5 ms·

I don't think sideloading in itself is necessarily a threat to privacy. It's unquestionably a downgrade in security thanks to the existence of social engineerin

I don't think sideloading in itself is necessarily a threat to privacy. It's unquestionably a downgrade in security thanks to the existence of social engineering, but that might be something we just have to live with. Where the real threat, in my opinion, lies is with third party app stores. It's easy to imagine Facebook for example launching its own app store where rules for information gathering are lax or nonexistent and then forcing its success by making the powerhouse apps it controls exclusive to it - a lot of people wouldn't think twice about installing a questionable app store if that were the only way they could get Instagram, WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, etc. There's also no shortage of unscrupulous developers who would jump aboard their platform for the anything goes policies. One could argue that users have a choice in that situation, but that's not really true, particularly where network effects are concerned. Most people are not going to switch to Signal for example if WhatsApp becomes a Facebook Store exclusive - they're just going to install the Facebook Store and get on with life, because the energy involved in getting entire social groups moved over just isn't there. Technical solutions to this privacy problem like sandboxing sound good on paper, but there will always be holes, and if the gatekeeper is happy to look the other way when developers use said holes (as Facebook themselves have in the past), those protections may as well not exist. Even if Apple puts maximum effort into closing off these holes, it'll be an endless cat and mouse game with user information dripping out the whole way. Some will point out that third party app stores and sideloading have been possible on Android since forever and the above described outcome hasn't occurred, but the incentives are quite different in the case of iOS/App Store, both financially (iOS user eyeballs are worth a lot more) and from a policy standpoint (the App Store, historically, has been much more strict than the Play Store). It could also still happen in the case of Android, and is perhaps even likely given how Google has been tightening the bolts on the Play Store's policies. So, my thought is that any legislation that forces the ability to sideload and install third party app stores must be accompanied by parallel legislation that effectively takes the App Store's privacy policies and codifies them as law, and potentially even criminalizes abuse of platforms to gain personal information without the user's explicit consent.

danaris 5y ago
Sideloading is a threat to privacy because it allows apps to ignore the consent requirements the App Store enforces. As it stands, if any app wants access to your contacts, your camera, your microphone, your photos, etc, it must ask first. Allowing sideloading removes this protection, and apps installed that way could simply siphon all your data silently. You even describe how that can be the case, but you couch it as being with third-party app stores. While what you say is not false, it is also not limited to that case: the removal of both privacy and security protections happens as soon as you stop having the App Store be the sole source for iOS software. Yes, of course, a hypothetical "Facebook App Store" with all Facebook apps being exclusive to it would have a higher chance of getting nefarious data-siphoning apps onto users' iPhones than any old random sideloaded app, but it's hardly a necessary part of the threat to privacy. It's just a way of guaranteeing much more widespread compromises of privacy.
- 8note 5y ago
  I would imagine that the OS's APIs should be the ones to enforce that, rather than the app store
  - interpol_p 5y ago
    One of App Store review's uses is to block misuses of valid API Some good examples are: * Exorbitant subscription pricing (3-day free trial, then $20 per week) * Misusing in-app purchase dialogues. There are some apps that dim the screen down to zero brightness when the in-app payment prompt pops up, and tells the user to rest their finger on the home button * Ensuring data collection practices match the claimed data collection practices in the privacy policy / "nutrition label" I don't know whether Apple is any good at enforcing those. We can only see the ones that slip through the cracks, and there are many. But not enforcing them hurts trust in the App Store and decreases revenue for all legitimate developers. I know two people who refuse to accept any free trials due to being burnt by subscription scams on iOS. And I personally have an app in the App Store with a free trial (no subscription, just a once-off lifetime purchase!) and constantly get one-star reviews claiming I run a subscription scam Lack of enforcement of the above is directly hurting my revenue. So I worry that allowing side-loading opens up the above channels to all sorts of scammy behaviour, and that then reflects poorly on the official App Store (many users won't know the difference, doesn't matter how many dire warnings / official dialogs you pop up)

danaris 5y ago

Sideloading is a threat to privacy because it allows apps to ignore the consent requirements the App Store enforces. As it stands, if any app wants access to your contacts, your camera, your microphone, your photos, etc, it must ask first. Allowing sideloading removes this protection, and apps installed that way could simply siphon all your data silently. You even describe how that can be the case, but you couch it as being with third-party app stores. While what you say is not false, it is also not limited to that case: the removal of both privacy and security protections happens as soon as you stop having the App Store be the sole source for iOS software. Yes, of course, a hypothetical "Facebook App Store" with all Facebook apps being exclusive to it would have a higher chance of getting nefarious data-siphoning apps onto users' iPhones than any old random sideloaded app, but it's hardly a necessary part of the threat to privacy. It's just a way of guaranteeing much more widespread compromises of privacy.

8note 5y ago
I would imagine that the OS's APIs should be the ones to enforce that, rather than the app store
- interpol_p 5y ago
  One of App Store review's uses is to block misuses of valid API Some good examples are: * Exorbitant subscription pricing (3-day free trial, then $20 per week) * Misusing in-app purchase dialogues. There are some apps that dim the screen down to zero brightness when the in-app payment prompt pops up, and tells the user to rest their finger on the home button * Ensuring data collection practices match the claimed data collection practices in the privacy policy / "nutrition label" I don't know whether Apple is any good at enforcing those. We can only see the ones that slip through the cracks, and there are many. But not enforcing them hurts trust in the App Store and decreases revenue for all legitimate developers. I know two people who refuse to accept any free trials due to being burnt by subscription scams on iOS. And I personally have an app in the App Store with a free trial (no subscription, just a once-off lifetime purchase!) and constantly get one-star reviews claiming I run a subscription scam Lack of enforcement of the above is directly hurting my revenue. So I worry that allowing side-loading opens up the above channels to all sorts of scammy behaviour, and that then reflects poorly on the official App Store (many users won't know the difference, doesn't matter how many dire warnings / official dialogs you pop up)