❌

Normal view

★ iPhone reiniciando sozinho? 6 maneiras de resolver o problema sem perder dados

23 October 2026 at 17:57

Pergunta:

Bom, meu celular começou a reiniciar toda hora, a cada 2 minutos. Achei que fosse a memória, apaguei tudo e não funcionou. Por fim, achei que fossem muitas telas abertas ao mesmo tempo, mas também não era… Não sei o que faço. Comprei esse celular em outubro de 2021.

Relato de um usuário na Comunidade da Apple.

Seu iPhone está reiniciando sozinho, sem aviso? Sem dúvida, é frustrante quando ele reinicia a cada poucos minutos, reinicia durante o uso de um aplicativo ou fica exibindo o logo da Apple repetidamente. Uma reinicialização inesperada pode interromper o uso do aparelho e até impedir que você o utilize normalmente. Esse problema pode ter diversas causas.

Neste artigo, apresentamos seis maneiras de resolver o problema de um iPhone que reinicia sozinho, desde soluções básicas até o reparo profissional do sistema iOS.

Por que o iPhone reinicia sozinho?

Entender as possíveis causas desse problema ajuda a escolher a solução mais adequada. Confira os principais motivos:

  • Falhas no iOS: erros no sistema ou arquivos corrompidos podem provocar reinicializações inesperadas.
  • Falhas nas atualizações de software: uma atualização do iOS interrompida ou malsucedida pode deixar o sistema instável.
  • Pouco espaço de armazenamento: a falta de espaço livre pode prejudicar as atualizações e o funcionamento normal do sistema.
  • Problemas com aplicativos: um aplicativo desatualizado ou incompatível pode causar falhas, especialmente se as reinicializações ocorrerem durante o uso dele.
  • Superaquecimento: o calor excessivo pode afetar o desempenho do aparelho e acionar mecanismos de proteção.
  • Problemas de hardware: uma bateria danificada, exposição a líquidos, uma queda recente ou defeitos em outros componentes internos podem provocar desligamentos e reinicializações repetidas.

Como resolver o problema de o iPhone reiniciar sozinho

Testamos e reunimos algumas soluções práticas a seguir. Recomendamos começar pelas opções mais simples. Se possível, faça um backup dos seus dados importantes antes de tentar procedimentos mais complexos.

Force a reinicialização do iPhone

Forçar a reinicialização pode ajudar quando o iPhone deixa de responder ou apresenta um travamento temporário do sistema. O procedimento não apaga seus dados pessoais e é uma boa primeira tentativa quando o aparelho entra em um ciclo de reinicializações.

Os passos variam de acordo com o modelo do iPhone.

iPhone 8 ou posterior, incluindo iPhone SE (2ª geração ou posterior)

Pressione e solte rapidamente o botão de aumentar o volume. Em seguida, pressione e solte rapidamente o botão de diminuir o volume. Por fim, mantenha pressionado o botão lateral até o logo da Apple aparecer na tela. Então, solte o botão.

iPhone 7 e iPhone 7 Plus

Mantenha pressionados simultaneamente o botão lateral e o botão de diminuir o volume. Continue pressionando ambos até o logo da Apple aparecer na tela.

iPhone 6s, iPhone SE (1ª geração) ou modelos anteriores

Mantenha pressionados simultaneamente o botão de Início e o botão lateral ou superior. Solte ambos quando o logo da Apple aparecer na tela.

Recarregue o iPhone e verifique se ele está superaquecendo

Uma bateria com carga extremamente baixa ou o calor excessivo podem fazer com que o aparelho reinicie inesperadamente. Por isso, verifique se o iPhone tem carga suficiente e está operando em uma temperatura normal.

Deixe o aparelho recarregando por pelo menos 30 minutos. Se estiver quente, coloque-o em um local bem ventilado e aguarde até que esfrie naturalmente antes de voltar a utilizá-lo.

Atualize o iOS e os aplicativos

Aplicativos desatualizados e falhas no iOS podem provocar travamentos e instabilidade no sistema. Se o iPhone continua reiniciando sozinho, verifique se há atualizações disponíveis.

Atualize o iOS

Abra Ajustes e acesse Geral » Atualização de Software. Se houver uma atualização disponível, confira os detalhes e toque em “Atualizar Agora” ou “Baixar e Instalar”, conforme as opções exibidas.

Mantenha o iPhone conectado à energia e a uma rede Wi-Fi confiável até que a atualização seja concluída.

Atualize os aplicativos

Abra a App Store no iPhone e toque na sua foto de perfil, no canto superior direito. Confira as atualizações disponíveis e toque em “Atualizar Tudo” ou atualize individualmente os aplicativos que possam estar relacionados ao problema.

Libere espaço de armazenamento no iPhone

Quando o armazenamento do iPhone está quase cheio, determinadas tarefas e atualizações de software podem falhar ou se tornar difíceis de concluir. Liberar espaço é uma medida útil para solucionar o problema, desde que ainda seja possível acessar o aparelho normalmente.

Para verificar o armazenamento, acesse Ajustes » Geral » Armazenamento do iPhone. Nessa tela, você poderá conferir quanto espaço está sendo utilizado e identificar aplicativos e conteúdos que podem ser removidos.

Resolva o problema de reinicializações do iPhone com o TunesKit iOS System Recovery

Se você já tentou as soluções básicas, mas o iPhone continua reiniciando sozinho, pode haver um problema mais complexo no sistema iOS que exija um reparo mais abrangente.

O TunesKit iOS System Recovery é um software para computadores desenvolvido pela TunesKit para corrigir problemas de software em iPhones e iPads. Entre os problemas que a ferramenta se propõe a resolver estão falhas na inicialização, dificuldades para entrar ou sair do modo de recuperação, erros durante atualizações, telas congeladas e outras falhas do sistema iOS.

O modo Standard Repair (Reparo Padrão) foi desenvolvido para solucionar problemas comuns do sistema sem apagar os dados do usuário.

TunesKit iOS System Recovery
  1. Baixe, instale e abra o TunesKit iOS System Recovery no computador. Conecte o iPhone ao computador, selecione “iOS System Repair” e clique em “Start”.
  2. Escolha “Standard Repair” entre os modos de reparo disponíveis. Esse é o modo recomendado para corrigir problemas relacionados ao software sem perda de dados.
TunesKit iOS System Recovery
  1. Siga as instruções exibidas na tela para colocar o iPhone no Modo de Recuperação (Recovery Mode) ou no modo DFU (Device Firmware Update). Em seguida, baixe o pacote de firmware correspondente ao seu iPhone.
  2. Clique em “Repair” para iniciar o reparo do problema de reinicializações. Mantenha o iPhone conectado ao computador até que o processo seja concluído. Depois, verifique se o aparelho inicia normalmente e se as reinicializações inesperadas pararam.

Verifique se há problemas de hardware

Se o iPhone continua reiniciando, a causa pode estar relacionada ao hardware, e não ao software do iOS. Uma bateria danificada, defeitos nos componentes de alimentação, exposição a líquidos ou danos internos podem provocar desligamentos inesperados.

Se suspeitar de um problema desse tipo, interrompa o uso do aparelho e procure assistência técnica especializada. Você pode entrar em contato com o Suporte da Apple ou procurar um Centro de Serviço Autorizado Apple para obter um diagnóstico mais preciso.

Conclusão

As reinicializações inesperadas do iPhone podem ter diversas causas, desde uma falha temporária de software até um problema mais sério de hardware. Comece pelas soluções básicas apresentadas neste artigo. Se o problema estiver relacionado ao software, o TunesKit iOS System Recovery pode ser uma alternativa para tentar corrigi-lo. Caso as reinicializações persistam, pode ser necessário procurar assistência técnica para realizar um diagnóstico do hardware.

MacVoices #26277: Live! – Evolving Full Disk Access For Security, and Voluntary AI Regulations

By: Chuck
13 October 2026 at 17:36
Apple’s warning about AI agents misusing Full Disk Access sparks a debate over Mac security, privacy, and the potential consequences for developers and users. The MacVoices Live! panel examines Apple’s permission system, the need for more granular controls, and concerns about restricting legitimate applications and developer options. The discussion also questions Mark Zuckerberg’s involvement in drafting the White House’s voluntary AI regulatory accord and whether self-regulation is the best solution to potentially dangerous advances in AI. 

