HunterBD wrote:
In this thread from 2014 https://discussions.apple.com/thread/6704451
Referring to EtreCheck, 'Linc Davis' said to me .....
"I haven't tested that program and I don't recommend it. In reports on this site, the "failed" warnings appear often. No one, including the developer, seems to know what they mean. I've seen no evidence that they mean anything at all. To do anything at all merely because of those warnings, in the absence of a functional problem, would be a waste of time. As I wrote, the results of posting "etrecheck" output can be very poor."
And ...... "I have no use for "etrecheck" output."
If you want any clarification regarding something that Linc Davis said in 2014, you are going to have to ask him. But he hasn't been active on these forums for about 2 years.
How can I be sure that connecting to the EtreCheck server and downloading the software will not, in and of itself, cause 'damage' to my computer or compromise my security?
...
I would very much like Apple itself to verify that the product is safe to use.
As others have said, that is not a service that Apple provides. If you feel that this is a service that Apple could, or should, offer, then you can submit Feedback or file a Bug Report.
Lacking any such Apple service, all you can do is consult online reviews and recommendations to see if a product is safe and legitimate. I am not going to make any attempts in this thread to demonstrate that EtreCheck is safe or legitimate. It seems like EtreCheck may be replacing ClamXAV as the object of your unwanted attention. I'm sure that would be good news for Mark Allan, but I would like you to find a different hobby. I made a sincere effort to explain some of the more confusing aspects of security software and to dissuade you from your strange anti-ClamXAV crusade. And the reward for my attempts to be helpful is that you now start an anti-EtreCheck crusade?
There is an old saying that goes something like "be careful what you ask for; you might get it." No one had any idea what your anti-ClamXAV agenda was about. Your anti-EtreCheck agenda seems more transparent. In all honesty, I would prefer that you don't use EtreCheck and avoid discussing it here in the forums, either positively or negatively. Otherwise, you might set something in motion that isn't what you would have wanted.