7 ms·

She isn’t making a sensible assessment of tradeoffs though. You do take a security hit from sideloading. There’s no way around that. Society may find that it i

by graeme 5y ago

She isn’t making a sensible assessment of tradeoffs though. You do take a security hit from sideloading. There’s no way around that. Society may find that it is worth mandating sideloading nonetheless and that the competition gain is worse the privacy loss. But it is senseless to argue there is no tradeoff.

realusername 5y ago
That's debatable, you don't have any more control as a user on apps downloaded from the appstore compared to a sideloaded app. They are running in the exact same security sandbox and the lack of insights on what the app is doing is there in both cases. For me the most secure medium right now is the web (much more than any appstore) and it's designed to run code on demand.
- Retric 5y ago
  You’re assuming that App Stores have no influence. Not enough people make choices based on privacy to offset the profits from violating people’s privacy, however gatekeeping App stores have real leverage. What they use that leverage for is a real question. We have plenty of examples where opening things up caused issues. For example the minimum quality of NES games massively declined after Nintendo opened the floodgates.
  - realusername 5y ago
    I can agree that having the appstore does maintain some quality standards, however it does not guarantee any security, that's not really a good argument considering that their security model still needs to catch up to reach something as good as the web which is completely opened.
    - Jcowell 5y ago
      It’s never been about it the guarantee of security. There is no such thing and never will be. It’s about the degree of security and having a Single App Store has a degree of security that multiple does not.
      - realusername 5y ago
        I don't agree that it provides any security and they don't provide any way to verify those claims anyways so it's not like their empty list of verifiable arguments will convince me. The web is currently orders of magnitude safer than the appstore and is designed to run code on demand.
        Retric 5y ago
        Even if your talking this second many people running unsecured browsers and unpatched system are at significant right now. So looking at every user of each system, the web is inherently less safe.
    - Retric 5y ago
      In terms of security the web might theoretically win, but in terms of privacy the App Store clearly wins. Further, the web really isn’t safe. Kids randomly clicking stuff will still infect PC’s long before those same kids randomly clicking the App Store will cause issues. It’s not even a question of adoption, iOS is a huge target and the App Store actually provides meaningful benefits for the general public.
      - realusername 5y ago
        No webapp ever stole your pictures or your agenda details, no webapp ever used some "private api", no webapp ever had access to an advertising id, I could add more items to this list.
        Retric 5y ago
        We apps have done all that and more including steeling all your Bitcoins. IE has a long and rather storied past including such wonders as ActiveX.
        realusername 5y ago
        No they did not, unless you count thirdparty browser addons as part of the web (which they are definitely not). And ActiveX is long gone. If you are really worried about security, the answer today is still to avoid using native apps, they have more permissions and are harder to investigate than web apps. But we all know this talk about "security" is just an excuse for corporate control, especially when the web just runs code on demand and is more secure.
        Retric 5y ago