💾

Unspecified Full Disk Access Screw Tightening

5 October 2026 at 20:40

Apple (Hacker News, MacRumors, Lobsters, TidBITS Talk):

Full Disk Access largely sidesteps these controls in order to allow backup apps to function properly on the Mac. Some developers are using Full Disk Access in ways that could put users at risk, exposing everything on their systems—including files, mail, messages, and even browsing history—without users’ full knowledge and understanding.

[…]

Going forward, we will introduce additional controls to ensure that users who genuinely wish to grant an app this extraordinary level of access can only do so with very explicit user action. Addressing this is critical. As AI agents become increasingly capable and autonomous, the risks associated with this level of access will grow substantially.

Guy English:

It was pretty obvious something like this would happen after the Muse accessing Messages news.

Jeff Johnson:

What we have is just one noisy, confused journalist, Jason Aten. He granted FDA to Muse but refuses to admit it, to the public or even to himself.

I see several issues with the current Full Disk Access system:

  1. Backup apps need FDA, but so do many other types of apps. Often, they don’t need full disk access but rather they need to work around a missing or broken API. All of my apps except ToothFairy use FDA, not because I want to or because it’s easier to code, but because without it the user experience would be much worse or key features wouldn’t work at all.

  2. There is no API for apps to see whether they have FDA or to request it from the user. It’s not like, say, accessing the user’s Contacts where macOS pops up a standard dialog and the app supplies a “reason” string to specify why it wants access. Instead, each app presents its own set of instructions for how to enable it deep in System Settings. It requires the confusing maneuver of first adding the app to the list; it doesn’t automatically show up with a slider switch next to it, like with other privacy settings. This adds an obstacle for users to get up and running with an app but doesn’t really provide additional security, just obscurity.

  3. FDA is not granular. There’s no way for apps to request only the permissions they actually need. For example, SpamSieve wants to be able to access the user’s mail, but it doesn’t need or want to see their iMessages or browser history. This is bad for users because they may be exposing more information than they want to and bad for developers because some users will think your app isn’t worth the risks.

  4. There is no way for the user to see what the app actually did. If it tells me that it wants FDA to access my mail but actually it mucked around with my Time Machine backup, how would I know?

  5. Apple’s wording in System Settings is not very clear. I don’t think most users really understand what FDA is doing.

  6. The previous items combine to create opportunities for malfeasance. It’s normalized that many apps that seem like they wouldn’t need full disk access do need FDA, so this makes it easier for apps to trick the user into granting it under false pretenses. Apple requires that apps coach the user through the process, so it’s normal that users mostly see text from the app (which might not be trustworthy) rather than standard text from Apple, as with other permissions prompts.

But the problem in the Muse case was not malfeasance. Rather, it seems that Muse asked Aten to enable FDA, but he doesn’t remember doing so or didn’t understand what he was doing. It sounds like Apple wants to make this consent more clear, which is good, but other issues would remain. As with the recent keychain story, this feels like a bandaid rather than a thoughtful solution to the real problem. The issues with FDA were clear when it was introduced 8 years ago, and many Radars were filed, but it’s been virtually unchanged since.

Apple seems to think that by making a scarier warning they can convince more users not to grant FDA—or at least perhaps deflect blame from Apple to the user if they later regret it. Maybe that solves Apple’s problem, but it doesn’t really solve the user’s problem. The user is installing Muse because it’s more capable than Siri. They probably do want it to access some protected data, e.g. so it can find information in their mail or messages. So they actually do need to give it FDA. Aside from deterrence, Apple is not actually protecting the user. And the deterrence is kind of sketchy. Rather than providing a safe way for users to choose what to share with a competing product, Apple is saying the only option is to share everything, and then discouraging that. Meanwhile, there’s no switch to turn off Apple Intelligence. It’s like they expect you to stay on eWorld and not download Netscape. I actually really liked eWorld, and the broad Internet wasn’t totally safe (though neither was eWorld), but that doesn’t seem like much of a strategy.

Jeff Johnson:

Below I’ve embedded […] a screen recording of a macOS Virtual Machine showing the first run experience of the Meta Muse app.

[…]

It’s important to note that macOS has no API for an app to request or acquire Full Disk Access. The only way for an app to receive Full Disk Access is via the Full Disk Access pane of System Settings, as shown in the video. Thus, the only thing an app can do is open the System Settings pane for the user, as also shown in the video. Once the user is in System Settings, it’s up to the user to manually grant Full Disk Access.

Without Full Disk Access, Muse cannot access the user’s Messages database. If it could, that would be a macOS zero day vulnerability.

[…]

Aten oddly writes as if the “if you give it Full Disk Access” earlier in the article were counterfactual, merely hypothetical, still insisting that he did not give Full Disk Access to Muse.

John Gruber (Mastodon):

I really worry about just how much Apple is going to lock Full Disk Access down. I use it with several apps that couldn’t function properly without it, and would be severely hampered if I needed to authorize it manually every time they do something.

Ben Lovejoy:

However, what Apple absolutely must not do is to make the mistake it made with macOS Sequoia over screen recording. Sure, this is also incredibly dangerous and very strong warnings are appropriate, but what Apple did then was to force us all to confirm these permissions on a weekly basis, as well as after every restart.

Dave Nanian:

Well, this is certainly ominous news for backup programs.

Like it’s not hard enough to turn this stuff on…

Nick Heer:

Is Apple suggesting this capability could be limited in the future to backup applications alone? I do not like that.

[…]

Because of the lack of information available at present, I do not want to get too far ahead of myself, but I am concerned that it could be a significant curtailing of application permissions. It has the potential for further self-preferencing, as Apple will surely exempt Siri from the kinds of permissions requests it requires of third-party apps, even as it is updated with additional capabilities.

[…]

Call me a naïve little baby if you want, but I do not think preserving Siri’s dominance on Apple’s devices is the company’s reason for locking down Full Disk Access. But Apple’s existing restrictions are part of the reason Siri was awful for a decade. If it had the opportunity to compete with third-party replacements, I doubt it would have languished in a miserable state for as long as it did.

John Voorhees:

[Only] a handful of apps to which I’ve granted Full Disk Access are backup apps. Others include the Finder replacement Bloom, launchers like Alfred, the wonderful selection utility PopClip, Apple’s own Pixelmator Pro, Setapp, TestFlight, Supercharge, Madden NFL 27 Arcade Edition, Hazel, and many others. It’s a diverse selection of apps covering everything from Apple’s own apps to Mac utilities that are longtime favorites of MacStories readers, and even one Apple Arcade game.

[…]

On the one hand, it seems to suggest that users will simply have to jump through additional explicit hoops to grant Full Disk Access to their agents and other apps. On the other hand, claiming that Full Disk Access was designed solely for backup apps raises red flags that could signal that the company intends to restrict the kinds of apps that can use Full Disk Access. I sure hope not.

Dan Moren:

But there are plenty of legit uses for Full Disk Access. Just looking at my MacBook Air this morning, I’ve given that permission to three apps: Terminal, BBEdit, and SuperDuper. All apps that I trust with that level of power because of their long history and because in order to do what they do best (or at all), they need that access. (Interestingly, on my Mac mini, that list also includes SpamSieve, KnockKnock, and Shortcuts—though not BBEdit, for whatever reason.)

[…]

I think there is a good argument for protecting Full Disk Access further, but there’s also only so much you can do to protect a user from themselves. Ultimately, this is a cat-and-mouse game, and while I don’t want my data purloined or misused, I also don’t want my computer locked down to the point that I can’t use it for all the things I want to do.

Ben Thompson (Hacker News):

To say that I’m nervous about what Apple’s solution will entail is a massive understatement. There is one aspect in which the Mac is the perfect agent host: Apple has, for decades, invested in a combination of scriptability, automation, and accessibility APIs (these are very often the same thing) that makes it remarkably well-suited to computer use. Then there is the fact that macOS is a certified Unix system; this means that agents — which are perfectly suited to the command line — have access to the entire universe of tooling built for Unix systems. And, of course, Mac hardware is amazing.

The problem is that for my particular use case — a headless, always-on Mac Mini that I primarily access from other computers and my phone through the ChatGPT and Claude apps — macOS is incredibly hostile. The biggest issue is GUI-only permission prompts that are invisible to software running on said computer, including agents.

