Third-Party macOS Security Tools Vulnerable to Malware Code-Signing Bypasses for Years - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Third-Party macOS Security Tools Vulnerable to Malware Code-Signing Bypasses for Years

Hackers have had an "easy way" to get certain malware past signature checks in third-party security tools since Apple's OS X Leopard operating system in 2007, according to a detailed new report today by Ars Technica. Researchers discovered that hackers could essentially trick the security tools -- designed to sniff out suspiciously signed software -- into thinking the malware was officially signed by Apple while they in fact hid malicious software.

macos code signing bypass
The researchers said that the signature bypassing method is so "easy" and "trivial" that pretty much any hacker who discovered it could pass off malicious code as an app that appeared to be signed by Apple. These digital signatures are core security functions that let users know the app in question was signed with the private key of a trusted party, like Apple does with its first-party apps.

Joshua Pitts, senior penetration testing engineer for security firm Okta, said he discovered the technique in February and informed Apple and the third-party developers about it soon after. Okta today also published information about the bypass, including a detailed disclosure timeline that began on February 22 with a report submitted to Apple and continues to today's public disclosure.

Ars Technica broke down how the method was used and which third-party tools are affected:

The technique worked using a binary format, alternatively known as a Fat or Universal file, that contained several files that were written for different CPUs used in Macs over the years, such as i386, x86_64, or PPC. Only the first so-called Mach-O file in the bundle had to be signed by Apple. At least eight third-party tools would show other non-signed executable code included in the same bundle as being signed by Apple, too.

Affected third-party tools included VirusTotal, Google Santa, Facebook OSQuery, the Little Snitch Firewall, Yelp, OSXCollector, Carbon Black’s db Response, and several tools from Objective-See. Many companies and individuals rely on some of the tools to help implement whitelisting processes that permit only approved applications to be installed on a computer, while forbidding all others.

Developer Patrick Wardle spoke on the topic, explaining that the bypass was due to ambiguous documentation and comments provided by Apple regarding the use of publicly available programming interfaces that make digital signature checks function: "To be clear, this is not a vulnerability or bug in Apple's code... basically just unclear/confusing documentation that led to people using their API incorrectly." It's also not an issue exclusive to Apple and macOS third-party security tools, as Wardle pointed out: "If a hacker wants to bypass your tool and targets it directly, they will win."

For its part, Apple was said to have stated on March 20 that it did not see the bypass as a security issue that needed to be directly addressed. On March 29, the company updated its documentation to be more clear on the matter, stating that "third-party developers will need to do additional work to verify that all of the identities in a universal binary are the same if they want to present a meaningful result."

Popular Stories

iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max Feature

'Apple Upgrade' Program Reportedly Launching Next Week

Tuesday July 21, 2026 8:30 am PDT by
Apple and Klarna are partnering on a new "Apple Upgrade" leasing program set to launch in the U.S. on Tuesday, July 28, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. The program will allow you to finance most iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch models, with a 24-month term for iPhones and Apple Watches and a 36-month term for iPads and Macs. Customers will be able to pay off the device early during...
iPhone 18 Pro Deep Red Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Launching in Two Months With These 12 New Features

Friday July 17, 2026 10:39 am PDT by
It is now mid-July, and that means the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are now just two months away. The devices are expected to look similar to the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, but there will still be many year-over-year changes, with rumored features including a smaller Dynamic Island, 5G via satellite, and more. Apple is expected to unveil the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, ...
iPhone 18 Pro Deep Red Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Launching in Two Months With These 12 New Features

Tuesday July 21, 2026 6:22 am PDT by
It is now mid-July, and that means the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are now just two months away. The devices are expected to look similar to the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, but there will still be many year-over-year changes, with rumored features including a smaller Dynamic Island, 5G via satellite, and more. Apple is expected to unveil the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, ...

Top Rated Comments

OldSchoolMacGuy Avatar
106 months ago
These companies are prioritizing speed for security. We can assume they'll now implement proper checks, but it will come at the cost of speed.

I'm sure most won't bother to read this article and blame Apple, but the real blame here is with developers including Little Snitch, xFence, and Facebook's OSquery. They're the ones that failed to properly check these signatures.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ThunderSkunk Avatar
106 months ago
Wow, but somehow, I'm less concerned about the security threat than I am excited to have discovered the job title "Senior Penetration Testing Engineer". ...someone's up for a performance review & promotion!
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
106 months ago
Does Apple give a damn?? Obviously not. It's focused now on important kindergarten stuff like animojis and AR gimmicks.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
106 months ago

I'm sure most won't bother to read this article and blame Apple, but the real blame here is with developers including Little Snitch, xFence, and Facebook's OSquery. They're the ones that failed to properly check these signatures.
It's Apple's fault. When 8 separate developers use the API in the wrong way, there's an issue with the API and instructions.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
slimtastic Avatar
106 months ago
This is very bad. Thank goodness for white-hats who find this stuff out.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
OldSchoolMacGuy Avatar
106 months ago
I'm not sure I'd blame the devs here. The problem is the documentation. Once again reminding us that tech writers are an underappreciated bunch.
The current Apple documentation insists on the need to vet all certificates. But that slows things down, which is why some developers have chosen not to do so.

Is it the states fault if people don't follow speed limit signs?
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)