Box Drive's system extension failed to load
Message:
Box Drive's system extension failed to load. Please make sure it has been enabled in System Preferences > Security & Privacy and then restart your computer.
Followed instructions, still unable to run Box Drive
Platform: MacBook Pro, macOS Big Sur, M1 Chip
-
Interesting, in this post a month ago they say no: https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/1500000313261-Box-Desktop-Sync-on-Mac-M1-Chip?page=1#community_comment_1500000496482
-
Dear Box,
Would it be possible to confirm why the Beta package is loading the KEXT from /Library/Filesystem again? Is this because the path is hardcoded in the application? We highlighted in this very thread that macOS does not expect KEXTs to be in this location: see https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360051323454-Box-Drive-s-system-extension-failed-to-load?page=1#comments
-
Not perfect but working for me on my M1 machines with MDM Profile pre-loaded.
Machine has to rebuild/recompile the Kexts and it restarts. Twice.
Then you have to approve the extensions and restart again.
This process will make your machine lag a big especially if you have alot of programs that run or startup in the background. Give it some time and it'll all get loaded.
It's a step in the right direction but far from being Kext-less.
-
@Tan Sharma - /Library/Filesystems is the default location where this particular kernel extension gets installed. Can you clarify which version of the OS you're using? Do you see this see this issue on Mac OS 11.2? If you do, can you please submit a support ticket and include a sysdiagnose so we can diagnose further? Thank you.
-
@rmashintchain , I can see from the package that it installs to /Library/Filesystems , question is why?
I’m running macOS 11 and even on intel machines the os expects to load extensions from specific locations - /library/Filesystems is not one of them. A lot of this is detailed in this very thread.
Now that the Beta is out, what is the timeline for a working public release?
-
Has anyone heard whether Box Sync will eventually support M1 chips? Their OS page makes it clear they do not support it today:
I prefer Box Sync over Box Drive, for two reasons: (a) since a copy of all files is copied to my computer, I have offline access on airplanes or in other locations without solid Internet coverage, and (b) my backup software Carbon Copy Cloner doesn't recognize Box Drive and will not back it up.
-
@Bill Elkus I'm not the most tech savvy person (so I could be wrong/taking some risks), but I think Box Sync does work for M1 chips? I used it briefly the other day, but my issue was that it only synced 100GB of data--this might have been a limitation of my institutional account though. Box Drive actually does work offline, but the issue is that the M1 chip version currently requires you to set your computer to reduced security. If you're okay with that, it works well. I'm not familiar with backup software, but since Box Drive syncs well, I basically just backup all of my files to Box. Occasionally, I'll also use an external hard drive, but at the moment I don't have one that fits all of my Box files and my local hard drive contents.
-
Age of thread: 5 Months
Age of last moderator update from Box: 1 Month
Latest Update from Box (yesterday):
"Later this year, Box will release a version of Box Drive that no longer requires kernel extensions, therefore no longer requiring Reduced Security mode to run. In the interim, customers who would like to use Box Drive will need to enable Reduced Security mode in order to use the product."
-- https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500004479962-Box-Drive-support-on-devices-with-M1-chips
5 Months we have been airing our frustrations...
10 Months since Apple made DTK's available to developers: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-announces-mac-transition-to-apple-silicon/
And now we are met with a delivery date of "later this year"? Are your roadmaps written in crayon too?
Everyone else seems to have figured out how to AT LEAST make their app work via Rosetta with many offering native M1 support for some time now on Big Sur no less...
What's the hold up? Is this upgrade too hard? Did Content Cloud seem like a better idea than supporting existing users? Or do you guys get last pick of the developers on the market?
This is beyond ridiculous at this point.
Reduced security mode as a workaround...I mean, come on...
-
I have an iMac 5K Retina, Intel i9 3.6 Ghz 8 core, Big Sur 11.4... none of this M1 stuff is my issue. It 'WAS' working OK, although I couldn't copy files to Box for a while, only from. Then, just like everyone else, suddenly "Box Dive's system extension failed to load". I HAVE SET THE SECURITY AND PRIVACY settings properly and it has full disk access... Still nothing, and it's impossible to get it to work. I have to use the web based version which is annoying. Looks like this has been going on forever! And for Apple corporate to use BOX as much as they do, I can't believe they are letting this happen. So annoying. This needs to be fixed NOW, not later.