[…]

This system is annoying but manageable on your primary Mac; it’s a disaster on a headless Mac running agents, for two reasons. First, agents write new programs all of the time, and in my case, those programs need access to devices on my network (SMB shares, for example, trigger a TCC warning). What I need is a permission layer for agents, not the programs they create; TCC is operating at the wrong level of abstraction.

Second, the TCC subsystem exposes its prompt in a protected space that no program can see; that means that programs silently fail and the agents don’t know why; what I have to do is remember that there is probably a permissions prompt on screen, log into the Mac Mini with screen-sharing software, and click OK.

Wade Tregaskis:

Apple’d get a long way by just renaming the privilege. How many laypeople understand what a “disk” even is? Regular people just talk vaguely about how much “memory” their computer has - if they think about it at all other than when they run out of disk space - at which point, how many just think that means they have to buy a new computer? So, how about just “Full Access to All Your Data”? Call it what it basically is.

Jason Anthony Guy:

If Apple has time (or is especially motivated), it might also add more granular options to control what data apps can access. For example, instead of today’s single toggle that grants an app access to the broadly defined “data like Mail, Messages, Safari, Home, Time Machine backups, and certain administrative settings,” it might instead allow you to enable access to specific data on a per-app basis. This would allow, for example, Muse to access Mail and Safari, but not Messages or Time Machine.

Kevin Grant:

With all the levels of entitlements and crap they added, I find it ironic that SIP is “only” implemented as “open up every damned thing to everyone” without more refined levels.

John:

I was frankly surprised when I learned FDA was for a machine, across user accounts, rather than for a single user. It seems like granting root, something the *nix community has tried to reduce and lock down for decades.

I certainly don’t trust anyone’s AI with root, and creating a weak, non-admin, user for AI experiments should be a safe path.

Jimmy Callin:

While [Gruber sees] this as a “why we can’t have nice things” moment, I see it as another case of Apple using privacy to limit competition in areas it currently lag behind.

I’d prefer to decouple trust in how my personal data is handled from trust in a particular platform or software vendor. That’s what I personally value about EU’s approach: give people rights over their information, make mishandling it a legal liability, and severely punish companies that break those rules.

Apple getting unique privileges to access sensitive data simply because they own the platform, and thus there is an implicit trust in their handling of it, feels like a brittle long-term strategy. If this works without causing anti-trust issues, it only makes Apple more dominant while locking out potentially useful software.

Previously:

Update (2026-10-06): See also: TidBITS Talk and Vitor.

Howard Oakley:

Whether or not you would ever want to unleash AI agents on your Mac, Apple does need to refine Full Disk Access as a matter of urgency. But its design and engineering cannot be rushed. Merely adding to the complexity of current Privacy settings wouldn’t help users, many of whom already find privacy protection confusing and opaque.

Sherief, FYI:

it’s clear there’s consumer demand for automated access to iMessages, and instead of offering a proper API with audit trails and fine-grained controls Apple would rather force users to FDA then cry fowl when they grant FDA.

Previously:

Update (2026-10-14): Adam Engst:

63% of the more than 200 people who voted said they had granted Full Disk Access to 6 or more apps, with over half of those people saying they had given 11 or more apps that level of access. In short, Full Disk Access is essential to how many of us use our Macs.

At the same time, Full Disk Access feels a bit like a Band-Aid, partly because Apple hasn’t put enough thought into more granular permissions, forcing many apps to rely on Full Disk Access even when they don’t need all its capabilities.

[…]

Given that Apple’s statement about Full Disk Access seems to have been prompted by the release of Meta’s Muse AI agent, I would suggest Apple think more carefully about how such agents should be handled. They may legitimately need Full Disk Access, along with numerous other permissions, but beyond what would appear in an App Privacy Report, I would like to see them maintain complete logs of every permission-enabled action they take on your computer. Preferably in human-readable form.

MacVoices #26267: Cloud Storage Isn’t Backup and Evaluating Googlebooks

By: Chuck
30 September 2026 at 00:01
The panel looks at macOS 27 ending Time Capsule backup support, then debates Google’s new Android-based laptops and its attempt to build a tighter ecosystem. Other topics include Chrome’s retro-style bookmark launchpad and GM’s geolocation privacy settlement before a deep dive into cloud storage, AWS data loss, redundancy, service agreements, and why cloud storage is […]

💾

Locked Down Passkey and Keychain Backups

24 September 2026 at 20:49

I remain unhappy with Apple’s passkey backup story. There’s little documentation about this, but from what I can tell:

  • There are no automatic versioned backups. (Syncing is not backup because it doesn’t protect you against human error, bugs, or attacks.)

  • Even if you have a Time Machine backup, it’s not possible to restore it to the same Mac without logging into iCloud. This could be a problem if your account is locked or compromised.

  • Restoring it to a different Mac is impossible because the decryption key is stored in the other Mac’s Secure Enclave. Apple is protecting you from accessing your own backup, even though the keychain is already an encrypted file, protected by the password that you set. (And the Time Machine or clone drive that it’s stored on is probably encrypted, too.)

  • The Passwords app can now export passkeys, but you cannot create an export file that you can import back into Passwords on another Mac. You can only export to a third-party password manager that’s installed on the same Mac (which may require a working Apple account). Even then, this does not include passkeys for Apple services; they don’t show up in the Passwords app. There are also some other restrictions around shared items and Sign In with Apple.

The above is last year’s news, but I don’t think I had written it all in one place before. The new bad news is that, as of macOS 26.4, these problems now affect regular passwords, not just passkeys. (You do have more flexibility to export passwords, though.)

Rich Trouton (Hacker News):

Historically, you could copy the login keychain file from one Mac to another and be able to open it on the destination Mac by providing the password to that keychain. As of macOS Tahoe, this does not appear to work for Macs which use Secure Enclave.

[…]

From that, it appears that unlocking the login keychain requires more than the password because the keys it unlocks are tied to the Secure Enclave of the Mac where the keychain was created. With the decryption keys stored in the source Mac’s Secure Enclave, manually copying the keychain to another Mac and then unlocking it won’t work. The password you have for the keychain may be correct, but the actual keys needed to decrypt its contents won’t be available on the destination Mac.

Jeff Johnson:

According to Apple, all Apple silicon Macs, as well as some Intel Mac models, have the secure enclave processor, so the issue affects millions of Mac users.

[…]

If anything happens to your Mac, if it’s stolen or becomes inoperable, your login keychain is also lost, unrecoverable, even if you have a copy of the login keychain file! This is a stunning development that has left me bewildered and irate. WTF was Apple thinking? To my knowledge, Apple did not even publicize the change in Tahoe.

[…]

How does Migration Assistant handle the situation on Tahoe? I don’t know. I would guess that since Migration Assistant still has access to the old Mac, it simply decrypts the old login keychain and copies the login keychain entries to the new login keychain on the new Mac, rather than transferring the keychain files directly.

[…]

I recommend that you open your login keychain with the Keychain Access app (now located in /System/Library/CoreServices/Applications) and check what’s in there, the data that you’re in danger of losing. Whether you realize or it not, many apps use the login keychain. For example, Google Chrome and other Chromium browsers store passwords in the login keychain. MailMate stores email account passwords in the login keychain. The open source RSS reader Vienna stores website passwords in the login keychain. The Zoom app also uses the login keychain. My Developer ID code signing certificate is stored in the login keychain; if I’m not mistaken, I believe that Apple’s own Xcode put it there. And of course, any items that you’ve manually added to the login keychain would be lost if the keychain file could not be unlocked.

Howard Oakley:

I have confirmed that a login.keychain-db copied from my Mac mini M4 Pro to a virtual machine (VM) running macOS Tahoe 26.6.2 cannot reveal any of its secrets to the Keychain Access app on the VM, as it refuses to accept the valid password. Not only that, but Keychain Access running in a VM cannot access the login.keychain-db keychain copied from another Tahoe VM, although neither has been anywhere near a Secure Enclave.

If you intend migrating manually between Macs, don’t waste time trying to copy across the login keychain, as it’s not likely to work, and its secrets will remain.

[…]

I performed test migrations between VMs, and demonstrated that Migration Assistant does copy the contents of the login keychain successfully to the destination Mac.

