9 ms·

I used to think the same way, but not anymore. The amount and variety of attacks on the devices have increased too much in the last years. The device could be e

I used to think the same way, but not anymore. The amount and variety of attacks on the devices have increased too much in the last years. The device could be encrypted, money could be stolen, some malware could sit silently and do surveillance for who knows. I always wanted to install software on my iPhone without the manufacturing company deciding what I can and can not have (according to californian standards!), but would I let my kids do that nowadays? No way! Stay on the app stores, also on Windows and MacOS is the first line of defense. It‘s sad but the safest approach. Regular users don‘t need to install software on their own anymore, the same as they don‘t need to put processors, storage and Monitors together or install a sound card.

newaccount74 3y ago
The security on the iPhone is from the app sandbox, not from app review. It's trivial to get something past app review (eg. look at casino apps that were disguised as games) On the Mac, staying on the Mac App Store makes sense because it is the easiest way to enforce you only install sandboxed apps. On iOS, that's not going to be necessary, because every app on iOS is sandboxed.
- heavyset_go 3y ago
  > On the Mac, staying on the Mac App Store makes sense because it is the easiest way to enforce you only install sandboxed apps. As an aside, I do believe you can use sandboxd with apps outside of the App Store, someone just has to write security policies for them. This page suggests that Apple might want to deprecate use of sandboxd in favor of just the App Store[1], though. [1] https://codeberg.org/valpackett/rusty-sandbox https://codeberg.org/valpackett/rusty-sandbox
  - newaccount74 3y ago
    > I do believe you can use sandboxd with apps outside of the App Store Yes, you can, it's trivial to do so. However, Apple does not make it easy to find out if an app is sandboxed or not, or what permissions it has. The warning that macOS shows when opening an app not from the Mac App Store does not differentiate between sandboxed and non-sandboxed apps.
heavyset_go 3y ago
The App Store is a poor line of defense, because it isn't about user security, it's about securing Apple's billion dollar app distribution monopoly moneyhose. User security is just a rhetorical afterthought. When we forgo real system safety in favor of gatekeeping corporate revenue, that isn't security. In fact, such a scheme is responsible for mass distribution of malware. Apple's App Store is responsible for distributing over half a billion copies of Xcodeghost to iPhone and iPad users[1], and that's just one piece of malware. [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...
- hayst4ck 3y ago
  I think you need to look at the system of incentives and alignment If apple's billion dollar app distribution monopoly money hose results in security problems for people, then their billion dollar app distribution monopoly money hose will be in jeopardy since it's justification comes into question. So what you see as a problem is what makes me feel the best about it. Apple is aligned with only secure apps on their store and apple is very unaligned with insecure apps. To apple security is not just a cost center, but a pillar of the justification for their monopoly position.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    It's a poor justification. You can cleanly implement a signing system for trusted developers (they've done it before), and it's obviously possible to distribute iPhone package files. All the pieces are in place, if it weren't for their $80 billion annual hayday then they wouldn't be dying on this hill in particular. Maybe part of it is this security alignment issue, but upon scrutiny it's clearly a small and solvable piece of the puzzle. Imagine if Keurig tried using user safety to justify a 30% cut off every K-cup sold. Such an ecosystem is doomed to fail, especially at-scale and with completely arbitrary enforcement.
    - geocar 3y ago
      It sounds more like you’re upset about apples revshare model on their channel; Why do you care if all your competitors also have to pay it? I don’t think the world got better because we got more channels on Tv, and I even think some of them might be dangerous and harmful to life…
ihatepython 3y ago
I used to think like you, but not anymore. I am not interested in installing random software from other people, I want to install my own software to be able to have full control over my own device. I don't care about 'regular users'. I care about myself.
- auggierose 3y ago
  You can do that already.
  - SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
    If I pay the fee and/or use something like altstore?
    - auggierose 3y ago
      Yes.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    If you own a mac, run a specific software at least once a week, and limited to like 3 apps. For all practical purposes, this means “you can’t”.
    - auggierose 3y ago
      > If you own a Mac If you own an iPhone, it's actually very practical to also have a Mac. > run a specific software at least once a week, and limited to like 3 apps. What?
      - kaba0 3y ago
        You get a license for a week only (without paying for a dev account), and has a limit of concurrently signing at most 7 apps (my parameters might not be exactly correct, but are roughly this), but a single application might require multiple signatures. The most common way to make all this signing a bit more bearable is to have AltStore installed on your mac, which will automatically re-signs the select few apps you want in some hacky way (needs your Apple id and password).
pseudo0 3y ago
So take five minutes to set up the parental controls on your children's devices. The idea that we should eliminate the ability to run arbitrary software "for the children" is completely ridiculous.
- simondotau 3y ago
  Then don’t buy an iPhone. I think it’s ridiculous that we are asking the government to save us from our own choices. As much as you and I don’t like it, what Apple is doing is perfectly legal. And as much as you or I might support a change in the law, you’re not going to get my support if the legislation is truly universal and not just a narrow-band targeting of a single company for developing an ecosystem which resonated with a large number of people. Write some legislation which applies to ALL platforms which run software and maybe I’ll take it seriously.
  - rhn_mk1 3y ago
    Sometimes our choices lead us to results that no one wanted. For a classical example, check out "tragedy of the commons". In those cases, you do want someone to enforce cooperation from outside, and this is what's happening to Apple now. > what Apple is doing is perfectly legal Not in the EU starting this summer! Although I agree with the second point: game consoles being general purpose computers should be treated the same.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    > Then don’t buy an iPhone. I think it’s ridiculous that we are asking the government to save us from our own choices. That's a great argument. I have even a better one: Don't dictate what and how people use their devices that they paid for with their hard-earned money.
    - simondotau 3y ago
      Yes it's your device, but it's not your software. You don't own the software. And it's the software which is stopping you from doing what you want. All software effectively "dictates" how a device works, whether you're talking about an OS or an app. If you buy an app, you don't get to decide how it works. You don't like it? Don't buy it. I don't see a big push for people crying to the government to stop Activision from dictating how to play Call of Duty. Apple doesn't dictate what software runs on your iPhone, any more than a toaster manufacturer dictates whether you can use it as a space heater, or Toyota dictating whether your car can function as a boat, or Epic Games dictating whether Fortnite can be used to prepare your taxes. It's true that Apple doesn't make the process of running your own software easy, but you are legally entitled to break whatever barriers you like and replace the OS with a Linux distro. Have at it. It's great. I support it. And if you want legislation that requires hardware manufacturers to provide documented paths for installing alternative operating system software, I'd support that legislation eight days a week.
kaba0 3y ago
And how exactly the AppStore prevents it? By using the OSs sandbox, which will apply the exact same way to user installed programs — you won’t suddenly run as root. AppStore checking is waaay overhyped as anything meaningful.
daveidol 3y ago
We should probably get rid of Safari / web browsers too in that case!
brucethemoose2 3y ago
I used to think that way, but then I realized the Android/iOS stores are absolute cesspools. I would not trust young kids on there either. Others are right, sandboxing is the real saving grace (and only if apps dont ask for a bajillion permissions which users will just click through so it will work). Apple is slowly trying to isolate apps even more, like they were in the early iOS days.
wiseowise 3y ago
> Regular users don‘t need to install software on their own anymore, the same as they don‘t need to put processors, storage and Monitors together or install a sound card. Uhuh, sure. "Shut your mouth, pay and be happy"
alerighi 3y ago
But it's an user choice! Same happens on Android. There is a settings that you have to enable to install applications from other sources. This is pure nonsense... giving user more choices is never a bad thing.

