4 ms·
I'm sorry, but as an advertisement for their network protection services, they're going to have to prove maliciousness beyond what is currently possible by down
by salgernon 11y ago
I'm sorry, but as an advertisement for their network protection services, they're going to have to prove maliciousness beyond what is currently possible by downloading any app from the App Store.
What they describe is a JavaScript to objc bridge in this library - would would be completely containerized by the embedding application. No, this bridge cannot be used to write outside of the apps container, nor steal keychain credentials outside of the ACLs provided by this application.
If you're embedding a third party library, any of the above could be true. But your user will still be protected to the extent provided by the app security model.
So this is just annoying FUD.
- salgernon 11y agoI still maintain the FUD factor, but a more careful reading shows that they are aware that this third party library is restricted to the apps container. But I don't see how this could be considered a back door since the app developer specifically embedded the library for the functionality it provides. It's more like inviting a vampire to dinner. It can't enter your house if not invited. (And vampires are too "proud" for the servents enter for.). Ok, as a metaphor, this needs work...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]