I think this only happens if you migrate over a network, with the old Mac acting as a server. I prefer to connect the old Mac using Target Disk Mode, but in that case Migration Assistant wouldn’t be running on the old Mac so the special sauce wouldn’t work. Likewise if I were trying to do the migration using a third-party cloning app.

Howard Oakley:

  • Loss of physical access to a Mac running 26.4 or later prevents access to any items stored in its login keychain.
  • Hardware failure requiring logic board replacement may have the same effect on restoring the contents of its login keychain (assuming that migration from a backup doesn’t work).
  • Restoring an Apple silicon Mac in DFU mode may be similar in effect.

What I don’t know yet is whether you can unlock and access any login keychain written by macOS 26.4 or later and migrated from a backup accessed directly from a different Mac. This would occur in one-Mac migration, when Migration Assistant uses a backup of a Mac not acting as a Migration server. This would only be possible if the backup also stored the additional secret required to access the login keychain, which seems unlikely.

[…]

Apple’s documentation for macOS Tahoe and the copying of keychains makes no mention of this change, in spite of its serious consequences and the change being made almost six months ago.

It there states “If you didn’t use Setup Assistant, the best way to copy your keychains to a new computer is to export and then import them using Keychain Access”. However, Keychain Access can only export some keychain items including certificates and keys, but not passwords. And to do that, the Mac must be able to unlock and access those items in the source keychain. Thus, Apple’s recommendations are out of date and will now fail.

rsUSA0 (via Jeff Johnson):

When upgrading to macos 27 Golden Gate, I erased my system through recovery to do a clean install. I planned to manually migrate data back to the computer from an external drive clone of Macintosh HD and a Time Machine backup. This has worked well in the past and eliminated system bloat.

When I manually migrated my login keychain, it opened, showed entries, but it wouldn’t accept my password to reveal any actual passwords. The window shakes like I’m using the wrong password. I’m 100% sure I’m using the correct password. I also tried every password I’ve ever used and I’m certain it’s not a password issue.

Perhaps even restoring to the same Mac failed because the clean install wiped the key stored in the Secure Enclave. [Update (2026-10-01): See update below.]

Jeff Johnson:

Some people who read my previous blog post misunderstood the issue, because they didn’t know that the macOS login keychain is distinct from iCloud Keychain.

[…]

In the Keychain Access app, you can see two separate default keychains, one of which is the login keychain. The other default keychain is named “iCloud” if you’ve enabled iCloud Keychain, “Local Items” if not. There’s actually a longstanding issue with this keychain analogous to the newer issue with the login keychain.

[…]

Mac users like myself who forsake iCloud Keychain face the prospect of no disaster recovery for the Local Items keychain. My habit is to manually create a new password item in the login keychain and only then supply the credentials to an app, for example, Safari AutoFill. Ironically, the login keychain change brought by macOS 26.4 sabotages my password backup procedure[…]

jen1x:

Today, I got my new Mac mini M6. When I started setting up the new machine, it asked me to update to macOS 27, so I followed the instructions.

[…]

After signing in to iCloud, it asked me to enter the passcode of one of my Apple devices. I entered the correct passcode and even tried the passcodes for all of my devices, but I keep getting the same message:

Verification Failed
There was an error verifying the passcode of your iPhone

I don’t like having to rely on iCloud.

Previously:

Update (2026-10-01): TN3137 has been updated for macOS 26.4:

Historically each file-based keychain was a standalone file. You could, for example, copy a keychain file from one Mac to another and still use it, as long as you knew the keychain password.

In macOS 26.4 and later that’s no longer the case. A keychain file might reference a protected entropy file. To unlock such a keychain you need both the keychain password and the protected entropy file.

[…]

These protected entropy files are stored in /var/db/SystemKeys. If you’re creating a backup product, make sure to back up that directory. Without it, the keychain files that you back up might be useless.

[…]

The /var/db/SystemKeys directory is not directly accessible, even when running as root, so you can’t copy a protected entropy file in the normal way. To access it, disable System Integrity Protection (SIP).

First things first: I don’t think turning off SIP every time you make a backup is a real solution. And I don’t understand what problem Apple is really trying to solve with protecting the entropy file; it seems like they don’t trust their own encryption. Lastly, it’s not explicitly stated, but I don’t think copying the entropy file helps with backing up passkeys.

That aside, I find the details both illuminating and confusing. This probably explains the rsUSA0 case above, where restoring to the same Mac didn’t work. The key wasn’t stored in the Secure Enclave but rather in the entropy file on the SSD, which had been wiped. This also suggests a simpler way for Migration Assistant to work; it could have special access to copy the entropy file without having to actually open the keychain.

It also seems to be saying that, if you turn off SIP and copy the entropy file, you can then access your keychain backup from another Mac. But I’m not sure how to square that with Apple’s keychain documentation:

Keychain items are encrypted using two different AES-256-GCM keys: a table key (metadata) and a per-row key (secret key). Keychain metadata (all attributes other than kSecValue) is encrypted with the metadata key to speed searches, and the secret value (kSecValueData) is encrypted with the secret key. The metadata key is protected by the Secure Enclave but is cached in the Application Processor to allow fast queries of the keychain. The secret key always requires a round trip through the Secure Enclave.

How can copying the entropy file work if the Secure Enclave is required? My guess is that the entropy file itself is encrypted (NSFileProtection) using the Secure Enclave. So accessing it on the original Mac does require going through the Secure Enclave. But when you make a backup, the entropy file gets decrypted. Maybe accessing the keychain on the second Mac causes file protection to be re-applied to the contents of /var/db/SystemKeys, so then it becomes protected by that Mac’s Secure Enclave.

Previously:

Update (2026-10-02): Dave Nanian (Mastodon):

This is obviously not a good user solution, because no one is going to boot to Recovery, turn off SIP, back up, boot back to Recovery, and turn SIP back on. Thinking they would do so is kind of crazy.

[…]

SuperDuper handles this situation. When you make a bootable copy, the required keys are copied without requiring any special steps.

SuperDuper itself can’t read the entropy file, but it uses Apple’s asr tool to make bootable backups, and that has special access. (Unfortunately, it can’t update the entropy file without making a fresh bootable backup, but in practice I don’t expect it to need updating.) I had not been bothering to make most of my backups bootable, since in most cases I just want to restore to an internal SSD, not actually boot from the backup. But I now think it makes sense to choose bootable backups as the default.

Howard Oakley (Rich Trouton):

I won’t expand on my feelings any further than by saying that in my 37 years as an Apple developer, I have never come across anything so shameful.

Unfortunately, it seems like the keychain stuff was just the warm-up act.

Update (2026-10-05): Howard Oakley:

[macOS 26.4] Added the protected directory at /var/db/SystemKeys to backups of Data volumes, and protects them in backups.

So Time Machine does back up the entropy file. I missed this because I didn’t see /var/db in my backups, but it turns out that they do have /private/var/db/SystemKeys and are just missing the /var symlink.

Update (2026-10-07): Jeff Johnson:

The -s option to the security show-keychain-info is not yet documented in man security, not even on the latest version of macOS Golden Gate. Moreover, the -s option does not work on macOS Sequoia and earlier. In general, the security show-keychain-info command reveals no information unless the specified keychain is unlocked, which makes it impossible to discover the salt of a keychain file that you can’t currently unlock. However, as long as you already have the entire contents of the /var/db/SystemKeys directory from the macOS volume on which a keychain file was created, the inability to determine the keychain file’s salt beforehand shouldn’t be much of a problem, because in practice there are typically only a few salt files, so you can simply copy them all to another macOS volume.

[…]

You don’t actually have to disable SIP to add files to the /var/db/SystemKeys directory, because you can do so from another boot volume. You have to boot into recovery anyway in order to disable SIP, so you could simply edit /var/db/SystemKeys from recovery rather than disabling SIP on the non-recovery volume.

The security unlock-keychain command lacks an option to specify the location of an entropy file or to provide the file data directly, so unfortunately a login keychain can’t be unlocked from the recovery volume, only from a volume where you can add files to the /var/db/SystemKeys directory.

Carbon Copy Cloner 7.2

22 September 2026 at 21:36

Mike Bombich:

I remember seeing this one way back in Big Sur; you’d create a perfectly functional bootable copy of the system, but it wouldn’t show up in the Startup Disk Preference Pane. Apple ultimately resolved that issue in macOS Monterey, but now we’re seeing it again — unfixed in the Golden Gate release candidate.

