With the recent release of 10.13.4 (the ‘spring update’) a few things have changed for the deployment of macOS. The initial premise is still unchanged: Imaging is still dead.
(NetInstall got a bit of a life extension, though.)
High Sierra came with many features for both users and admins. However, for Mac admins it brought the support article HT208020: “Upgrade macOS on a Mac at your institution”. In this article Apple lists the supported means of installing and upgrading macOS and explicitly states that ‘monolithic imaging’ is not recommended and will not ensure that the firmware of a Mac is of the correct version to run the OS image that was just laid down. (I posted an article on this back in October.)
Then, with the release of the iMac Pro in December, it became clear that NetBoot and NetInstall, will not be supported with the new hardware. The assumption is, that will also be true for all new Macs with the T2 or a newer system controller. (My post on that, from December.)
NetBoot and NetInstall are used by many administrators to provide a centralized workflow to (re-)deploy or re-purpose a Mac. Common tools are macOS Server’s NetInstall, DeployStudio, AutoCasperNBI, or Imagr.
On top of that some NetInstall features, such as automated installation and adding custom packages were broken in earlier releases of 10.13.
Also booting off external drives became much harder on the iMac Pro, since its default security prohibits external boot and you have to go through the entire installation process before you can re-enable it.
Also Apple announced that the macOS Server app will lose most features, including NetBoot/NetInstall in a future release later this year. (My post on that, from January.)
What changed in 10.13.4?
The ‘spring update’ macOS 10.13.4 brought a few welcome changes.
We got a glimpse of some of these in February when HT208020 was briefly updated with new information. Interestingly, now that 10.13.4 is released, HT208020 has not been updated.
However, we got new detailed information in this article:
Enterprise content: - No longer disables User Approved Kernel Extension Loading on MDM-enrolled devices. For devices with DEP-initiated or User Approved MDM enrollment, administrators can use the Kernel Extension Policy payload. - Improves Spotlight search results for files stored on network mounts. - Properly evaluates ACLs on SMB share points. - Adds the --eraseinstall flag to the startosinstall command in the macOS Installer app at Contents/Resources/startosinstall. Use this flag to erase and install macOS on a disk. For details, run startosinstall with the --usage flag. - Updates System Image Utility to allow creating NetInstall images that erase and install macOS to a named target volume.
Not documented here, but 10.13.4 also fixes the bug that the
defaultscommand deletes non-plist files.
The first one is really important. Apple introduced a new security feature called “User Approved Kernel Extensions” (UAKEL) in 10.13. This means that third party kernel extensions have to be approved by the user at the Mac (within 30 minutes after installing) before they can be loaded.
In 10.13.0–10.13.3 Apple simplified the life of Mac admins by disabling UAKEL on Macs which were enrolled with an MDM. In 10.13.4 Apple added a Kernel Extension Policy profile payload which allows Mac admins to whitelist certain Kernel Extensions centrally from the MDM.
This is a useful addition and allows Mac admins to manage Kernel Extensions before they are installed and without the necessity of user interaction.
However, 10.13.4 also changes the previous behavior for UAKEL on MDM managed Macs. Since admins now have a way of whitelisting Kernel Extensions, UAKEL will be enabled, even on MDM managed Macs.
If you were installing a Kernel Extension on a managed Mac from 10.13.0 to 10.13.3 it would work, since MDM disabled UAKEL. Once you upgrade that Mac to 10.13.4, UAKEL will turn active and it will block the Kernel Extension from loading, unless there is a profile whitelisting the extension!
When the extension was previously manually approved on 10.13 or grandfathered in when the Mac was upgraded from 10.12, then it will still run under 10.13.4. While all of this has some internal logic, it will lead to strange situations were Kernel Extensions will load on some clients and not load on others.
The best way to avoid the confusion is to have the Kernel Extension Policy profile ready and in place before your clients update to 10.13.4. In other words: now!
User Approved MDM
However, (yes, there is another ‘however’ here). The Kernel Extension Policy profile has to “be delivered via a user approved MDM server.” This is another level of security introduced to keep the user in the loop.
Apparently there is malware/trojans that tricks users into accepting MDM profiles to connect their iOS devices or Macs to malicious MDMs. I am not convinced these new measures will be effective against this kind of trickery, though.
Macs deployed with the Device Enrollment Program (DEP) are considered “user approved” by default. Otherwise the user has to approve the MDM profile when it is installed. Again, this cannot be automated or approved over remote control.
