Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - netjpk

#1
Hello zsolt,

sorry for the delayed reply! Yes, indeed, putting Finder on the Whitelist doesn't make a whole lot of sense!

I still don't know what process (related to Finder) was trying to gain access to the protected folders, but anyway, so far everything works fine again!

Thanks for your help and for "ping-ponging" this with me!

-J. P.
#2
OK, I think we are getting somewhere...

De- and re-installing Espionage worked and the behavior was back to normal... for about a minute. Then Finder requested access to the locked folder (not exactly sure why, some process looking at all folders regularly!?) and since I didn't want to have to deal with these kinds of requests, I put Finder on the WhiteList. After that, I was back to the recently seen behavior, where I can look into a "locked" folder, but not open any of the contained files.

What did I do wrong? I guess I should remove Finder from the Whitelist, right?! How to find out which processes regularly scan folders and which ones of those I can safely put on the Whitelist?

Thanks!

-J. P.
#3
Hello zsolt,

thanks for the reply! I tried what you suggested, but had still the same symptoms, i.e., I can see a "locked" folders contents but I cannot open any of the contained files. At least now, when I double-click on such a file, I get the prompt to enter the password for unlocking the folder. Still, it is not optimal that one can see the folders contents by name, file type and (sometimes) the icon preview.

I am not sure what you could see in the Console (I am not an expert), but I attach a screenshot showing some lines from the Console that might be relevant.

I am not encrypting any folders - I guess I feel that data loss is much more likely when encrypting...

Cheers,

-J. P.
#4
Hi,

I use Espionage mainly to lock folders (I.e., they are not encrypted). Since switching to Mountain Lion, I noticed that I can now click on "locked" folders and still see all their contents. Previously, when clicking on a locked folder, one was prompted to input the password to open the folder - otherwise access was denied. Now, as mentioned, I can immediately see the contents (file names, file types) of the "locked" folders. However, when I double-click a file contained in such a folder it won't open (either "file type not recognized" or "insufficient privileges"). While this is not as good a protection as not even seeing the folders contents, this still prevents unauthorized people from opening these files. However, if I myself want to open these files I have to invoke the Espionage program and switch the folder status manually from "locked" to "unlocked" - needless to say, this is very inconvenient! (I am also not aware of a context-sensitive submenu (right-click) that would offer to unlock a folder!?)

So, I was wondering if that is because of a problem with EspionageHelper or whether there could be another cause for this problem!? In any case, a way to fix it would be appreciated :)

Thanks!

-J.P.
#5
Espionage 2 / Re: Espionage and Hazel
February 20, 2012, 12:09:17 PM
Dear zsolt,

thanks so much for this tip - this seems to do the trick indeed!

in the meantime, I came up with a different way of tackling this issue, namely to put every encrypted folder on an exclusion list in Hazel, but your solution is of course much more elegant, and much more like it should be done!

Thanks again!

-J.P.
#6
Espionage 2 / Espionage and Hazel
February 19, 2012, 08:10:23 AM
Hi there,

I am currently evaluating Espionage, which seems to offer most of the features I am looking for. However, I was wondering if anybody in here had experiences on how to make it work with Hazel (which is a program scanning folders and performing certain actions when necessary)?!? I was trying to add the Hazel prefpane to the whitelist, but that doesn't stop me from getting the password prompt whenever Hazel is (routinely) checking all folders. I guess the problem is that Hazel is not a program as such, but uses processes (e.g., "hazelfolderwatch"), which perhaps cannot be added to the whitelist!?

I am sure several in this forum must use both applications!? Any leads/hints are appreciated!

Thanks!

-J.P.