The new CCC has a workaround, as does SuperDuper.

CCC 7.2 introduces a hybrid approach for bootable backups: as long as the source and backup OS versions are the same, CCC will update the backup incrementally without requiring any task configuration changes. This new approach will make many of the CCC-specific features available for bootable backup tasks, e.g. backup versioning, Quick Update, insight into what changes were made to the source between events. For the long stretches of time where your Mac’s OS isn’t getting updated every day, now you can enjoy the full benefits of the CCC backup solution.

These are great benefits for anyone that requires a bootable backup, but this isn’t a panacea. If the OS versions don’t match, the destination (and all backup versions) still must be erased and recloned; again, to offer the most reliably-bootable copy of macOS. We made improvements here, too. By default, CCC will ask for your approval before erasing the destination — this allows you to schedule your backup task without the fear of the backup getting automatically erased whenever the source OS is updated. That also allows you to retain the option of downgrading the source volume’s macOS, which you might want a day or so to assess.

Previously:

macOS 27 Golden Gate

14 September 2026 at 21:51

Apple (release notes, security, enterprise, developer, full installer, IPSW):

Explore what’s new for macOS 27.

The page is designed in an annoying way that requires sideways scrolling, and there doesn’t seem to be a PDF list of the new features like in previous years.

See also:

Jeff Johnson:

There’s also a DEPRECATION NOTICE at the top of the man page that lists the diskutil replacements for hdiutil subcommands.

Patrick Wardle:

Fixed: launchd no longer supports loading launchd property list files with the quarantine extended attribute.

Dave Nanian:

[Even] though a bootable backup is properly configured to boot, they aren’t showing up as choices in either the startup disk preference pane or the startup picker. (FB24210103, reported quite a while ago, Apple friends.)

Previously:

Update (2026-09-17): See also: Hacker News.

Andrew Cunningham (Hacker News):

Generative AI is unavoidable if you install macOS 27 Golden Gate. I’m being very literal: There used to be a toggle you could hit if you wanted to turn off Apple Intelligence and delete the gigabytes’ worth of AI models it would download to your disk, and now there isn’t. Apple Intelligence defines the Golden Gate release, in everything from its marketing to its features to the chips it runs on to the amount of space it takes on your disk.

[…]

More impressively, for apps that support it, the iPhone Mirroring window can now be resized dynamically while running apps. Apps will resize themselves to take up all the available space, and once the window is wide enough, you can even take advantage of multi-column iPad-style views for the apps that offer them.

[…]

For most Mac users, though, Golden Gate is a no-brainer update with few major downsides. It won’t hurt anything to wait until the 27.1 or 27.2 release if you’re already on macOS 15 Sequoia or macOS 26 Tahoe and you’re not in a hurry.

Juli Clover:

macOS Golden Gate: 10 Features to Try First

Paul Haddad:

Did Virtualization under 27 get hit with the slow stick? Trying to run a Mac VM on my M1 Ultra and it feels basically unusable. Getting Intel flashbacks.

Jeff Johnson:

In System Settings Privacy & Security, the Accessibility pane has been renamed to Device Control and Data Access.

Avi Drissman:

Have you been noticing that, starting with macOS 27, you have been consistently failing to SSH to a remote machine? Is it the case that the remote machine’s password ends with a shifted character?

There is a new setting: “Shift Return sends Meta Return” under Settings > Profiles > (profile) > Keyboard. This setting (enabled by default!) will cause a shift-return keypress to insert an ESC before the return is sent.

Rich Trouton:

As part of testing macOS Golden Gate, it was discovered by myself and others that MDM enrollment does not appear to completely work.

Adam Maxwell (tweet):

Golden Gate broke AuthorizationExecuteWithPrivileges such that spawned tasks no longer inherit PATH of the calling process[…]

Daniel Compton:

After upgrading to macOS 27 Golden Gate, my beloved copy of 1Password 7 started crashing every time I unlocked it.

[…]

If you’re planning ahead, you can disable Watchtower from Settings before you upgrade to macOS 27, but if you’ve already upgraded, then you’ll need to disable it with the following terminal command[…]

Update (2026-09-21): Benjamin Mayo:

Ever since updating to Golden Gate, my Mac now periodically makes a scratchy paper alert sound. No idea from what.

Chris Pepper:

Hopefully 1Password will upgrade v7 for OS 27 compatibility, but I can’t count on them fixing bugs in v7 — they’re pushing users to v8.

I found a ‘fix’ for this crash, but that command didn’t work (even after enabling Full Disk Access for Terminal so it could actually execute), and isn’t available on iPhone or iPad.

Nicholas Riley:

Golden Gate status: wow, the new menu extra/Control Center area is rough. Not just unpolished UI behaviors but multiple crashes. Hidden Bar is no longer functional and none of the replacements I found actually worked, while having about 100 features I don’t want.

System keyboard shortcuts also seem to be an area that weren’t well tested. My preferred screenshot shortcuts were ignored until I opened that section of System Settings, and some Siri thing created a conflict with Spotlight so I get both of them when I press ⇧⌘Space.

Previously:

Update (2026-09-23): Jesse Squires:

macOS golden gate is still shockingly terrible in unexpected ways.

Steve Troughton-Smith:

I’m no math expert, but I’m pretty sure this doesn’t add up to anywhere near 16GB. I’ve only started seeing this dialog in the release build of macOS 27.0, despite running the betas all summer, so clearly there are some ghosts in this build

Mario Guzmán:

Okay… how do you

  1. make everything super huge like the text and pictures… while
  2. having way more empty space than you need AND STILL have to
  3. truncate your text labels?

8 of the 9 text labels are truncated.

Can we please have designers who know how to design for DESKTOP software and NOT magazines/print?

Jeff Johnson:

There are a surprising number of behavioral bugs in Golden Gate. It's not just a superficial update. Apple is basically breaking AppKit.

Mark Lilback:

I reported a bug to Apple in May, found while building Alcove. Two OS releases later it still isn’t fixed. It has gotten worse with each one.

[…]

On the betas the whole window went blank after the Cmd-Tab: sidebar, content, detail pane, status bar, everything but the toolbar. On the 27.0 release it usually doesn’t wait for the Cmd-Tab. In 5 of 6 clean launches the window came up with only the toolbar drawn. Cmd-Tabbing away and back doesn’t fix it. It moves the sidebar’s first row up under the traffic-light buttons and leaves the rest of the window empty[…]

Jeff Johnson (Reddit):

Golden Gate Finder bug:

If you start dragging a file, the mouse scroll wheel stops working.

Jeff Johnson:

I’m seeing a bug on Golden Gate where main menu item titles are not displayed if the item is added to the menu after launch. Examples: the Safari Develop menu and the Profile menus of Chrome and Firefox.

Update (2026-09-24): Avi Drissman:

It’s bizarre that hiding a main menu item would hold the space rather then shift things over.

Jeff Johnson:

Search on Golden Gate is twice as good.

Update (2026-09-25): Ric Ford:

Randy Singer emailed us about printer and scanner failures following macOS 27 installation. Fortunately, there’s a fix: reinstalling Apple’s deprecated and removed Rosetta 2 emulation code[…]

Paul Kafasis:

We’re also already recommending upgrading your Mac to Golden Gate. The new OS includes several important audio improvements, and as a result, Golden Gate provides the best experience when using our apps. Below, you’ll find details on key bug fixes Apple included in MacOS 27.

pdfu (via Jeff Johnson):

Hidden behind a feature flag, the System Settings app can now be resized in any direction. You can make the app window narrower than the default too, or adjust the sidebar to get even more space.

Update (2026-09-28): Matt:

Steve Jobs would fire the entire company and replace them with AI if he was alive to see this

Collin Allen:

Turns out, Backblaze is half busted on macOS 27 and there’s no fix yet. Have to launch /Library/Backblaze.bzpkg/bzbmenu.app manually for now, it seems.

Update (2026-10-05): Karsten Kusche:

Kudos to 1Password for providing an update for version 7 on iOS and macOS to restore compatibility with this year’s operating systems!!

SuperDuper’s “Follow-Up”

31 August 2026 at 20:44

Dave Nanian:

Recent versions of xOS (that is, macOS, iOS, iPadOS, etc) have Data Protection Classes from A to D that get assigned to files and folders.