        You can pretend Flash for example never existed, but ActiveX was native not 3rd party. Further it’s even still supported by Microsoft. The Internet Explorer 11 desktop application will be retired and go out of support on June 15, 2022 (for a list of what’s in scope, see the FAQ). The same IE11 apps and sites you use today can open in Microsoft Edge with Internet Explorer mode. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/DeployEdge/edge-ie-mode https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/DeployEdge/edge-ie-mode Beyond that even Linux users have faced zero days. The web is inherently unsafe which in practice is rarely a issue for the cautious, but that’s only so useful.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- srtjstjsj 5y ago
  The sandbox is extremely limited protection. There's no recourse against misuse of data you grant permission to use, but in the main App Store Apple can kill a deceptive app
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > The sandbox is extremely limited protection. There's no reason that the OS can't implement sandboxes and protections for user data like that, either. > There's no recourse against misuse of data you grant permission to use, but in the main App Store Apple can kill a deceptive app Apple can also distribute malware via the App Store, like it did with 500 million copies of Xcodeghost[1]. Other mobile app distribution methods can be more secure than the App Store, as well. Users can enjoy the increased efficiency and lower costs that free markets and competition in app distribution, security, and payments can bring. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7bbmz/the-fortnite-trial-is-exposing-details-about-the-biggest-iphone-hack-of-all-time https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7bbmz/the-fortnite-trial-is...
smoldesu 5y ago
Apple should obviously inform users of the possible hazards when sideloading (like Android already does), but that's still no justification to withhold functionality from the user.
- spideymans 5y ago
  Certain firms (ahem... Epic in particular) would argue that these warnings are anticompetitive in nature.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Be that as it may, Epic wouldn't be suing Apple if they treated sideloading the same way Android did.
    - spideymans 5y ago
      Epic is suing Google because of Android’s side loading model.
ksec 5y ago
It doesn't have to be side loading though. What EU are really trying to suggest is that Apple is having too much power to dictate other business via App Store. Sideloading or Alt App Store are only some solutions. But instead Apple uses privacy and security to flat out deny any wrong doing. I have often thought the advice Steve gave to Tim Cook, "Dont think What he would do, do what you think is right" was all good intention but turns out to be possibly the worst advice ever.
- srtjstjsj 5y ago
  Why? Steve Jobs was deeply anticompetitive and anti user control since 1980 or older. Wozniak fought him to get the tiniest bits of user freedom into the Apple computer.
  - ksec 5y ago
    He and Scott Forstall were also the ones who fought for side loading in the initial iPhone. And was also aware of the business consequences, App Store was there to help selling more iPhone. It is now a rent seeking machine with absolute power over many trenches of our society and economy. I also think people often mistaken some of those design choices as anti user freedom. Where the results of those decision might seems that way, the starting point were different. Things like integrated hardware design. Steve was an empathic and also a hash person. People often seems to read everything as if he was an asshole and very little about his empathic side of stories.
Jyaif 5y ago
> You do take a security hit from sideloading The security comes from the sandbox, not from the app stores. This is why it's secure to use the web even though the websites are not individually approved by Apple.
- Jcowell 5y ago
  You’re thinking of App security and not other aspects is Social engineering that will absolutely happen more with the introduction of third party app stores. That IS an inevitability when it comes to things like this.

