[Barbing]

Yes but miffing to open Privacy & Security & see dozens of apps pretending to need “accessibility” features. Apple has a dozen+ categories there but many poweruser apps I want specifically need accessibility.

Is there an opinionated reason not to break out capabilities?

[int0x29]

> Is there an opinionated reason not to break out capabilities?

If you have a disability and need tools to use your computer the last thing you want to do is have those things not only off by default but complicated and involved to turn on.

[skykooler]

Is there a reason a capability has to be covered by only a single permission? Why not have one accessibility permission that covers all that and then a bunch of individual permissions for non-accessibility apps?

[Wowfunhappy]

Apple doesn’t provide another API for this, so apps have to use the one that’s available.

[vorticalbox]

i think the issue is that you can still have these all under the accessibility api but why not break that down more

accessibility.screenshot accessibility.paste

and whatever else there is. that completely removes the issues for apps like this.

[Wowfunhappy]

As a programming practice in service of the principle of least privilege, that would make complete sense.

The issue is with Apple's UX. Apple insists on asking permission for every little capability an app wants. So I would have to say "yes, allow this app to take screenshots" and "yes, allow this app to read the clipboard".

I wouldn't be surprised if, in the near future, Apple forced people to click "yes, allow this app to read the clipboard from app X" and then separately "yes, allow this app to read the clipboard for app Y" and so on for every single other app on my machine.

Apple does not allow you to say, "yes, I trust this #$@-ing app, please allow it to do whatever it needs."

[vorticalbox]

annoying true, but no reason they couldn't group read/write into the same prompt.