Post by: Paddy on January 21, 2009, 06:19:33 PM
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?m...8849583#8849583
And why are they doing this???
Post by: Mayo on January 21, 2009, 06:57:49 PM
I would like to add that running the iWork '09 30-day trial is a bit of a bother if you already have iWork '08 installed. '09 Pages "hijacks" the opening of documents previously created in Pages '08, and if you save the documents they will only be accessible by Pages '09. After the trial period ends, you can open and read the '09 docs, but they cannot be edited.
To avoid problems I now have to select a Pages doc and use the "Open With..." option or specify that all Pages docs are to be opened using Pages '08.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 21, 2009, 08:04:21 PM
The "high-jacking" may not be too bad aslong as the formats aren't changed. But I agree it's irritating and possibly a slimy attempt to 'encourage' a sale?
Post by: kimmer on January 21, 2009, 09:49:36 PM
The first thing that showed up was an alert that MacJournal wanted to connect to "homepage.mac.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Why in the world would MacJournal want to connect? I denied. I'm a bit irked. What info were they sending?
The next alert was that Firefox wanted to connect to "safebrowsing.clients.google.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Any idea why? I temporarily denied.
Other than that, everything seemed normal. We'll see how this goes.
Do have one question ... by family plan/household ... does that cover our laptop? Even if we are using it away from home?
Post by: Jack W on January 22, 2009, 09:29:28 AM
QUOTE(kimmer @ Jan 21 2009, 10:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I was curious and went and installed LittleSnitch.
The first thing that showed up was an alert that MacJournal wanted to connect to "homepage.mac.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Why in the world would MacJournal want to connect? I denied. I'm a bit irked. What info were they sending?
The next alert was that Firefox wanted to connect to "safebrowsing.clients.google.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Any idea why? I temporarily denied.
Other than that, everything seemed normal. We'll see how this goes.
Do have one question ... by family plan/household ... does that cover our laptop? Even if we are using it away from home?
The first thing that showed up was an alert that MacJournal wanted to connect to "homepage.mac.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Why in the world would MacJournal want to connect? I denied. I'm a bit irked. What info were they sending?
The next alert was that Firefox wanted to connect to "safebrowsing.clients.google.com on TCP port 80 (http)." Any idea why? I temporarily denied.
Other than that, everything seemed normal. We'll see how this goes.
Do have one question ... by family plan/household ... does that cover our laptop? Even if we are using it away from home?
Kimmer,
MacJournal is probably connecting to find out if there is an update. You should check the prefs and see in there is a √ for update box. A lot of programs do that if you don't uncheck their box.
Regarding doubleclick.net. They set a cookie and keep track of sites visited for advertising purposes for the sponsors.
I set up Little Snictch to deny TCP connections to:
fls.doubleclick.net
i.cmpnet.com
pclick.yahoo.com
suggestqueries.google.com
www.paypal.com
ytming.com
amungst others.
- Jack
P.S. Little Snitch can open up your eyes to net traffic you are unaware of.
Post by: kimmer on January 22, 2009, 12:19:14 PM
QUOTE(Jack W @ Jan 22 2009, 07:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Kimmer,
MacJournal is probably connecting to find out if there is an update. You should check the prefs and see in there is a √ for update box. A lot of programs do that if you don't uncheck their box.
MacJournal is probably connecting to find out if there is an update. You should check the prefs and see in there is a √ for update box. A lot of programs do that if you don't uncheck their box.
That's likely what it was, and I've unchecked it. Thanks!
Post by: RHPConsult on January 22, 2009, 01:06:46 PM
But, really, a lot of this is gobbledegook to me, except what I interpret is an invasion of privacy.
Is this correct:
There's a default setting in Pages '09 (which I'm about to buy) which contacts some outside party/agency about which I know nothing to transmit some kind of data about my use of Pages? Or my iMac, generally.
Totally w/o my knowledge, even though having read this I can turn-it off?