This can throw a wrench into non-DEP installation workflows (sometimes also called user-initiated enrollment). Some management systems will let the user download a pkg that installs the MDM profile and necessary certificates. Some solutions install the MDM through an agent software (which is still necessary for many tasks that the mdm client software cannot perform). Either of these workflows will require the user to go to the Security pane in system preferences within 30 minutes after installation.
Note: Jeremy Baker found a creative way that uses User-interface scripting to click the approve button. However, his script requires Accessibility access for the script, which also cannot be provided in an automated fashion. (The database in question is protected by SIP.)
However, in 10.13.4, when a User installs the MDM profile directly by double-clicking it, they will be prompted to approve the MDM as part of the profile installation dialogs, streamlining the process.
Rich Trouton has documented the new workflows for the user in these articles:
- User-initiated computer enrollment now using MDM profile enrollment in Jamf Pro 10.3
- Using QuickAdd-based user-initiated enrollment on macOS High Sierra with Jamf Pro 10.3
- Detecting user approved MDM using the profiles command line tool on macOS 10.13.4
For Jamf you will need to upgrade your Jamf Pro server to version 10.3 to get the new workflow. Other management solutions may already implement this or also need to be on the latest version to work well with these new requirements.
The next interesting new feature is for
startosinstall which gains a new
Graham Pugh has already documented this very well:
This allows for automated workflows where you can wipe and re-install macOS, add a few custom packages to the installation process with
--installpackage arguments, which configure your management system. Then after first boot your management system takes over and installs/configures the rest.
It is important to note that
startosinstall uses some APFS volume creation trickery to make
--eraseinstall work. This means that you cannot run
--eraseinstall on a Mac with a HFS+ system volume. You have to already be on a 10.13 system with APFS to use this option.
--eraseinstall is a welcome and necessary addition to
startosinstall. However, what struck me most about this is that this is the first time Apple is even mentioning the
startosinstall command in any documentation. Since this tool is central to many approaches to automate the installation process, I am happy it is finally getting recognized as ‘official’.
The last feature isn’t really new. Apple fixed a bug that has been around since 10.13.0. In previous versions of 10.13, when you built a NetInstall set with System Image Utility and chose the option for “Automated Erase Install” on a certain volume (by name), the installation would just stall at a grey screen. Now, this option works as expected, when you build the NetInstall set from 10.13.4.
The days of NetInstall are still numbered because the iMac Pro (and presumably future Macs with similar controllers) cannot NetBoot at all, and macOS Server is loosing NetInstall along with many other services. Nevertheless, this provides another Apple-supported workflow for automated erase and re-install which you can customize with your own packages.
NetInstall (with or with out the erase) is also a good workflow to upgrade Macs with older versions of macOS to 10.13. (In this case we don’t care that it doesn’t work for iMac Pros, since they already come with 10.13.)
Since, currently, in most deployments the iMacs Pro will be a significant minority (if present at all), this allows administrators to deploy a well known workflow (NetInstall) for the existing fleet this year, while figuring out new workflows (
startosinstall + DEP?) for future Macs.
There are, however, still a few kinks left with NetInstall workflows:
- the 10.13.4 install application fails when run on a 10.12 (or older) Virtual machine, this makes testing difficult
- when you add a custom pkg, script or profile to a custom NetInstall the image creation fails
- NetInstall automated install will convert spinning disks to APFS
There was no Spring Update resurrection: Imaging is still dead.
It is obvious, that while Apple may not be going in exactly the direction that we would like them to, they are listening to criticism and providing solutions, albeit slowly. The additions to
startosinstall and the fix to NetInstall now allow for automated
wipe and install workflows. These were not really possible before.
However, installation workflows, however you start them, are much slower than block copying a prepared image. This is an important consideration for education deployments, which usually re-image dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of Macs over the summer break.
But this update now provides a few useful options for High Sierra:
- use NetInstall Automated Erase to wipe and upgrade existing Macs from earlier macOS versions to 10.13
startosinstallto upgrade and update Macs (including iMac Pros) to the latest version of 10.13
--eraseinstallto ‘wipe and install’ existing 10.13 Macs
- this will only work with 10.13 SSD Macs with APFS. Since Fusion drives and HDs cannot get APFS yet, you will have to use NetInstall to convert/upgrade these Macs, when (if ever) they support APFS
- iMac Pros cannot use automated NetInstall, however, since they definitely have APFS 10.13 already installed, you can use
- if fast restore times are important (like a loaner MacBooks scenario, where devices need to get reset to a well-known state quickly), use any of the above to get the Macs up to the latest 10.13, then you can still use imaging to quickly lay down a ‘fresh’ image of the same macOS version
- you will need to put in extra effort to keep the image system version in sync with the version installed (or upgraded) on the target Macs
Now is the time to start testing, testing, testing to get your workflows ready for the summer re-installation marathon and the 10.14 release in the fall. (And to give Apple another chance to fix the remaining issues in the next update.)
