4 ms·

Enabling Developer Mode on a Device

58 points by judge2020 4y ago

BeefySwain 4y ago
Can someone summarize how this compares to how things were prior (if there is even any change at all)? Does this make it easier or harder to sideload apps, for instance?
- akmarinov 4y ago
  Looks like harder as you have to explicitly opt in and restart your device
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    I think it's an OK kind of harder though. It's harder in the sense that you have to more clearly express your intention to load a non-store app and take a reboot. It's not harder in the sense of "you are prohibited from doing it".
- irons 4y ago
  Previously, each developer had to do one or more of: * use TestFlight for centralized distribution of pre-release apps, through Apple (with some lighter-touch app review involved), or * use enterprise signing (which requires enrolling in a more expensive program and jumping through some corporate hoops, with your apps subject to deactivation if you abuse it) to install on an unrestricted number of devices theoretically owned by your company, or * whitelist a pretty low number of specific iOS devices to install arbitrary apps onto — I think that limit is still 100 devices per year, per developer account This sounds like it removes the whitelisting requirement from the third option. Hope it's enough friction to prevent the worst aspects of sideloading from taking hold.
  - akmarinov 4y ago
    It’s 100 devices per type per dev account, so 100 iPhones, 100 iPads, 100 Apple TVs, etc
  - Wowfunhappy 4y ago
    If this removes the whitelisting requirement, that would be awesome—but I’m very much not holding my breath. My pessimistic guess would be nothing else changes, just a bit of extra fiction.
kgermino 4y ago
This seems like a positive change, or at least a non-issue. It’s not a big deal to ask developers to check a “I know what I’m doing” box. However, I’m not sure how big of an attack vector they’re closing here. I’m thinking of two channels: 1. Drive by installs when someone uses a public charger or another person’s computer to charge while using their phone 2. Users being guided to install malicious apps themselves under the guise of fake support or similar setups. These just don’t seem like major problems to me. (1) could probably work if you were targeting an individual, but it doesn’t seem like this is the weak link. For (2) I can’t imagine anyone who goes to the trouble of installing xcode and deploying to their device wouldn’t be willing to just check that box too.
- ev1 4y ago
  2) is basically going to be attempted on nearly every single kid with an iOS device (see "free fortnite skins / robux just follow these instructions and paste these in, also turn off firewall and av")
- kube-system 4y ago
  Along with #1, could it also make it more difficult for attacks on devices where the attacker has physical access?
  - kgermino 4y ago
    I don’t think so… I’m not sure, but it doesn’t look like this adds anything beyond knowing the passcode (already required in my understanding) if you have time alone with the device.
- grishka 4y ago
  (1) is already a non-issue because the device would ask you whether you "trust this computer" and then your passcode to proceed. Xcode won't even see it before you go through this prompt. FWIW Android does a similar thing with USB debugging enabled, just without the extra step with the passcode.
  - 4y ago
judge2020 4y ago
Upon enabling, it shows this warning[0], then upon reboot requires the passcode to confirm[1]. 0: https://i.judge.sh/40fyN/1bNGK4tR_k.png https://i.judge.sh/40fyN/1bNGK4tR_k.png 1: https://i.judge.sh/JbQcE/Q2UdipID_A.png https://i.judge.sh/JbQcE/Q2UdipID_A.png
mikeknoop 4y ago
This seems targeted at adding friction for alternative app stores eg. https://altstore.io/ https://altstore.io/
grishka 4y ago
Does this developer mode come with any changes to the signing requirements? For example, does it allow the installation of apps with self-signed, non-Apple-issued certificates?
- idle_zealot 4y ago
  No, at least not right now. Apple may be preparing to be forced into allowing sideloading with this feature though.
akmarinov 4y ago
Hmm this + the new API to check whether an app has been installed from the AppStore (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/apptransaction https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/apptransa...) makes me wonder what we’re in for
Melatonic 4y ago
Makes me wonder if enabling the developer options on my Android is opening any security holes. I would think not (assuming you don't then go into those same options and start messing with stuff) but I always do it first thing. I love turning on the option where it shows a little white circle exactly where it is registering your touch - I am sure this was intended to be just for testing but it is super useful on a device as imprecise as a touchscreen.
CogitoCogito 4y ago
Will this allow the local building/installing of personal apps without uploading it to Apple? Also will the app continue working indefinitely or will it require a periodic (weekly?) rebuild as this did before? Basically what my question boils down to is: can I locally and build a persistent app with this change?
- denysvitali 4y ago
  Wasn't this already the case? I think you just need the developer subscription, but you don't have to upload your IPA to any Apple server, as far as I know
  - CogitoCogito 4y ago
    Last I checked, the app would only continue to function for a week or some limited time. A work-around was to repeatedly redeploy it. Is this still necessary?
samuraixp 4y ago
Surely this is the beginning of providing a side loading option. Perhaps if they enforce the purchase of a paid developer account they can get their pound of flesh from the users on their way out of the store. It would be ironic if iPhone users paid Apple 100 USD a year to side load to play Fortnite etc...
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  Many people have already been doing just that for years albeit with Infinity Blade. Anyone with a free developer account can sign and sideload 3 apps while those with a paid one can sign an unlimited number of apps. This might be a more pessimistic reading, but from what I can glean, Apple added a warning toggle and app code requirement to the sideloading and signing process. That's it. Nothing presented here indicates the lifting of any previous restrictions or the addition of any new features like on-device app-signing/compiling, now or in the future. If anything, this "Developer Mode" is another layer of soft lockout to those who wish to load jailbreaks or non-Appstore apps onto their phones. Those who don't know any better will think that Apple is capitulating, when the likelier scenario is that Apple is putting on a show to quell the complainers while quietly expanding its control.
solarkraft 4y ago
This doesn't appear to add any features, but just revert ones that are being taken away by default in iOS 16.