Whatever Suit at Apple made such a decision (on "my behalf"!!!!!), and the decision itself (if I have this correctly) should be identified and slammed in the forums. Outrageous.
Very sincerely yours
RHP
an Apple Shareholder
Post by: kimmer on January 22, 2009, 02:41:53 PM
I've been watching the LittleSnitch window today and was amazed that after I launched Safari, while it was idle and not at any web page ... it was contacting Google, doubleclick, and edgesuite (no idea what this is). Now if I'm loading a web page, I can see the browser doing things ... but sitting idle?
I also noticed that when I launch FF it keeps going to "safebrowsing.clients.google.com on TCP port 80 (http)." and I'd still like to know what this is.
Post by: Mayo on January 22, 2009, 03:19:51 PM
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 22, 2009, 04:02:15 PM
QUOTE
after I launched Safari, while it was idle and not at any web page ... it was contacting Google, doubleclick, and edgesuite (no idea what this is).
What do you have as a "home page?" I suspect it is not a local file but some web 'portal' somewhere. If so, it undoubtedly will have ads from at least one company, even if it's just the place that serves the page. In FF, one could use AdBlock and such to prevent seeing those adds and I thought, letting their server run a script to record your use. Safari is much less 'programmable' in things like that, although there are several apps you can add, now.Back to the activity while it's "doing nothing." That's exactly what LS is there for. While the user will usually see no activity on the screen, many javascripts are busy collecting and reporting what's happening, what page you're viewing, how long it's been viewed (even if you are asleep!), etc. It's always been happening, you just won't know it if LS or something like it is installed (or you like using Terminal!).
Post by: Paddy on January 22, 2009, 04:53:29 PM
I don't have time to argue with idiots...)
Post by: kimmer on January 22, 2009, 06:36:25 PM
QUOTE(Mayo @ Jan 22 2009, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Kim, Firefox is checking in with the Google Safe Browsing server.
Thanks, Mayo. Most interesting since I don't have the Google toolbar installed.
QUOTE(Xairbusdriver @ Jan 22 2009, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE
after I launched Safari, while it was idle and not at any web page ... it was contacting Google, doubleclick, and edgesuite (no idea what this is).
What do you have as a "home page?"Homepage: blank page (same as I use for FF) .... and I didn't have a blank page open. I had used Safari, and closed the window. It was still running, but I wasn't using it. That's really why it caught my attention.
QUOTE
It's always been happening, you just won't know it if LS or something like it is installed (or you like using Terminal!).
This is almost creepy.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 22, 2009, 08:18:53 PM
If Safari never had a web page loaded and messages were being sent by it to double-click, then we have another indication that Apple has started 'keeping track' of more than a few serial numbers. Or, they have found another income stream to help boost their 'ailing' coffers! No, wait, it's Steve that is ailing...the coffers are full to overflowing!
I've opened the Connection History window with Safari selected. Only four domains are listed; photobucket, ipaintit, checkurl.phishtank, techsurvivors and comcast (my ISP). The last two are obvious. I assume that the ipaintit and photobucket are links to some image in one of the threads I have opened. I'd have to look up what the checkurl.phistank is for, assuming that the name doesn't represent that.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 22, 2009, 08:46:55 PM
This doesn't sound like what was being discussed on the Apple Forums, but is it a harbinger of what may start happening? Of course, I have no pity for anyone downloading anything from a pirated software source...but Apple's announcement that serial numbers/registration would no longer be needed isn't helping matters (even if there are pirate sources for the numbers!).
Post by: Mayo on January 22, 2009, 09:40:34 PM
QUOTE
I've opened the Connection History window with Safari selected.
Where is this "Connection History window" you refer to?
I've been perusing the Pages '09 Apple forum today... It would appear that the days of purchasing one copy of iWork and installing it on both a desktop and portable Mac are Long Gone. It is my impression that the new registration scheme requires the purchase of a "family pack" if you want to install the software on more than one computer. Can anyone confirm this?
