5 ms·
Facebook made their enterprise development certificate a single point of failure and then messed up by abusing it? That's so dumb that it's actually funny.
by _Microft 8y ago
Facebook made their enterprise development certificate a single point of failure and then messed up by abusing it?
That's so dumb that it's actually funny.
- bunderbunder 8y agoIt would have taken time to get a second enterprise development certificate. So they probably did it in order to move fast. . . and then they broke things.
- nevir 8y agoApple only allows/signs one cert per company. And the process to get one requires an annoying amount of paperwork about your business
- rootusrootus 8y agoShould have set up a new, disposable company to handle the research. Helps shield them from more than just Apple.
- weeks 8y agoApple's policy is one certificate per company. So it being a single point of failure is unavoidable.
- detaro 8y agoCould have used a different company for it (although then it possibly would have attracted attention earlier)
- chris_wot 8y agoYou mean, commit fraud? Don’t give them ideas!
- detaro 8y agoNot sure how owning a market research subsidiary would make it any more fraudulent than it already is. (It's of course also not a full protection against Apple deciding the parent deserves to be punished too)
- chris_wot 8y agoOops, forgot that they don't play by the normal rules. Indeed, they have committed fraud a few times. Just ask those who buy advertising from them.
- myrandomcomment 8y agoFound the engineer :) Let’s make our internal systems depend on the good will of an outside company that is marginaly a competitor. The worse part is there has to be someone that KNEW they where in violation. FB seems to have a culture of is okay to be scum if we get what we need since we can always just say sorry.
- plink 8y agoYes. Are they utterly oblivious to the eventuality that a policy of "break things now, apologize later" will receive the world's cold shoulder?
- blattimwind 8y ago> The worse part is there has to be someone that KNEW they where in violation. Given the timeline outlined in the TechCrunch article it seems practically certain to me that they intentionally used the Apple EDP infrastructure to circumvent Apple's ban on literally the same app.
- ASinclair 8y ago> Let’s make our internal systems depend on the good will of an outside company that is marginaly a competitor. What's the alternative for internal-only apps?
- myrandomcomment 8y agoThey could have started by understanding that another company has control over their infra and maybe not be evil. That being said, a web app (like the FT uses on IOS so they do not have to cut in apple on $) that is a saved web clipping would work without having to load an application.
- jboles 8y agoThey could develop their own phone. Apple, the maker of the hardware, is also a stakeholder in users’ privacy. They are not obligated to assist Facebook in the undermining of users’ privacy. If their stance on privacy does not meet Facebook’s requirements, Facebook is free to develop their own phone to run their own apps.
- enedil 8y agoGetting enterprise certificate is not easy and requires manual approval from Apple for registered company. I can imagine that getting another one can be hard, if ever possible.
- grogenaut 8y agoAnd in this instance apple could just have blacklisted both
- zaroth 8y agoApparently Google did exactly the same thing! Their “research” app only targeted adults though, which still violates Apple policy but is a lot less scummy.
- ejstronge 8y agoThat's not quite true - minors could be included but had to be associated with someone over 18.