-
FINALLY! After a year and updating my Mac mini to Big Sur 11.3.1, I finally have the Box drive on my desktop again! Still don't understand what took so long. Only one problem so far, the desktop version won't let me drag/drop files into folders. Had to go to the web version for that.
-
Age of thread: 7 Months
Age of last moderator update from Box: 3 Months
Latest Update from Box (EDIT: 3 months ago):
"Later this year, Box will release a version of Box Drive that no longer requires kernel extensions, therefore no longer requiring Reduced Security mode to run. In the interim, customers who would like to use Box Drive will need to enable Reduced Security mode in order to use the product."
-- https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500004479962-Box-Drive-support-on-devices-with-M1-chips
7 Months we have been airing our frustrations...
1 YEAR since Apple made DTK's available to developers: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-announces-mac-transition-to-apple-silicon/
And now we are met with a delivery date of "later this year"? Are your roadmaps written in crayon too?
Everyone else seems to have figured out how to AT LEAST make their app work via Rosetta with many offering native M1 support for some time now on Big Sur no less...
What's the hold up? Is this upgrade too hard? Did Content Cloud seem like a better idea than supporting existing users? Or do you guys get last pick of the developers on the market?
This is beyond ridiculous at this point.
Reduced security mode as a workaround...I mean, come on...
-
Why is there complete and utter radio silence from Box on this critical issue?
I won't repeat the facts and figures here as they have been posted on numbers occasions, yet Box continue to ignore us all.
Why can't you even come out of hiding to admit you've made a mistake, you've got it wrong, we sincerely apologise for letting you all down, but we've learnt from our mistakes and we won't do it again, you've literally given us nothing, no explanation, total zero!
Can you seriously look at yourselves and feel no shame, no guilt for still taking our money and still not supporting nearly 1 year old hardware.
Will someone there man-up (or woman-up) and take some responsibility and actually explain why you were so unprepared for M1!
-
This thread should highlight and expose to everyone with an interest in this issue:
- There is no "cloud", just someone's computer that is not yours.
- Box is giving the appearance of being in a state of floundering. Their M1 support, which should be an extension of their enterprise-level support, seems under-staffed or under-financed.
- Their current solution to enterprise-level customers is (literally) to roll back device security, which undermines most corporate usage policy agreements and documentation, probably including Box's own Macintosh Usage and security policy
- You are trusting your IP and data, often the very heart of your business, to an organization that refuses to honestly communicate with the very people who's data they're holding.
Sketchy stuff.
-
I'm definitely not an expert in this area, but it appears that there are limitations with system extensions for fully-featured file system browsers. As in there are API limitations that prevent porting over all such features to the system extensions (which would not require elevated privileges and reduced device security). This affects not only Box Drive, but also OSX Fuse. There are some discussions on this at the OSX Fuse project.
https://github.com/osxfuse/osxfuse/issues/814
https://github.com/osxfuse/osxfuse/issues/769
While Box's communication has been somewhat subpar, keep in mind that they along with OSX Fuse are probably sticking with kexts in order to preserve existing functionality, not because of a lack of development effort. This is likely temporary until they see that they can transition to system extensions without compromising functionality.
-
You have to restart the machine after installation for the Extension to be approved and loaded..
Thank you
-
Hello all, we are excited to announce the next release of Box Drive (v2.23) will provide public beta access to our newest version of Box Drive on Mac, which has been completely updated with a new kext-free architecture which will provide seamless support for M1 and Intel-based Mac devices as well as provide support for macOS 12. This new version of Box Drive is built using Apple's File Provider APIs and no longer requires the use of kernel extensions (or reduced security mode) to run the application. You can learn more and access the public beta on our from our community page. Thanks all for your patience as we've worked to get to this solution!
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
318 comments