Two, and more importantly, you already have hard proof that Dropbox can’t be trusted. So assuming you can trust a “big name” company not to “ feck you off’ because they might lose your business is not “smart computing”, even less smart if they figure that you’re a customer on a free plan anyway… :p ( See this for more reasons why big companies in general don’t pay much attention to ethical values).
If a 1000 people read this post and stop using Dropbox because of it, it’s not going to make much difference to Dropbox. One: the bigger the name, the less effect customer dissatisfaction has. After all, they’re a big name company who wouldn’t want to upset their customers, right? As anyone can readily see, what that allows is GUI control just as if the program or script was clicking buttons and menu items.īut perhaps you implicitly trust Dropbox to not do anything untoward. Accessibility frameworks were first introduced in Mac OS X 10.2 and expanded in 10.3 to allow control of user interface items via System Events and the Processes suite. Interlude: Contrary to Dropbox’s completely spurious “explanation”/obfuscation here, Accessibility has nothing at all to do with granting permissions to files. There’s a reason why apps in that list have to ask for permission and why it takes a password and explicit user permission to get in there: it’s a security risk. What does ‘take control’ mean here? It means to literally do what you can do in the desktop: click buttons, menus, launch apps, delete files…. It matters first and foremost because Dropbox didn’t ask for permission to take control of your computer. There’s at least three reasons why it matters. First, why does it matter, and second, is there any way to keep using Dropbox but stop it having access to control your computer?
0 kommentar(er)