I have ignored the file share changes in this post. While these are certainly important, they don’t really have influence on deployment strategy.
Join the MacAdmins on the MacAdmins Slack to share experiences and solutions!
Apple’s new Upgrade/Update Strategy
There is another aspect of the Spring Update.
Apple switched to the yearly upgrade cycle for Mac OS X with 10.7. (Upgrade meaning a ‘major’ version change, i.e. 10.8 -> 10.9. Nevermind that Apple uses the second version number for the major version. More on macOS version numbers here.) Apple did summer releases for 10.7 and 10.8 and then switched to the Fall release schedule. Since 10.9 releases have been reliably in late September or October.
The rule used to be that upgrades would bring lots of new features, both visible to the user and under the hood and then Apple would release updates (the third number in the version) to fix bugs and issues. Sometimes new features would be introduced in updates, but those were rare exceptions and usually done to match with iOS or iCloud (dotMac, Mobile Me) features.
The rule of thumb was that the first two or three releases were for ‘early adopters’ only and it would be fairly safe to migrate to the new major version by the third or fourth update. Admins could join the developer program to get access to the developer releases of the next upgrade after WWDC, but getting your hand on early releases of the updates was more difficult.
iOS, on the other hand, has had a different pattern. Apple released iOS 4.2 in the spring with new features to support the then new iPad. Since the iPad and iPhone hardware releases rarely synced to the same time of year, iOS has had a pattern with a major new iOS release in the Fall (usually with a new iPhone) and a ‘Spring Update’ with new features to match with a new iPad.
Even though the Mac hardware follows yet other cycles. We now see this Fall Upgrade/Spring Update pattern with macOS as well.
Apple has added new features in 10.13.4. Some are visible to users (eGPU support, Business Chat, new privacy dialogs), some are for client management (UAMDM, UAKEL profiles, new configuration profile documentation).
We now also have a public beta program for iOS and macOS which covers not just the major upgrades, but ‘minor’ updates as well. The beta versions for iOS 11.4 and macOS 10.13.5 were released right after 11.3 and 10.13.4. And it looks like they will contain yet more new features (iMessages on iCloud and AirPlay 2).
The fact that Apple is willing to add new features or change existing fucntionality at any time during the update cycle is a win to users. It is also a reaction to competitors more-cloud based solutions that can be updated at any time.
However, for us admins this means change:
- the notion of a ‘stable’ release is a thing of the past.
Features might be added or changed at any time during the upgrade cycle. Different parts of the deployment and workflow will be in different stages of ‘maturity’. Additionally, parts of the workflow (DEP, MDM, and VPP) exist in the cloud and might also change at any time (Apple School Manager was not introduced with a major iOS release and it looks like Apple Business Manager will not sync with a major iOS or macOS release, either).
macOS and iOS don’t stand alone. Apple (and third parties) are building networks of operating systems, software, devices and cloud-based services. Scheduling these releases in to a yearly major update cycle must be nearly impossible. It is also not necessary as distribution of software has become reliable, secure, and fast enough to push frequent updates.
In some ways Apple is reacting to their more cloud-based competitors, which can and will push incremental updates to their systems continually.
- ‘permanent beta’ mode
The beta versions for iOS 11.4 and macOS 10.13.5 were released hours after the release 11.3 and 10.13.4. If you are concerned how the new updates will work (or not) in your environment, you have to be testing now.
This is being a pro-active adminstrator. Rather than waiting for problems to occur and trying to fix them, you are anticipating problems and trying to pre-empt them. The traditional release cycle of the past allowed us to switch between the two roles over the year. Now, we are either in permanent beta-test or in permanent break/fix.
I don’t think any one likes it, but it is the situation we have to deal with and I don’t see that changing any time soon. You will have to adapt your and your organization’s workflows to adapt to this new situation.
- Apple is listening and communicating the changes
Provide feedback (bugreports) to Apple. Not all the issues you find will be fixed (some might be).
However, this gives you time to document issues for your users and allow you to implement management strategies to ameliorate them. (Even if all you can do is write knowledge base articles along the line of “we know this is broken” you are saving some people a lot of time and nerves.)
I find it very interesting and encouraging that we are learning about these changes in offical support articles. Also then changes to UAKEL and UAMDM were based on user feedback, mainly adminstrators who complained that the feature as it was initially implemented was unmanageable.
Of course there are many other challenges and issues which have not been fixed (yet). But it is encouraging to see this kind of feedback work.