58 points by judge2020 4y ago

Can someone summarize how this compares to how things were prior (if there is even any change at all)? Does this make it easier or harder to sideload apps, for instance?

akmarinov 4y ago
Looks like harder as you have to explicitly opt in and restart your device
- sokoloff 4y ago
  I think it's an OK kind of harder though. It's harder in the sense that you have to more clearly express your intention to load a non-store app and take a reboot. It's not harder in the sense of "you are prohibited from doing it".
irons 4y ago
Previously, each developer had to do one or more of: * use TestFlight for centralized distribution of pre-release apps, through Apple (with some lighter-touch app review involved), or * use enterprise signing (which requires enrolling in a more expensive program and jumping through some corporate hoops, with your apps subject to deactivation if you abuse it) to install on an unrestricted number of devices theoretically owned by your company, or * whitelist a pretty low number of specific iOS devices to install arbitrary apps onto — I think that limit is still 100 devices per year, per developer account This sounds like it removes the whitelisting requirement from the third option. Hope it's enough friction to prevent the worst aspects of sideloading from taking hold.
- akmarinov 4y ago
  It’s 100 devices per type per dev account, so 100 iPhones, 100 iPads, 100 Apple TVs, etc
- Wowfunhappy 4y ago
  If this removes the whitelisting requirement, that would be awesome—but I’m very much not holding my breath. My pessimistic guess would be nothing else changes, just a bit of extra fiction.

kgermino 4y ago

This seems like a positive change, or at least a non-issue. It’s not a big deal to ask developers to check a “I know what I’m doing” box. However, I’m not sure how big of an attack vector they’re closing here. I’m thinking of two channels: 1. Drive by installs when someone uses a public charger or another person’s computer to charge while using their phone 2. Users being guided to install malicious apps themselves under the guise of fake support or similar setups. These just don’t seem like major problems to me. (1) could probably work if you were targeting an individual, but it doesn’t seem like this is the weak link. For (2) I can’t imagine anyone who goes to the trouble of installing xcode and deploying to their device wouldn’t be willing to just check that box too.