I was considering upgrading because on one or two occasions I have had Pages '08 file corrupted and I think that the problem was with the .xml "sidecar" that is created with each Pages document. (In at least one case the document had been encrypted using goSecure, but I haven't been able to determine if it is the cause of the problem.) Pages '09 allows the user to create a file without a sidecar file but some people are reporting problems when using the option.
Post by: krissel on January 23, 2009, 12:47:51 AM
QUOTE(Mayo @ Jan 22 2009, 10:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE
I've opened the Connection History window with Safari selected.
I've been perusing the Pages '09 Apple forum today... It would appear that the days of purchasing one copy of iWork and installing it on both a desktop and portable Mac are Long Gone. It is my impression that the new registration scheme requires the purchase of a "family pack" if you want to install the software on more than one computer. Can anyone confirm this?
This article suggests quite the opposite:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/articl...ticleId=9126480
Post by: RHPConsult on January 23, 2009, 10:52:36 AM
The "lightly refreshed" comment in the article depends upon one's perspective, not to put too fine a point on it.
'09 appears to have solved (I'm waiting for delivery) a really vexing issue for me (as "publisher" – tah dah – of the newsletter for the local Friends of the Library) . . . it will now and finally display 2-up printing on my iMac, rather than the kludgy '08 default , which always left whatever was Page 1 hanging up top. by itself. That meant that sending a pdf of the final 6 page document always required 7 pages, the first of which was a blank. For printing, e-dispatch, posting on our web site, this new tweak is a REAL convenience.
Not a major issue of Western Civilization in the 21st century, I'll grant you, but the new version does have some neat "amenities", as well as being both full-featured and e-a-s-y, for a certified a-m-a-t-e-u-r like myself.
I hope this observation is useful to some TeeEssers.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 23, 2009, 11:05:46 AM
QUOTE
Where is this "Connection History window" you refer to?
I am referring to the 'modal' window that displays current activity. The one that usually fade away when not doing/seeing anything. It has a "stay visible" checkbox in the top, right-hand part of the window. That's step one. Second, there is a 'disclosure arrow' right under the (blank) title bar. Step two is to click that arrow. Step three, if needed, is to select one of the processes that is in the list, if any. You should now see a scrollable list of the urls that were being addressed by that process, that list is entitled "Connection History."Perhaps you should start a thread on actually using/modifying LS? I'd like to know more about it without having to do any actual work!
Post by: RHPConsult on January 23, 2009, 11:20:57 AM
If so, then I really agree with this comment, from Mr. Cap'n ABD. . . .
QUOTE
Perhaps you should start a thread on actually using/modifying LS? I'd like to know more about it without having to do any actual work!
OTOH, if it means "lightly sautéed" then that would be good, too.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 23, 2009, 12:03:47 PM
QUOTE
"lightly sautéed" [...] would be good, too.
Yes! And better than "lightly salted!"Whadayasay, Mr. Sandwichspread?
I still not sure how to block specific parts of a domain but allow others. Is "forever" best with a specific domain/url + a port than a slightly different setting? Creating a new rule looks fairly non-intuitive. Probably help in the uhmn...Help Files but it's more fun to talk to an expert! This is a 'Help SIte" after all... 
Besides, I love to ask stupid questions, just to prove we allow and encourage them! 
Post by: Mayo on January 23, 2009, 05:05:02 PM
Creating a new rule is fairly simple, but I wouldn't try it unless you have a reason (and the knowledge...) to do so.
I think that Little Snitch is most valuable for monitoring new outgoing connections that don't make any sense to you, plus it is easy enough to look through the list of rules and make sure that all outgoing connections are from applications and system processes that are recognizable and bona fide.
Mayo
The MONTH, Not The Sandwich Spread...
Pronouced My-Oh!
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 23, 2009, 08:14:46 PM
As for new rules. I thought it would be simple to create one for a domain or a specific part of a domain. But I need to learn the differences between the choice for the "Servers" options...I'd feel more comfortable simply typing in a specific url, as in "s2.amazonlookything.com." Instead I see
Nevermind! I C, I C!!!