformation" there, simply differing opinions. Thing is, neither opinion is really wrong. Little Snitch can be useful, but it also has some potentially serious disadvantages. Anyone using it would be well-served to be aware of both points of view.

This is a field of professional expertise, not a matter of personal tastes and opinions. When I state that a post contains "dangerous misinformation" about computer security, that's the equivalent of a medical doctor stating that there is dangerous misinformation in an anti-vaccine post.

I understand that this is an important interest of yours and that you have a web page on the topic of Mac security, but I assure you that I would not be calling something "dangerous misinformation" if it were simply a matter of personal tastes. As you wrote on your own web page: "For such things, Little Snitch is a third-party firewall that blocks outgoing data rather than incoming data. Little Snitch can tell you a lot about what applications are making connection attempts and can help you to manage them. This is the most useful kind of firewall, in my opinion, as it can allow you to detect and block attempts to transmit data by applications that you don’t fully trust."

I am surprised that you feel there are potentially serious disadvantages to running Little Snitch now. Would you care to elaborate on them? Without Little Snitch, Hands Off, or an equivalent software firewall, isn't a user operating in-the-blind with no idea if the solitaire game they just loaded is harvesting e-mail addresses, Social Security numbers, phone numbers, etc. and transmitting them to some site in Russia, Nigeria, China, etc. ?