4 ms·

Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure?

by 43920 6y ago

Retric 6y ago
Apple’s rejected a huge number of App updates for security reasons. It’s not a huge benefit, but it does exist.
- cliffsteele 6y ago
  And also allowed a jailbreak app in the iOS App Store. Yes, it only happened once (that I know of), but it still shows you can't really be oblivious to their practices.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    So out of the millions of apps on the App Store, they slipped up once? Sounds like a really good success rate.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      That's just the one jailbreak that ended up in the news. There's been many other of bad things that have been pulled.
      - cmdshiftf4 6y ago
        >been many other of bad things that have been pulled A jailbreak app making it to the app store being bad, and "apple's walled gardens are bad", are fundamentally incompatible.
        jasonlotito 6y ago
        Jailbreak apps are bad for Apple. Walled gardens are bad for users. It's not complicated.
        neotek 6y ago
        I, a user, am extremely appreciative of Apple's walled garden. I've never once had to worry that the app I'm downloading is crammed full of malware because I trust that Apple's processes are robust and will work well in 99.999% of all circumstances.
        davrosthedalek 6y ago
        A walled garden is not the same as a curated app store. You could have the same benefit if apple would allow non-app-store apps to be installed after flipping a switch, tethering with a Mac or some other voodoo.
        neotek 6y ago
        Apple does give you the ability to install non-app-store apps (some without tethering), e.g. sideloading or enterprise certificates, although I agree it's not as easy as flipping a switch. They should also provide a way to downgrade iOS via Xcode for those with a dev account, but that's another story.
        friendlybus 6y ago
        People who are precious about security never obtain apps that aren't generally approved and vetted by professionals anyway. Forcing this deciscion onto everybody is just going to push the people who want a free and open platform into places you dont want them. The benefits of openness don't go away just because apple said so.
        LaGrange 6y ago
        We get Zoom, we used to install Java (remember when it was bundled with crapware in hope you'll forget to uncheck a checkbox?). Companies routinely strong-armed users into getting malware. And I doubt popular game mods are all that strongly reviewed by security experts, but are quite popular with tech people. App Store policies are a poor replacement for collective action, of course, but let's not pretend we can just become immune to hostile by sheer force of will.
        saagarjha 6y ago
        Apple can be bad at doing what they claim to be doing and also be doing the wrong things. The nice way this works is that Apple curates a bunch of software they think is safe, and I can run whatever I want on my device. The worst of both worlds is that I can't run what I want, but sometimes malicious things get through Apple's checks.
throwaway851 6y ago
Yes, but would a typical user know or care if the app they downloaded from a web site was sandboxed and would otherwise have been approved by the App Store if it was submitted there? And if not, how could someone like John Gruber make that claim of safety on anything other than iPhone and iPad? Taking the Zoom example on a parent thread above, look at what happens when you’re installing a Zoom client on the Mac without the strict enforcements of the iOS App Store: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22736608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22736608
- ken 6y ago
  This just doesn't seem like a terribly difficult problem. Web browsers have figured it out. Any webpage that isn't served over SSL says "Not Secure" right at the top. I can think of a dozen ways which the OS could prominently display "Not Secure" for non-sandboxed applications, in a way that wouldn't preclude or hinder users from using such applications if they really wanted to.
  - ithkuil 6y ago
    I wonder what's a decent way to do this with a CLI app
zrm 6y ago
> Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure? More relevantly, wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded from Apple's store be equally secure even if you could install different apps from developers you trust more outside of the store?

Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure?

by 43920 6y ago

Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure?

Retric 6y ago

Apple’s rejected a huge number of App updates for security reasons. It’s not a huge benefit, but it does exist.

cliffsteele 6y ago
And also allowed a jailbreak app in the iOS App Store. Yes, it only happened once (that I know of), but it still shows you can't really be oblivious to their practices.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  So out of the millions of apps on the App Store, they slipped up once? Sounds like a really good success rate.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    That's just the one jailbreak that ended up in the news. There's been many other of bad things that have been pulled.
    - cmdshiftf4 6y ago
      >been many other of bad things that have been pulled A jailbreak app making it to the app store being bad, and "apple's walled gardens are bad", are fundamentally incompatible.
      - jasonlotito 6y ago
        Jailbreak apps are bad for Apple. Walled gardens are bad for users. It's not complicated.
        neotek 6y ago
        I, a user, am extremely appreciative of Apple's walled garden. I've never once had to worry that the app I'm downloading is crammed full of malware because I trust that Apple's processes are robust and will work well in 99.999% of all circumstances.
        davrosthedalek 6y ago
        A walled garden is not the same as a curated app store. You could have the same benefit if apple would allow non-app-store apps to be installed after flipping a switch, tethering with a Mac or some other voodoo.
        neotek 6y ago
        Apple does give you the ability to install non-app-store apps (some without tethering), e.g. sideloading or enterprise certificates, although I agree it's not as easy as flipping a switch. They should also provide a way to downgrade iOS via Xcode for those with a dev account, but that's another story.
        friendlybus 6y ago
        People who are precious about security never obtain apps that aren't generally approved and vetted by professionals anyway. Forcing this deciscion onto everybody is just going to push the people who want a free and open platform into places you dont want them. The benefits of openness don't go away just because apple said so.
        LaGrange 6y ago
        We get Zoom, we used to install Java (remember when it was bundled with crapware in hope you'll forget to uncheck a checkbox?). Companies routinely strong-armed users into getting malware. And I doubt popular game mods are all that strongly reviewed by security experts, but are quite popular with tech people. App Store policies are a poor replacement for collective action, of course, but let's not pretend we can just become immune to hostile by sheer force of will.
      - saagarjha 6y ago
        Apple can be bad at doing what they claim to be doing and also be doing the wrong things. The nice way this works is that Apple curates a bunch of software they think is safe, and I can run whatever I want on my device. The worst of both worlds is that I can't run what I want, but sometimes malicious things get through Apple's checks.

throwaway851 6y ago

Yes, but would a typical user know or care if the app they downloaded from a web site was sandboxed and would otherwise have been approved by the App Store if it was submitted there? And if not, how could someone like John Gruber make that claim of safety on anything other than iPhone and iPad? Taking the Zoom example on a parent thread above, look at what happens when you’re installing a Zoom client on the Mac without the strict enforcements of the iOS App Store: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22736608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22736608

ken 6y ago
This just doesn't seem like a terribly difficult problem. Web browsers have figured it out. Any webpage that isn't served over SSL says "Not Secure" right at the top. I can think of a dozen ways which the OS could prominently display "Not Secure" for non-sandboxed applications, in a way that wouldn't preclude or hinder users from using such applications if they really wanted to.
- ithkuil 6y ago
  I wonder what's a decent way to do this with a CLI app

zrm 6y ago

> Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure? More relevantly, wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded from Apple's store be equally secure even if you could install different apps from developers you trust more outside of the store?