by graeme 5y ago

realusername 5y ago

That's debatable, you don't have any more control as a user on apps downloaded from the appstore compared to a sideloaded app. They are running in the exact same security sandbox and the lack of insights on what the app is doing is there in both cases. For me the most secure medium right now is the web (much more than any appstore) and it's designed to run code on demand.

Retric 5y ago
You’re assuming that App Stores have no influence. Not enough people make choices based on privacy to offset the profits from violating people’s privacy, however gatekeeping App stores have real leverage. What they use that leverage for is a real question. We have plenty of examples where opening things up caused issues. For example the minimum quality of NES games massively declined after Nintendo opened the floodgates.
- realusername 5y ago
  I can agree that having the appstore does maintain some quality standards, however it does not guarantee any security, that's not really a good argument considering that their security model still needs to catch up to reach something as good as the web which is completely opened.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    It’s never been about it the guarantee of security. There is no such thing and never will be. It’s about the degree of security and having a Single App Store has a degree of security that multiple does not.
    - realusername 5y ago
      I don't agree that it provides any security and they don't provide any way to verify those claims anyways so it's not like their empty list of verifiable arguments will convince me. The web is currently orders of magnitude safer than the appstore and is designed to run code on demand.
      - Retric 5y ago
        Even if your talking this second many people running unsecured browsers and unpatched system are at significant right now. So looking at every user of each system, the web is inherently less safe.
  - Retric 5y ago
    In terms of security the web might theoretically win, but in terms of privacy the App Store clearly wins. Further, the web really isn’t safe. Kids randomly clicking stuff will still infect PC’s long before those same kids randomly clicking the App Store will cause issues. It’s not even a question of adoption, iOS is a huge target and the App Store actually provides meaningful benefits for the general public.
    - realusername 5y ago
      No webapp ever stole your pictures or your agenda details, no webapp ever used some "private api", no webapp ever had access to an advertising id, I could add more items to this list.
      - Retric 5y ago
        We apps have done all that and more including steeling all your Bitcoins. IE has a long and rather storied past including such wonders as ActiveX.
        realusername 5y ago
        No they did not, unless you count thirdparty browser addons as part of the web (which they are definitely not). And ActiveX is long gone. If you are really worried about security, the answer today is still to avoid using native apps, they have more permissions and are harder to investigate than web apps. But we all know this talk about "security" is just an excuse for corporate control, especially when the web just runs code on demand and is more secure.
        Retric 5y ago
        You can pretend Flash for example never existed, but ActiveX was native not 3rd party. Further it’s even still supported by Microsoft. The Internet Explorer 11 desktop application will be retired and go out of support on June 15, 2022 (for a list of what’s in scope, see the FAQ). The same IE11 apps and sites you use today can open in Microsoft Edge with Internet Explorer mode. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/DeployEdge/edge-ie-mode https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/DeployEdge/edge-ie-mode Beyond that even Linux users have faced zero days. The web is inherently unsafe which in practice is rarely a issue for the cautious, but that’s only so useful.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
srtjstjsj 5y ago
The sandbox is extremely limited protection. There's no recourse against misuse of data you grant permission to use, but in the main App Store Apple can kill a deceptive app
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > The sandbox is extremely limited protection. There's no reason that the OS can't implement sandboxes and protections for user data like that, either. > There's no recourse against misuse of data you grant permission to use, but in the main App Store Apple can kill a deceptive app Apple can also distribute malware via the App Store, like it did with 500 million copies of Xcodeghost[1]. Other mobile app distribution methods can be more secure than the App Store, as well. Users can enjoy the increased efficiency and lower costs that free markets and competition in app distribution, security, and payments can bring. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7bbmz/the-fortnite-trial-is-exposing-details-about-the-biggest-iphone-hack-of-all-time https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7bbmz/the-fortnite-trial-is...

smoldesu 5y ago

Apple should obviously inform users of the possible hazards when sideloading (like Android already does), but that's still no justification to withhold functionality from the user.

spideymans 5y ago
Certain firms (ahem... Epic in particular) would argue that these warnings are anticompetitive in nature.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  Be that as it may, Epic wouldn't be suing Apple if they treated sideloading the same way Android did.
  - spideymans 5y ago
    Epic is suing Google because of Android’s side loading model.

ksec 5y ago

It doesn't have to be side loading though. What EU are really trying to suggest is that Apple is having too much power to dictate other business via App Store. Sideloading or Alt App Store are only some solutions. But instead Apple uses privacy and security to flat out deny any wrong doing. I have often thought the advice Steve gave to Tim Cook, "Dont think What he would do, do what you think is right" was all good intention but turns out to be possibly the worst advice ever.

srtjstjsj 5y ago
Why? Steve Jobs was deeply anticompetitive and anti user control since 1980 or older. Wozniak fought him to get the tiniest bits of user freedom into the Apple computer.
- ksec 5y ago
  He and Scott Forstall were also the ones who fought for side loading in the initial iPhone. And was also aware of the business consequences, App Store was there to help selling more iPhone. It is now a rent seeking machine with absolute power over many trenches of our society and economy. I also think people often mistaken some of those design choices as anti user freedom. Where the results of those decision might seems that way, the starting point were different. Things like integrated hardware design. Steve was an empathic and also a hash person. People often seems to read everything as if he was an asshole and very little about his empathic side of stories.

Jyaif 5y ago

> You do take a security hit from sideloading The security comes from the sandbox, not from the app stores. This is why it's secure to use the web even though the websites are not individually approved by Apple.

Jcowell 5y ago
You’re thinking of App security and not other aspects is Social engineering that will absolutely happen more with the introduction of third party app stores. That IS an inevitability when it comes to things like this.