ev1 4y ago
2) is basically going to be attempted on nearly every single kid with an iOS device (see "free fortnite skins / robux just follow these instructions and paste these in, also turn off firewall and av")
kube-system 4y ago
Along with #1, could it also make it more difficult for attacks on devices where the attacker has physical access?
- kgermino 4y ago
  I don’t think so… I’m not sure, but it doesn’t look like this adds anything beyond knowing the passcode (already required in my understanding) if you have time alone with the device.
grishka 4y ago
(1) is already a non-issue because the device would ask you whether you "trust this computer" and then your passcode to proceed. Xcode won't even see it before you go through this prompt. FWIW Android does a similar thing with USB debugging enabled, just without the extra step with the passcode.
- 4y ago

judge2020 4y ago

Upon enabling, it shows this warning[0], then upon reboot requires the passcode to confirm[1]. 0: https://i.judge.sh/40fyN/1bNGK4tR_k.png https://i.judge.sh/40fyN/1bNGK4tR_k.png 1: https://i.judge.sh/JbQcE/Q2UdipID_A.png https://i.judge.sh/JbQcE/Q2UdipID_A.png

mikeknoop 4y ago

This seems targeted at adding friction for alternative app stores eg. https://altstore.io/ https://altstore.io/

grishka 4y ago

Does this developer mode come with any changes to the signing requirements? For example, does it allow the installation of apps with self-signed, non-Apple-issued certificates?

idle_zealot 4y ago
No, at least not right now. Apple may be preparing to be forced into allowing sideloading with this feature though.

akmarinov 4y ago

Hmm this + the new API to check whether an app has been installed from the AppStore (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/apptransaction https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/apptransa...) makes me wonder what we’re in for

Melatonic 4y ago

Makes me wonder if enabling the developer options on my Android is opening any security holes. I would think not (assuming you don't then go into those same options and start messing with stuff) but I always do it first thing. I love turning on the option where it shows a little white circle exactly where it is registering your touch - I am sure this was intended to be just for testing but it is super useful on a device as imprecise as a touchscreen.

CogitoCogito 4y ago

Will this allow the local building/installing of personal apps without uploading it to Apple? Also will the app continue working indefinitely or will it require a periodic (weekly?) rebuild as this did before? Basically what my question boils down to is: can I locally and build a persistent app with this change?

denysvitali 4y ago
Wasn't this already the case? I think you just need the developer subscription, but you don't have to upload your IPA to any Apple server, as far as I know
- CogitoCogito 4y ago
  Last I checked, the app would only continue to function for a week or some limited time. A work-around was to repeatedly redeploy it. Is this still necessary?

samuraixp 4y ago

Surely this is the beginning of providing a side loading option. Perhaps if they enforce the purchase of a paid developer account they can get their pound of flesh from the users on their way out of the store. It would be ironic if iPhone users paid Apple 100 USD a year to side load to play Fortnite etc...

Dracophoenix 4y ago
Many people have already been doing just that for years albeit with Infinity Blade. Anyone with a free developer account can sign and sideload 3 apps while those with a paid one can sign an unlimited number of apps. This might be a more pessimistic reading, but from what I can glean, Apple added a warning toggle and app code requirement to the sideloading and signing process. That's it. Nothing presented here indicates the lifting of any previous restrictions or the addition of any new features like on-device app-signing/compiling, now or in the future. If anything, this "Developer Mode" is another layer of soft lockout to those who wish to load jailbreaks or non-Appstore apps onto their phones. Those who don't know any better will think that Apple is capitulating, when the likelier scenario is that Apple is putting on a show to quell the complainers while quietly expanding its control.

solarkraft 4y ago

This doesn't appear to add any features, but just revert ones that are being taken away by default in iOS 16.