← Back to context Comment by supportengineer 3 months ago It seems this mostly affects Intel systems. 3 comments supportengineer Reply JohnTHaller 3 months ago Only true because this only works on Intel code. You can't use the typical method to bypass Gatekeeper because Apple removed it for ARM64 code. saagarjha 3 months ago No, the mechanism is the same. Aaron2222 3 months ago To clarify, the macOS kernel requires a signature on all Apple Silicon binaries, but this can just be an ad-hoc signature. Ad-hoc signed Apple Silicon applications are treated much the same as unsigned Intel ones.
JohnTHaller 3 months ago Only true because this only works on Intel code. You can't use the typical method to bypass Gatekeeper because Apple removed it for ARM64 code. saagarjha 3 months ago No, the mechanism is the same. Aaron2222 3 months ago To clarify, the macOS kernel requires a signature on all Apple Silicon binaries, but this can just be an ad-hoc signature. Ad-hoc signed Apple Silicon applications are treated much the same as unsigned Intel ones.
saagarjha 3 months ago No, the mechanism is the same. Aaron2222 3 months ago To clarify, the macOS kernel requires a signature on all Apple Silicon binaries, but this can just be an ad-hoc signature. Ad-hoc signed Apple Silicon applications are treated much the same as unsigned Intel ones.
Aaron2222 3 months ago To clarify, the macOS kernel requires a signature on all Apple Silicon binaries, but this can just be an ad-hoc signature. Ad-hoc signed Apple Silicon applications are treated much the same as unsigned Intel ones.
Only true because this only works on Intel code. You can't use the typical method to bypass Gatekeeper because Apple removed it for ARM64 code.
No, the mechanism is the same.
To clarify, the macOS kernel requires a signature on all Apple Silicon binaries, but this can just be an ad-hoc signature. Ad-hoc signed Apple Silicon applications are treated much the same as unsigned Intel ones.