newaccount74 3y ago

The security on the iPhone is from the app sandbox, not from app review. It's trivial to get something past app review (eg. look at casino apps that were disguised as games) On the Mac, staying on the Mac App Store makes sense because it is the easiest way to enforce you only install sandboxed apps. On iOS, that's not going to be necessary, because every app on iOS is sandboxed.

heavyset_go 3y ago
> On the Mac, staying on the Mac App Store makes sense because it is the easiest way to enforce you only install sandboxed apps. As an aside, I do believe you can use sandboxd with apps outside of the App Store, someone just has to write security policies for them. This page suggests that Apple might want to deprecate use of sandboxd in favor of just the App Store[1], though. [1] https://codeberg.org/valpackett/rusty-sandbox https://codeberg.org/valpackett/rusty-sandbox
- newaccount74 3y ago
  > I do believe you can use sandboxd with apps outside of the App Store Yes, you can, it's trivial to do so. However, Apple does not make it easy to find out if an app is sandboxed or not, or what permissions it has. The warning that macOS shows when opening an app not from the Mac App Store does not differentiate between sandboxed and non-sandboxed apps.

heavyset_go 3y ago

The App Store is a poor line of defense, because it isn't about user security, it's about securing Apple's billion dollar app distribution monopoly moneyhose. User security is just a rhetorical afterthought. When we forgo real system safety in favor of gatekeeping corporate revenue, that isn't security. In fact, such a scheme is responsible for mass distribution of malware. Apple's App Store is responsible for distributing over half a billion copies of Xcodeghost to iPhone and iPad users[1], and that's just one piece of malware. [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...

