Re: [Fed-Talk] [EXTERNAL] ATO for Notarization?
Re: [Fed-Talk] [EXTERNAL] ATO for Notarization?
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] [EXTERNAL] ATO for Notarization?
- From: junkatar via Fed-talk <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 13:28:40 -0700
Having a gatekeeper option to bypass notarization sounds like something that
would be an "allow notarization bypass" security option. Just from the sound
of it, "allow notarization bypass" would be summarily and administratively
disabled in a security minded environment.
So... we are back to the contractor's app not working.
> On Jul 19, 2019, at 12:06 PM, Noam Bernstein via Fed-talk
> <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Is there any reason to think you won’t be able to add Gatekeeper exceptions
> (as now achieved by shift-click and selecting Open, or some command line
> equivalent) for un-notarized applications in the future? Docs I’ve seen say
> notarization “will be required by default”, not “will always be required”.
>
> If you don’t want to ship you application to apple to notarize, you can’t
> rely on their service (gatekeeper) to keep you safe.
>
> Noam
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden