3 ms·
Sure, I'll bite. My mental model of notarization is strictly a means to fight malware (which, yes, is a nebulous word, but I think we can all agree that Unreal
by jakelazaroff 6y ago
Sure, I'll bite. My mental model of notarization is strictly a means to fight malware (which, yes, is a nebulous word, but I think we can all agree that Unreal Engine games don't blanket qualify).
Since most people are essentially prevented from running non–notarized macOS software, Apple should treat notarization as a rubber stamp. As long as your app is not literally malware, Apple should notarize it.
Apple's use of notarization as a stick for Epic here certainly goes against if not the letter, then the spirit of their developer documentation: [1]
> Notarization gives users more confidence that the Developer ID-signed software you distribute has been checked by Apple for malicious components. Notarization is not App Review. The Apple notary service is an automated system that scans your software for malicious content, checks for code-signing issues, and returns the results to you quickly. If there are no issues, the notary service generates a ticket for you to staple to your software; the notary service also publishes that ticket online where Gatekeeper can find it.
[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/notarizing_macos_software_before_distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/notarizing_m...
- floatingatoll 6y agoI think that'd be ideal. 1. You can submit software anonymously, or with a free account, or with a paid account. 2. Apple can refuse notarization for the usual reasons they do now. 3. Apple can, in the future, revoke notarization and notify you. 3a. If you choose to submit anonymously, notification is impossible. 3b. If you choose to submit with a free developer account, they'll notify you of revocation and why. 3c. If you choose to submit with a paid developer account, they'll allow you to contest the revocation.