5 ms·

Why couldn't they make the entitlements enforced by the operating system with user prompts, rather than the App Store (or both)? Just because that's how it's do

Why couldn't they make the entitlements enforced by the operating system with user prompts, rather than the App Store (or both)? Just because that's how it's done right now doesn't mean we're just flipping a switch and suddenly allowing everything. It's still up to Apple on how they implement it. If that's how they choose to implement it, that's on Apple.

olliej 5y ago
Prompt based security has been shown to be a bad "solution" over and over again. The primary goal of which degenerates to "blame the user". Even if you do want to do that, what do you ask the user? Even the basic entitlements often require some amount of knowledge a regular user simply doesn't have. Then the law itself has rules prohibiting restrictions, and I would bet someone will claim dialog based security counts as a restriction. The law even makes it hard (impossible?) for a platform to protect even a modicum of user privacy. Section 2 (b) 3&4 explicitly prohibits a platform owner from placing restrictions on collection and use of user data.
- ThatPlayer 5y ago
  As opposed to the current primary goal of giving all the power to Apple to decide what the user gets? And once again, that's on Apple to implement. If they choose to continue to keep entitlements in the same format, that's on them to explain it to the user. See Android, they handle permissions fine. That section doesn't place restrictions on the generation of user data, only access to generated data. So don't generate it. In my opinion that's to prevent the platform holder from getting an unfair advantage by keeping the data for themselves. If the user doesn't give permission, the device doesn't generate the data, you're not restricting access to data because it doesn't exist.
  - olliej 5y ago
    You mean the android that has a massive malware problem? That android? As for the second bit, the "generated information" is things like device ids, location, etc. The stuff that is necessary for a phone. But clearly you're of the view that requiring malware, people having to give CC information to innumerable other companies, is a good thing, so I doubt we're ever going to agree on this. I would rather not have to worry about software installing a persistent crypto miner in the background, and not having to worry about software invading my privacy, than installing whatever mysterious apps aren't currently permitted on the App Store, but you do you.
    - ThatPlayer 5y ago
      No, it's only "generated through an interaction of a covered platform user with the business's products or services". Device ID and Locations aren't exactly generated through an interaction unless the user decides to give it. Exactly that's your choice. You can choose to continue being on Apple's App Store where they do check for all of these if you want. No one is forcing you to install give that credit card info. Don't take away my choice to choose otherwise. If I want to pay for something with credit card, shouldn't I be allowed to? Or if I wanted to run background processes on my devices?
      - olliej 5y ago
        You do have a choice, for all of your examples: you can buy an android device. The iOS ecosystem is successful because that is what many people want. You want the android experience, but rather than getting an android, you want to force that on the people who prefer the iOS model. They like not having to worry about malware. Currently an iOS user can get all the software that they want from the iOS AppStore, and they don’t have to give random companies their CC#, they don’t have to worry about the app subverting their privacy, because they know apple kills software that does that whenever they find it. This law means they have to deal with multiple different stores, that have no incentive to maintain platform security or user privacy. In fact they’re incentivized to abuse user privacy. As an iOS user I do not want the android experience. This law basically forces ios to have that. Malware and all. The only things this does is reduce user security, and give scummy publishers the ability to bypass AppStore rules the protect users (like “you must make discounting if subscriptions trivial”, “you don’t get to run a cruptominer in the background”, etc). Again, if you want to have the android experience, use android. Literally no one is stopping you.
        ThatPlayer 5y ago
        I want a better iOS, not just an Android experience. Those are not the same thing. > an iOS user can get all the software that they want from the iOS AppStore, > apple kills software Which is exactly the problem. That Apple has monopoly power over iOS apps. > This law means they have to deal with multiple different stores And in the same way I can choose Android, you can choose to use to continue to use Apple App Store only. Do you think Apple should be the only smartphone manufacturers because you don't want to deal with multiple OSes? No, because you're not being forced to use all of them.

olliej 5y ago

Prompt based security has been shown to be a bad "solution" over and over again. The primary goal of which degenerates to "blame the user". Even if you do want to do that, what do you ask the user? Even the basic entitlements often require some amount of knowledge a regular user simply doesn't have. Then the law itself has rules prohibiting restrictions, and I would bet someone will claim dialog based security counts as a restriction. The law even makes it hard (impossible?) for a platform to protect even a modicum of user privacy. Section 2 (b) 3&4 explicitly prohibits a platform owner from placing restrictions on collection and use of user data.

ThatPlayer 5y ago
As opposed to the current primary goal of giving all the power to Apple to decide what the user gets? And once again, that's on Apple to implement. If they choose to continue to keep entitlements in the same format, that's on them to explain it to the user. See Android, they handle permissions fine. That section doesn't place restrictions on the generation of user data, only access to generated data. So don't generate it. In my opinion that's to prevent the platform holder from getting an unfair advantage by keeping the data for themselves. If the user doesn't give permission, the device doesn't generate the data, you're not restricting access to data because it doesn't exist.
- olliej 5y ago
  You mean the android that has a massive malware problem? That android? As for the second bit, the "generated information" is things like device ids, location, etc. The stuff that is necessary for a phone. But clearly you're of the view that requiring malware, people having to give CC information to innumerable other companies, is a good thing, so I doubt we're ever going to agree on this. I would rather not have to worry about software installing a persistent crypto miner in the background, and not having to worry about software invading my privacy, than installing whatever mysterious apps aren't currently permitted on the App Store, but you do you.
  - ThatPlayer 5y ago
    No, it's only "generated through an interaction of a covered platform user with the business's products or services". Device ID and Locations aren't exactly generated through an interaction unless the user decides to give it. Exactly that's your choice. You can choose to continue being on Apple's App Store where they do check for all of these if you want. No one is forcing you to install give that credit card info. Don't take away my choice to choose otherwise. If I want to pay for something with credit card, shouldn't I be allowed to? Or if I wanted to run background processes on my devices?
    - olliej 5y ago
      You do have a choice, for all of your examples: you can buy an android device. The iOS ecosystem is successful because that is what many people want. You want the android experience, but rather than getting an android, you want to force that on the people who prefer the iOS model. They like not having to worry about malware. Currently an iOS user can get all the software that they want from the iOS AppStore, and they don’t have to give random companies their CC#, they don’t have to worry about the app subverting their privacy, because they know apple kills software that does that whenever they find it. This law means they have to deal with multiple different stores, that have no incentive to maintain platform security or user privacy. In fact they’re incentivized to abuse user privacy. As an iOS user I do not want the android experience. This law basically forces ios to have that. Malware and all. The only things this does is reduce user security, and give scummy publishers the ability to bypass AppStore rules the protect users (like “you must make discounting if subscriptions trivial”, “you don’t get to run a cruptominer in the background”, etc). Again, if you want to have the android experience, use android. Literally no one is stopping you.
      - ThatPlayer 5y ago
        I want a better iOS, not just an Android experience. Those are not the same thing. > an iOS user can get all the software that they want from the iOS AppStore, > apple kills software Which is exactly the problem. That Apple has monopoly power over iOS apps. > This law means they have to deal with multiple different stores And in the same way I can choose Android, you can choose to use to continue to use Apple App Store only. Do you think Apple should be the only smartphone manufacturers because you don't want to deal with multiple OSes? No, because you're not being forced to use all of them.