[…]

The thing is, though, is that these files and folders are inaccessible unless the user is logged in, and the screen is unlocked. A few seconds after the screen locks (or you log out), the keys are purged, and they cannot be read.

[…]

That means the files any application considers to be worth protection cannot be accessed when a backup usually happens.

[…]

You may have noticed that if you had an overnight backup, when you unlock your screen, a copy starts to run. It’s typically quite brief, thanks to ⚡️Turbo Smart Update, but it might surprise you anyway. […] During your overnight copy, SuperDuper kept track of the files that it couldn’t access due to their protection class. And now that it can access them, it’s making sure they get backed up.

This seems like the right thing to do. Time Machine also does it. A backup app should try to make as faithful a backup as possible. I kind of find it annoying, though. Sometimes it can’t do a Turbo Smart Update, and so the backup that should already be done may end up taking another 30 minutes or more. The best thing to do is schedule backups while you’re using your Mac to avoid SuperDuper needing to do such “follow-ups.”

I wrote some code to try to figure out which files I have that are using data protection. Interestingly, the URLFileProtection API seems to not work on macOS. I used the lower level getattrlist() instead. Nanian recommends fcntl(). I didn’t find any protected files that I actually care about, just caches and derived data from Apple’s own apps. But, in theory, Apple or a third-party app could be saving actual user data using data protection.

Previously:

Review: SuperDuper! 4 gets a stem-to-stern revamp, but is just as seaworthy as ever

13 August 2026 at 22:20

Backups, as any computer user knows, are worth their weight in gold. If it isn’t backed up, it might as well might not exist. That’s why I have for years trusted ShirtPocket’s SuperDuper! to ensure that all my data is safe and sound. And now, for the first time in a very long time, the venerable backup utility has gotten a top-to-bottom update that brings it into the modern era without sacrificing any of the features—and, most importantly, the reliability—that its users have come to depend on.

While SuperDuper! 4 may look like an entirely new beast, its history has stuck around. It still explains what it’s doing in plain English. It still allows you to make complete, bootable backups. It still has its excellent Smart Update option to optimize the copying process.

SuperDuper! 4 screenshot showing Ghost to Ghost Backup daily backup configuration with text including Daily Backup, Copy Now, Preview, and Copy Jobs can run unattended.

But it’s gotten some significant updates too. There’s a new interface, for starters, which conforms to Apple’s current Liquid Glass aesthetic, love it or hate it. It’s a bit of a shock to the system after so long without a change, but it’s hard to deny that the old look had grown somewhat antiquated. The result is an app that makes backups as simple and straightforward as they should be, so that anyone can figure it out: click here to set your destination, choose what method, and click Go.

The changes to SuperDuper! 4 also run more than just skin deep. For example, it’s considerably faster than the previous version—up to an order magnitude faster using the new Turbo implementation of Smart Update, according to Shirt Pocket. That’s borne out in my real-world usage. For example, my last nightly backup of 20.55GB took less than 4 minutes.

Screenshot of SuperDuper Daemon Ping menu listing actions: Create Job, Delete Job, Run Job, Get Job Results, Get Job Settings, Get Job Status, Get Setup Info, Save Setup Info, Set Job Settings, Ask for Setup Choice, Ask for Setup Text, Get Job by Identifier, Get Jobs for Source, Get Source by Identifier, Get Run Result by Identifier.
Just get a load of all those Shortcuts actions.

There are new capabilities here, too. A new Preview feature lets you perform a dry run of your copy job, letting you see every file that will be changed without actually doing any of it. With a new background helper app, copies won’t interrupt whatever you’re doing. And there’s Shortcuts support, so you can run a workflow when your copy job is completed—or even have one of your shortcuts kick off a copy job.

I’ve been using betas of SuperDuper! 4 for a month or so now, and what’s impressed me most is how much it maintains that set-it-and-forget-it strength of the previous versions. The most important thing for a backup is that element of reliability, so when I open up the app and see “31 successful in a row” note, I know that my data is right where it should be. And if something goes wrong, it’s easier than ever to see what happened: click on a failed job and you’ll get the details, including an Apple Intelligence-powered summary of the job. (You can get that for completed jobs too.)

There are way more features here too, ones that I just don’t have much reason to use for my purposes, but might just well be what you’re looking for. For example, copy rules that let you handle certain files and folders in granular ways, such as excluding certain ones from backups; support for any file system that macOS understands; and there’s support for multiple copy jobs at the same time, even for those that are scheduled.

Backup apps may not be the most exciting software category, but I dare you to find one that’s more crucial. For me, SuperDuper! has done the job for years and I’ve never had any reason to complain about it. Nothing about that seems poised to change with version 4.

SuperDuper! 4 screenshot showing Run succeeded Aug 10 at 12:54 PM, TIME 1m 11s, COPIED 14.05 GB, FILES 4,734, UPDATED 70, DELETED 4,154, METHOD Smart Update, BOOTABLE Yes. APPLE INTELLIGENCE SUMMARY: The successful backup of the source volume/drive from Ghost to Ghost Backup was completed in 1 minute and 11 seconds using the Smart Update copy mode. The backup was kept bootable. Generated from local diagnostics on-device. The copy log never leaves your Mac.
You can see the details of any copy job, including a quick summary.

SuperDuper! 4 requires macOS 14 (Sonoma) or later. A free trial version lets you make unlimited full erase backups, but to unlock the rest of the features requires a one-time payment of $43.95. There’s also an upgrade discount for owners of SuperDuper 3 of up to 30 percent. (And, if you bought version 3 very recently, you may be able to get version 4 for free.) And good news: if you need to run backups on older systems, SuperDuper 3 is sticking around.

For everybody who’s already backing up their Macs, SuperDuper! 4 may offer some new features and speed increases that will make the process even smoother. For those of you who aren’t yet…what are you waiting for?

SuperDuper 4

13 August 2026 at 20:10

Dave Nanian:

The new version of SuperDuper is a ground-up rewrite, a tip-to-tail reinvention of what SuperDuper looks like, how it works, what it can do, and where I can take it in the future.

[…]

Documents have been retired and replaced with Copy Jobs, which are stored internally and organized by source. If you want to copy Macintosh HD, that’s where you start. Click, and you’re presented with one or more template copy operations, or you can start from scratch.

Configuration is done right inline by clicking bold, underlined link elements and selecting options from pop-ups. The effect of your choices is immediately reflected in What’s going to happen?, ensuring you know what to expect when you click Copy Now.

SuperDuper has been around for 22 years, and I’ve been using it since version 2 in 2006. Shirt Pocket had always been great about keeping the copy engine up-to-date with all the changes in macOS and its increasingly baroque file system structures. But the outward appearance of the app hadn’t changed much, aside from losing the brushed metal, and neither had the feature set. I know all too well how much work it can be as a solo developer just to keep an app working. Ironically, the better you are at adapting to the changing OS, hiding the complexity, and presenting a simple interface, the more it looks like you aren’t doing much. Actually, if you follow Nanian’s blog, you can see a fraction of all the stuff going on under the hood—tricky edge cases, macOS bugs, and undocumented behaviors that must be handled so that you can essentially just press a button and get a proper bootable backup.

Eventually, he found the time to rewrite the app, both the engine (which is faster and more robust) and the user interface (which is greatly expanded). My first reaction was: this is SwiftUI, isn’t it? And it is. You can just tell by the way the text reflows, all the different colored buttons and blobs, the hover effects, and how the design heavily emphasizes scrolling. (Like System Settings, it doesn’t remember scroll positions. Nor does it remember which disclosure triangles are expanded.) The keyboard navigation and focus behavior are off in places. For reasons I don’t understand, SwiftUI gets a lot of this wrong out of the box. In some cases, like the outline view for creating a copy rule, keyboard support was manually added and works as expected. But there are other places where arrow keys and type-selection don’t work. Sometimes I need extra clicks to get the proper focus. Sometimes the arrow keys scroll the window instead of changing the selection.

That said, this is one of the best SwiftUI interfaces I’ve seen. I think it successfully preserves the spirit of the app, making it really easy to configure things and see what’s going to happen, while streamlining the way documents/jobs are managed and expanding what you can do. It’s still essentially one window (plus a Settings with one checkbox), and you can still use it in the old way, but now you can also run multiple jobs at once and inspect their histories.

