Little Snitch 2.2.2 + serial number
- Type:
- Applications > Mac
- Files:
- 4
- Size:
- 2.38 MiB (2498004 Bytes)
- Tag(s):
- Little Snitch Network Monitor
- Uploaded:
- 2010-03-17 22:45:51 GMT
- By:
-
polisdavid
- Seeders:
- 1
- Leechers:
- 0
- Comments
- 10
- Info Hash: AB877916278C0EAEFC51E3F64546F9B3D3A68D5E
(Problems with magnets links are fixed by upgrading your torrent client!)
Official Web Site: http://www.obdev.at/products/littlesnitch/index.html WHAT'S NEW in Version 2.2.2: * Improved IPv6 support. * Improved German localization. * Improved display of inactive rules in rules window. * Fixed: Unnecessary connection alerts with “Deny any connection†rules and IPv6 addresses. System Requirements: Mac OS X 10.4 or later. -->> PLEASE SEED <<--
| File list not available. |
polisdavid at 2010-03-17 23:05 CET:
THANK YOU SEEDERS !! ;-)
my hosts file already has,
127.0.0.1 localhost
What does this mean? Do I over-write it based on instruction?
127.0.0.1 localhost
What does this mean? Do I over-write it based on instruction?
polisdavid at 2010-03-18 04:50 CET:
ciprol,
If your hosts file is already correctly configured, then you don't have to add it again.
dp
If your hosts file is already correctly configured, then you don't have to add it again.
dp
Version 2.2.1 caused KP on 1 of my 2 Hackintosh machines. Actualy I'm afraid to try this one, on that machine. Anybody else had this problem?
NoggintheNomad at 2010-03-18 19:10 CET:
Seems to work fine on 10.6.2 Intel. Just waiting for the 3 hours to expire... Obdev are good at stopping serials, let's just hope no-one forgot to 'deny their connections'! Cheers, Polis.
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU
@ciprol
this: "127.0.0.1 localhost" means that you're telling your computer to interpret the hostname "localhost" as the IP address "127.0.0.1". 127.0.0.1 always points back to your own computer, so it's telling any address directed towards "localhost" as going directly back to your computer.
if you added another entry like this: "127.0.0.1 google.com" it would tell any traffic from your computer directed towards google.com to loop back to your own computer, effectively blocking all traffic from your computer to google.
so putting in whatever the instructions say, probably "127.0.0.1 obdev.at" if it's the same as other instructions i saw, means that any traffic sent out towards obdev.at would just get looped back to your own computer, blocking it. you can have multiple listings in the hosts file that start with 127.0.0.1.
this: "127.0.0.1 localhost" means that you're telling your computer to interpret the hostname "localhost" as the IP address "127.0.0.1". 127.0.0.1 always points back to your own computer, so it's telling any address directed towards "localhost" as going directly back to your computer.
if you added another entry like this: "127.0.0.1 google.com" it would tell any traffic from your computer directed towards google.com to loop back to your own computer, effectively blocking all traffic from your computer to google.
so putting in whatever the instructions say, probably "127.0.0.1 obdev.at" if it's the same as other instructions i saw, means that any traffic sent out towards obdev.at would just get looped back to your own computer, blocking it. you can have multiple listings in the hosts file that start with 127.0.0.1.
Thanx man! appreciate alot!
thanks man!
All the Read Me files and everyone on the pirate bay says we have to disable:
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app
However, when I ran activity monitor this morning, I noticed--to my surprise--the UI Agent was running... at this location:
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app/Contents/MacOS/Little Snitch UIAgent
So I checked it out and low and behold the initial ui agent had package contents, with an additional ui agent within. Does this mean the program will ultimately fail and snitch itself? Or since the parent folder/application is disabled, we are safe?
here is what activity monitor gave under open files and ports:
/
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app/Contents/MacOS/Little Snitch UIAgent
/usr/share/icu/icudt40l.dat
/private/var/folders/8O/8O+CsmguGHWszfwpDQPKmk+++TI/-Caches-/com.apple.LaunchServices-025501.csstore
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/HIToolbox.framework/Versions/A/Resources/Extras2.rsrc
/System/Library/Fonts/Helvetica.dfont
/usr/lib/dyld
/private/var/db/dyld/dyld_shared_cache_i386
/dev/null
->0x18b9ccec
/Users/kerikino/Library/Logs/Little Snitch UIAgent.log
/private/etc/security/audit_control
count=1, state=0x2
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/HIToolbox.framework/Versions/A/Resources/Extras2.rsrc
/private/etc/security/audit_class
please pardon any newbishness
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app
However, when I ran activity monitor this morning, I noticed--to my surprise--the UI Agent was running... at this location:
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app/Contents/MacOS/Little Snitch UIAgent
So I checked it out and low and behold the initial ui agent had package contents, with an additional ui agent within. Does this mean the program will ultimately fail and snitch itself? Or since the parent folder/application is disabled, we are safe?
here is what activity monitor gave under open files and ports:
/
/Library/Little Snitch/Little Snitch UIAgent.app/Contents/MacOS/Little Snitch UIAgent
/usr/share/icu/icudt40l.dat
/private/var/folders/8O/8O+CsmguGHWszfwpDQPKmk+++TI/-Caches-/com.apple.LaunchServices-025501.csstore
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/HIToolbox.framework/Versions/A/Resources/Extras2.rsrc
/System/Library/Fonts/Helvetica.dfont
/usr/lib/dyld
/private/var/db/dyld/dyld_shared_cache_i386
/dev/null
->0x18b9ccec
/Users/kerikino/Library/Logs/Little Snitch UIAgent.log
/private/etc/security/audit_control
count=1, state=0x2
/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/HIToolbox.framework/Versions/A/Resources/Extras2.rsrc
/private/etc/security/audit_class
please pardon any newbishness
Comments