hayst4ck 3y ago
I think you need to look at the system of incentives and alignment If apple's billion dollar app distribution monopoly money hose results in security problems for people, then their billion dollar app distribution monopoly money hose will be in jeopardy since it's justification comes into question. So what you see as a problem is what makes me feel the best about it. Apple is aligned with only secure apps on their store and apple is very unaligned with insecure apps. To apple security is not just a cost center, but a pillar of the justification for their monopoly position.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  It's a poor justification. You can cleanly implement a signing system for trusted developers (they've done it before), and it's obviously possible to distribute iPhone package files. All the pieces are in place, if it weren't for their $80 billion annual hayday then they wouldn't be dying on this hill in particular. Maybe part of it is this security alignment issue, but upon scrutiny it's clearly a small and solvable piece of the puzzle. Imagine if Keurig tried using user safety to justify a 30% cut off every K-cup sold. Such an ecosystem is doomed to fail, especially at-scale and with completely arbitrary enforcement.
  - geocar 3y ago
    It sounds more like you’re upset about apples revshare model on their channel; Why do you care if all your competitors also have to pay it? I don’t think the world got better because we got more channels on Tv, and I even think some of them might be dangerous and harmful to life…

ihatepython 3y ago

I used to think like you, but not anymore. I am not interested in installing random software from other people, I want to install my own software to be able to have full control over my own device. I don't care about 'regular users'. I care about myself.

auggierose 3y ago
You can do that already.
- SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
  If I pay the fee and/or use something like altstore?
  - auggierose 3y ago
    Yes.
- kaba0 3y ago
  If you own a mac, run a specific software at least once a week, and limited to like 3 apps. For all practical purposes, this means “you can’t”.
  - auggierose 3y ago
    > If you own a Mac If you own an iPhone, it's actually very practical to also have a Mac. > run a specific software at least once a week, and limited to like 3 apps. What?
    - kaba0 3y ago
      You get a license for a week only (without paying for a dev account), and has a limit of concurrently signing at most 7 apps (my parameters might not be exactly correct, but are roughly this), but a single application might require multiple signatures. The most common way to make all this signing a bit more bearable is to have AltStore installed on your mac, which will automatically re-signs the select few apps you want in some hacky way (needs your Apple id and password).

pseudo0 3y ago

So take five minutes to set up the parental controls on your children's devices. The idea that we should eliminate the ability to run arbitrary software "for the children" is completely ridiculous.

simondotau 3y ago
Then don’t buy an iPhone. I think it’s ridiculous that we are asking the government to save us from our own choices. As much as you and I don’t like it, what Apple is doing is perfectly legal. And as much as you or I might support a change in the law, you’re not going to get my support if the legislation is truly universal and not just a narrow-band targeting of a single company for developing an ecosystem which resonated with a large number of people. Write some legislation which applies to ALL platforms which run software and maybe I’ll take it seriously.
- rhn_mk1 3y ago
  Sometimes our choices lead us to results that no one wanted. For a classical example, check out "tragedy of the commons". In those cases, you do want someone to enforce cooperation from outside, and this is what's happening to Apple now. > what Apple is doing is perfectly legal Not in the EU starting this summer! Although I agree with the second point: game consoles being general purpose computers should be treated the same.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  > Then don’t buy an iPhone. I think it’s ridiculous that we are asking the government to save us from our own choices. That's a great argument. I have even a better one: Don't dictate what and how people use their devices that they paid for with their hard-earned money.
  - simondotau 3y ago
    Yes it's your device, but it's not your software. You don't own the software. And it's the software which is stopping you from doing what you want. All software effectively "dictates" how a device works, whether you're talking about an OS or an app. If you buy an app, you don't get to decide how it works. You don't like it? Don't buy it. I don't see a big push for people crying to the government to stop Activision from dictating how to play Call of Duty. Apple doesn't dictate what software runs on your iPhone, any more than a toaster manufacturer dictates whether you can use it as a space heater, or Toyota dictating whether your car can function as a boat, or Epic Games dictating whether Fortnite can be used to prepare your taxes. It's true that Apple doesn't make the process of running your own software easy, but you are legally entitled to break whatever barriers you like and replace the OS with a Linux distro. Have at it. It's great. I support it. And if you want legislation that requires hardware manufacturers to provide documented paths for installing alternative operating system software, I'd support that legislation eight days a week.

kaba0 3y ago

And how exactly the AppStore prevents it? By using the OSs sandbox, which will apply the exact same way to user installed programs — you won’t suddenly run as root. AppStore checking is waaay overhyped as anything meaningful.

daveidol 3y ago

We should probably get rid of Safari / web browsers too in that case!

brucethemoose2 3y ago

I used to think that way, but then I realized the Android/iOS stores are absolute cesspools. I would not trust young kids on there either. Others are right, sandboxing is the real saving grace (and only if apps dont ask for a bajillion permissions which users will just click through so it will work). Apple is slowly trying to isolate apps even more, like they were in the early iOS days.

wiseowise 3y ago

> Regular users don‘t need to install software on their own anymore, the same as they don‘t need to put processors, storage and Monitors together or install a sound card. Uhuh, sure. "Shut your mouth, pay and be happy"

alerighi 3y ago

But it's an user choice! Same happens on Android. There is a settings that you have to enable to install applications from other sources. This is pure nonsense... giving user more choices is never a bad thing.