Click the Preview button and SuperDuper will run the copy without making changes and present you with a report that shows exactly what would have been updated, added, deleted, etc., had this been a real run.

This is great to have. If there are particular folders or files you want to check, you can browse the source tab of the preview to see what’s excluded or find them in the destination tab to see whether they would be added, updated, removed, or kept. The interface to browse this is a sort of columns view with only one column. It’s fast and easy enough to use, but keyboard navigation doesn’t work properly. I longed for it to be an outline view so that I could quickly expand an entire subtree and see at a glance which files would be changed. I also wished that it would show how much data would be copied.

SuperDuper 4 is much faster than before. And I’m not just talking 20% or 30% faster. Smart Updates are between 2x and, with the new Turbo feature, an order of magnitude faster.

It’s hard to benchmark such things, but my general impression is that this is true. The longstanding Smart Update feature copies only the files that have changed. This seems quite a bit faster than before and slightly faster than Carbon Copy Cloner. The new Turbo feature uses the FSEvents log to optimize finding such files. If macOS knows which folders might contain changes, SuperDuper can focus on those and not waste time scanning ones that are identical. When this works, it feels almost impossibly fast. SSD-to-SSD backups of my Mac’s boot drive will take 1–3 minutes instead of more like 20 minutes. This also seems to be faster than Carbon Copy Cloner’s similar Quick Update feature.

Unfortunately, for reasons seemingly out of the app’s control, sometimes Turbo isn’t possible. This can happen if you’ve modified the copy job or if there’s been a huge amount of file system activity since the last backup so that FSEvents doesn’t contain the necessary information. In such cases, SuperDuper will fall back on doing an old-school Smart Update. I found that excluding my destination drive from Spotlight made it much more likely that Turbo would work.

As much as I like Turbo, I don’t end up using it except for the daily scheduled backup of my boot drive to an always-connected SSD. For my other backups, I have multiple destination drives for each source, and I find that the user interface doesn’t scale so well to configuring a separate job for each. That leads to lots of scrolling. So, instead, I use just one job per source and select the destination I want before starting each backup. This counts as editing the job, so it won’t be able to Turbo, but I find that backups to slow spinning hard drives take a long time either way and are dominated by the copying speed rather than the scanning speed.

Successful and failed runs are shown at the bottom of the copy job, with color-coded dots that can be clicked to display details.

This is my favorite bit of interface design in the new version. It very compactly shows you the recent history for that copy job using the same format that’s used for showing the completion status of the most recent run. I can quickly see all the information I usually care about, and you can click a button to see more detailed information if necessary. The downside is that you can’t see as much information at once—or across multiple jobs—as if there were a dedicated log window, and it only shows the most recent 7 runs. But I think this tradeoff is well in keeping with the app’s spirit of making things simple and clear rather than offering every possible option.

The most baffling part of the interface is that after each backup completes or fails it shows an “Apple Intelligence Summary”. Much space is devoted to labeling this and to assuring you that none of your data went into the cloud. I just don’t see what the point of this is. 99+% of the time, my backup either succeeded or failed for a very predictable reason like running out of space. Why do we need AI for this? I trust the AI summary less than I would a hard-coded string from the developer. Perhaps in an obscure situation that the developer didn’t anticipate Apple Intelligence would be able to offer a useful interpretation, but I have yet to see that.

At a technical level, SuperDuper has been split into a “helper” or “server”, which runs the copy, and an interface, which is the part you interact with. That means that, once registered, you can quit the SuperDuper application and your backups will still run. They’ll even run if you log out!

It doesn’t much matter to me that it can back up without launching the app—I like to see its progress—but I appreciate the new architecture for scheduled copies. Schedules are now much better integrated into the app proper rather than being driven through AppleScript.

You can run any number of copies at the same time. If you have four backups you need to do, just click Copy Now for each, and they’ll all run simultaneously.

This is the most important new feature for me. I used to do all my clone backups with SuperDuper. But, over years, my backup needs grew. I now have five main source drives to back up. They are much larger than before, and APFS on spinning hard drives is really slow. Thus, the backups, even with Smart Update, can take a long time. That was a lot to manage with old versions of SuperDuper. Carbon Copy Cloner has long supported multiple simultaneous backups so that I could connect a bunch of destination drives, tell it to start, and when I came back they’d all be done. I didn’t have to be there to wait for each backup to finish and then start the next.

It was just so much easier, so I started using Carbon Copy Cloner for most of my backups. But I still liked SuperDuper and trusted its copy engine, so I continued to use it to do some of the backups of my most important drive (the internal SSD). I think it’s good backup practice to have redundancies, not just in terms of multiple physical drives and storage locations but also for the software creating the backups. Both are quality apps, but it’s possible that there’s a bug or a misconfiguration on my part that might prevent the copying of a file that I need. Why put all my eggs in one basket? Now that SuperDuper also supports multiple simultaneous backups, I’m using it for half the backups of all my drives. On one backup day I’ll do all SuperDuper backups, then the next time I’ll do all Carbon Copy Cloner backups. (I continue to use Time Machine and Arq for additional redundancy.)

If you try this, I strongly recommend writing down which app you used for each destination drive and then doing all future backups to that drive using that same app. And it works better to do the first SuperDuper backup with Erase and Copy rather than trying to Smart Update a Carbon Copy Cloner backup.

There are a variety of reasons for this, but the main one is the different ways that the apps deal with APFS snapshots. Both use snapshots on the source to ensure they’re copying from a consistent state. And both mark completed copies with snapshots on the destination. But the retention of the destination snapshots is very different.

Carbon Copy Cloner can keep them around essentially as long as you have enough free space. It can also prune them out of order, so that you have daily snapshots for the last month and weekly ones going back further. This is managed by the app, though you can also manually delete snapshots yourself using Disk Utility.

SuperDuper’s snapshots are automatically managed by the macOS. I’m personally less fond of this design because in practice the system will choose to clean up old snapshots almost right away. I can’t count on being able to restore from any backup but the most recent. To me, this is a shame because APFS supports multiple snapshots, and there’s plenty of space on the drive to store them, but I can’t use them. It’s just not a design goal of the app.

Again, this ties back to how SuperDuper values simplicity. If it made longer-lived snapshots that weren’t cleaned up automatically, you might get into a situation where you (or another app) wanted to add files to a drive and couldn’t because it seemed to be full. You’d have to understand snapshots or have an app that could delete the SuperDuper snapshots to free up space. Third-party apps aren’t supposed to delete snapshots belonging to other apps, which is why you don’t want to mix SuperDuper and Carbon Copy Cloner on the same destination. If the former needs more space to complete a backup, it won’t be able to purge snapshots created by the latter.

The status information for the backups that are in progress is shown right in the Sources section of the main window. You can see at a glance which drives are being copied and when they’re all estimated to finish. I haven’t found the estimates very accurate, so I’d prefer to see the start time and the percent complete. Flipping between multiple active jobs to check their detailed progress is kind of a chore, but if all you need is the summary information you can close the app and monitor it from the new menu bar icon.

SuperDuper 4 now supports copying to and from any file system the Mac supports. Using a “Photos” drive with both Windows and Mac that’s formatted as exFAT? No problem: you can copy it.

It can also copy individual folders rather than just entire volumes, if you drag them into the sidebar.

I’ve added Shortcuts support, so you can create a shortcut that runs before or after a copy, on success, or on error. Want to send an email on success or failure? Beep when copies are done?

[…]

Not only does SuperDuper let you call a shortcut from a copy—you can create, run, and check on a copy job from a shortcut!

There’s a lot of potential here, and the completion shortcut receives a bunch of JSON describing what happened so that it can make decisions about what to do. On the other hand, I would rather see AppleScript support, as I find Shortcuts confusing and inconvenient. I wish that common completion actions like sending e-mails were built into the app so that they were easier to set up. (You can choose to eject the drive, post a notification, or sleep the Mac without having to write a shortcut.)

In all the years SuperDuper has been on the market, we’ve never charged for updates and never even raised the price. That’s 22 years of free updates.

The Apple Silicon version was a paid upgrade, but you could run SuperDuper 3 in Rosetta with an old license and still get all the features.

