5 ms·

>you can keep using app store, so I don't understand the issue Apps with massive following that are into the idea of violating privacy rights will leave App St

>you can keep using app store, so I don't understand the issue Apps with massive following that are into the idea of violating privacy rights will leave App Store and its restrictions, and will be available only on third party app stores where they can do whatever they want. Imagine Facebook leaving App Store and becoming available only on Meta Store (or whatever they would call it). Oh, and they dont have to abide by Apple's privacy rules anymore. Oh, and you also got no choice now if you want to continue using it. I personally don't use FB, but it was a solid example, and it can apply to any other app. Facebook is almost definitely cheering now at this decision, because I remember they had a pretty bad earnings call last year after Apple added additional privacy restrictions to iOS/App Store. But worry no more, FB is back in the game as soon as they can release their unrestricted version on a third party app store. "More choice available", in this scenario refers not to my personal choices, but to more ways for companies behind those large apps to avoid privacy considerations and restrictions of the platform. Tl;dr: FB has only two options now - abide by the current privacy rules of App Store or not have an app for iOS at all. With third party app stores being available, FB has a new and way juicier option - publish a version in their own app store with zero restrictions. Why would they even consider the official App Store and follow the restrictions. Consumers lose a solid option here.

smoldesu 4y ago
I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. Nobody is forcing you to download the Facebook app. It's perfectly usable inside a web browser, nevermind the fact that a sideloaded version of Facebook could still leverage the same security benefits provided by iOS' sandboxing model. At this point you're basically arguing that Apple should be the one who dictates what privacy should look like... which isn't the case. If you feel strongly that Facebook's data collection should be regulated more closely, you should take it up with local legislation. That's how systematic improvements like this EU bill get drafted, and it's how we force big companies to play fair instead of expecting other privately held businesses to hold them in check. That's not how antitrust action works.
- stevewatson301 4y ago
  > I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. And yet, people have a preference for installing apps, as evidenced by the populace that has the app on their phone as opposed to using m.facebook.com on their web browser. Sure, I, an experienced user, can still make that choice, but most won’t and it’s a net negative for the common user’s privacy.
- musicale 4y ago
  > I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here Probably because they got caught abusing enterprise certificates to sideload a spyware app: "Facebook has been using their membership to distribute a data-collecting app to consumers, which is a clear breach of their agreement with Apple. Any developer using their enterprise certificates to distribute apps to consumers will have their certificates revoked, which is what we did in this case to protect our users and their data." https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/30/facebook_apple_enterprise_certificate_revocation/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/30/facebook_apple_enterp...
- dwaite 4y ago
  > I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. Nobody is forcing you to download the Facebook app. It's perfectly usable inside a web browser, nevermind the fact that a sideloaded version of Facebook could still leverage the same security benefits provided by iOS' sandboxing model. I'll see if I can help. 1. A lot of people feel forced to use the Facebook ecosystem - there are groups and markets that are only accessible to Facebook users, let alone the ability to stay up to date with family and friends. Facebook/Meta also provide internet services in some countries, making them utterly unavoidable 2. Facebook has caught in several privacy abuses in the past, including one that used enterprise certificates to side-load a non-reviewed app which set Facebook as a VPN to monitor internet traffic and app usage. 3. There is no guarantee that Facebook will continue to allow full accessibility via a browser if they have sufficient benefits to installing a native app. See Reddit heavily pushing for their native app over the browser on mobile, or Google blocking whole services (or essential features for some services, such as the ability to edit Google Docs) to "encourage" people into native apps. 4. There are many security and privacy features of the App Store that come not from technical measures but from Apple acting as a quasi regulatory enforcer. For instance, application developers must ask for consent for tracking, and the setting chooses whether an advertising identifier is released. But the App Store contract limits _all_ cross-party tracking methods without this consent, including things like sharing device fingerprinting and IP addresses with third parties. These protections only exist for iOS users because of Apple's ability to block publication.

smoldesu 4y ago

I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. Nobody is forcing you to download the Facebook app. It's perfectly usable inside a web browser, nevermind the fact that a sideloaded version of Facebook could still leverage the same security benefits provided by iOS' sandboxing model. At this point you're basically arguing that Apple should be the one who dictates what privacy should look like... which isn't the case. If you feel strongly that Facebook's data collection should be regulated more closely, you should take it up with local legislation. That's how systematic improvements like this EU bill get drafted, and it's how we force big companies to play fair instead of expecting other privately held businesses to hold them in check. That's not how antitrust action works.

stevewatson301 4y ago
> I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. And yet, people have a preference for installing apps, as evidenced by the populace that has the app on their phone as opposed to using m.facebook.com on their web browser. Sure, I, an experienced user, can still make that choice, but most won’t and it’s a net negative for the common user’s privacy.
musicale 4y ago
> I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here Probably because they got caught abusing enterprise certificates to sideload a spyware app: "Facebook has been using their membership to distribute a data-collecting app to consumers, which is a clear breach of their agreement with Apple. Any developer using their enterprise certificates to distribute apps to consumers will have their certificates revoked, which is what we did in this case to protect our users and their data." https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/30/facebook_apple_enterprise_certificate_revocation/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/30/facebook_apple_enterp...
dwaite 4y ago
> I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone cites Facebook here. Nobody is forcing you to download the Facebook app. It's perfectly usable inside a web browser, nevermind the fact that a sideloaded version of Facebook could still leverage the same security benefits provided by iOS' sandboxing model. I'll see if I can help. 1. A lot of people feel forced to use the Facebook ecosystem - there are groups and markets that are only accessible to Facebook users, let alone the ability to stay up to date with family and friends. Facebook/Meta also provide internet services in some countries, making them utterly unavoidable 2. Facebook has caught in several privacy abuses in the past, including one that used enterprise certificates to side-load a non-reviewed app which set Facebook as a VPN to monitor internet traffic and app usage. 3. There is no guarantee that Facebook will continue to allow full accessibility via a browser if they have sufficient benefits to installing a native app. See Reddit heavily pushing for their native app over the browser on mobile, or Google blocking whole services (or essential features for some services, such as the ability to edit Google Docs) to "encourage" people into native apps. 4. There are many security and privacy features of the App Store that come not from technical measures but from Apple acting as a quasi regulatory enforcer. For instance, application developers must ask for consent for tracking, and the setting chooses whether an advertising identifier is released. But the App Store contract limits _all_ cross-party tracking methods without this consent, including things like sharing device fingerprinting and IP addresses with third parties. These protections only exist for iOS users because of Apple's ability to block publication.