Version 4 costs $43.95, with various upgrade discounts based on the purchase date. There’s no discount if you purchased before July 2020, but us old timers got so many years of free updates it was one of the best deals ever in Mac software. Regardless, it’s not a high price for peace of mind. The new version is, I think, a massive improvement, maintaining the spirit of the original while modernizing and expanding it.

I’ve already said that I use both SuperDuper and Carbon Copy Cloner. I think both are excellent—great apps with great customer support. With SuperDuper 4 they’re more similar than in the past, but they remain very different. If you must pick one, I would say that Carbon Copy Cloner is better if you want lots of options and control; if you want persistent snapshots, verification, copying of cloud-only files, or detailed logging; or if you have a very large number of backups. (It does have a Simple Mode, but it’s arguably too simple and limiting.)

SuperDuper is better if you care about bootable backups or want something simple but not too simple. There’s documentation, but you probably won’t need it because so much is explained within the app’s interface. It’s just really easy to set up a backup, see what it’s going to do, see what it’s currently doing, and see what it did before. Pretty much everything happens in a single window, without tabs or separate modes. SuperDuper is all about striking a good balance for most people, doing the right thing with a minimum of fuss.

See also: Adam Engst and Accidental Tech Podcast.

Previously:

Update (2026-08-14): The developer wrote in to say that SuperDuper does try to remember the scroll position in the main window, just not across launches. With the current version, 4.0.2, I find that this mostly works but that it gets thrown off if I’ve expanded any of the triangles to see more details about the currently running job. Then my carefully positioned view will be shifted a bit when I come back to it. It’s hard to get this exactly right.

He also had a great tip about a hidden feature that can relieve some of the scrolling issues I encountered: you can click multiple times on a drive in the list of sources to have it jump to the next active job for that drive, scrolling it to exactly the right spot. When the sidebar has keyboard focus, you can also do this by pressing the Spacebar.

See also: Dan Moren.

Update (2026-08-20): SuperDuper 4.0.3:

For those with a lot of volumes, there’s now a sort control for the source list: you can alphabetically by type, or purely alphabetically.

There’s now an option in the sort pop-up that adds a few sections to the source list.

I like being able to separate the source drives from the destination drives. The update also improves VoiceOver support.

Update (2026-09-09): See also: John Gruber.

Previously:

Update (2026-09-16): SuperDuper 4.0.6:

Click the n copies running pill to filter to just those jobs. If you have a lot of copy jobs for a given source, you can filter the list with a click.

[…]

SuperDuper now picks a band size that suits the image’s size, balancing the number of bands with their size.

[…]

There’s now a third-party application, Open Backup, that can notify mobile devices (iPhone and Android) when backups run.

10 cuidados de cibersegurança a ter antes de ir de férias

7 August 2026 at 12:48

Tal como confirmamos se levamos os documentos, se fechámos a porta de casa ou se temos tudo preparado antes de viajar, também faz sentido dedicar alguns minutos à nossa segurança digital. Vitor Oliveira alinha 10 recomendações a ter em conta.

The post 10 cuidados de cibersegurança a ter antes de ir de férias appeared first on Tek Notícias.

Searching Time Machine Backups and Versions

9 July 2026 at 19:38

Howard Oakley:

Spotlight doesn’t currently appear able to search Time Machine backups reliably, at least not in Sequoia or Tahoe, although this may not be universal.

[…]

If I now step back through my backups to reach one that I know contains that file, I can restore it. But if I type anything into the search field, nothing is found. If I change the scope of the search to that backup, the window title changes but its contents remain blank, and there isn’t even a busy spinner to indicate a search is in progress.

[…]

As I can’t disable Spotlight indexing on that volume without macOS telling me that it’s required to be indexed by Spotlight, neither can I force that volume to be reindexed.

[…]

My conclusion is that using Spotlight to search Time Machine backups no longer works, and the instructions given by Apple are also broken.

That has been my experience, too. As I see it, there are four separate problems:

  1. I want to be able to search all my backup snapshots, because I don’t know which one might contain the file I want to restore. Time Machine only lets you search one at a time.
  2. Searching an individual snapshot doesn’t actually work.
  3. Spotlight indexing is invasive, using lots of CPU time, and with spinning hard drives causes wear and tear and creates lots of noise. If search doesn’t work anyway, I’d like to turn it off, but macOS won’t let me.
  4. If the problem is with the index, there’s no way to reset it without deleting your backup.

Howard Oakley:

Unfortunately, all those saved versions in the version database fall outside the scope of Spotlight indexing, and Spotlight search can’t look inside any of the old versions saved in a volume’s version database. Surprisingly, the version browser doesn’t offer any search facilities either, as that’s presumably another feature intended for a future that never came.

[…]

One way around this is to save each document version as a separate file, allow Spotlight to extract their contents and add those to its indexes for that volume, then to search those files. This is quick and simple using my free utility Versatility.

Previously:

Forget storage anxiety with this 20TB Seagate external hard drive — it's one of our favourites and it's 32% off

I’m sure this scenario is familiar to you — you buy an external hard drive for a certain capacity, thinking that it would have more than enough space to store all your current files, and many more in the future — but then you soon realise that you’ve filled it up in no time. You’re then forced to delete some files to make enough room for new ones that you need to back up or archive. And so it goes.

I can definitely relate, having filled up a couple of hard drives ranging from 2TB to 6TB containing photo libraries, videos and Steam game backups, then later finding myself auditing those files more often than I’d like to clear up storage space.

If you’re in the same boat as me, Amazon has discounted the 20TB Seagate Expansion Desktop external hard drive by 32% to AU$623.73. That price averages to around 3 cents per gigabyte, which is brilliant value for a backup drive that’s also fast enough to be used regularly. I don't know about you, but it would certainly cure my storage anxiety woes.

This deal can also benefit those who work with large files regularly, like content creators, video editors, data professionals, graphic artists and more, where they can focus on their work and not constantly worry about storage.

This listing is from Amazon Germany, so you may have to wait until at least early next month for delivery to Australia, but this is so far the lowest price we’ve seen for EOFY. The Seagate Expansion Desktop has USB 3.0 file transfers, Windows and Mac support (with automatic recognition for easy setup) and access to a data recovery service for that extra peace of mind.View Deal

In our best external hard drives buying guide, our reviewer called the Seagate Expansion Desktop the best-performing HDD they'd tested thanks to the read and write speeds of 242 MB/s and 237 MB/s, respectively, and for its relatively compact size compared to others in this category.

The main downsides the tester mentioned were the hard drive’s external power requirement — which is something I would certainly live with for a capacity of this size — and the expensive RRP, which this 32% discount handily takes care of.

While you can invest in some network attached storage (NAS) devices for your growing storage needs, the Seagate Expansion Desktop is an easier plug-and-play solution that won’t require much fiddling to set up — it’s as easy as plugging the drive in and moving files to it via Windows Explorer or macOS Finder. Plus, this deal is a much cheaper alternative as the NAS devices themselves without drives cost around the same or even more in some cases.

On the other hand, this external drive can be used in a NAS device (or your PC, even) through “shucking”, or removing the external casing and installing the bare drive into a hard drive bay to add more storage for redundancy or otherwise. Do note that this will void the drive’s warranty.

In any case, a deal like this in a period of storage component shortages is hard to pass up for anyone in need of extra storage space for backups, archiving or any work that involves large file sizes.

Used Waymo robotaxi batteries become backup storage for power grids

4 June 2026 at 12:00

Thousands of electric vehicles in Waymo’s autonomous robotaxi fleet may eventually give up their used batteries for a very different purpose—contributing up to hundreds of megawatt-hours of stationary energy storage to local power grids.

That prospect comes from a “strategic supply agreement” announced by Waymo and B2U Storage Solutions on June 4. B2U has been repurposing thousands of used batteries from various electric vehicles by installing them in large stationary energy storage projects. Such energy storage facilities can capture excess renewable energy during low demand periods and release such energy when local power grids are experiencing peak demand periods.

“Our business is getting the full residual value out of electric vehicle batteries after they're no longer suitable for automotive use,” Freeman Hall, CEO of B2U Storage Solution, told Ars. “Waymo puts a lot of miles on EVs and their model is expanding rapidly, and so we're just very pleased and honored to be able to work with them.”

Read full article

Comments

© Awarded Goods Company

❌