7 ms·

I really think Apple needs to do something here with their next update. For every company that does the right thing by asking permission first, who knows how ma

by itg 15y ago

I really think Apple needs to do something here with their next update. For every company that does the right thing by asking permission first, who knows how many are being sneaky.

loceng 15y ago
That would hurt the virality of their apps, and therefore not make their app ecosystem as useful (or as competitive, if competing with apps on other platforms).
- mattgreenrocks 15y ago
  "Virality" of apps is not a problem users should bear. Good apps will be evangelized by users if they are genuinely useful. I'm suspicious of the utility* of apps that need to goad non-users into joining. * Usually, 'utility' is not the primary driver of these apps, it is more in building a large userbase quickly so VC attention can be garnered.
ChrisLTD 15y ago
Yes. The API should be updated now to require a permissions modal before an app can access your address book. I'm actually shocked this wasn't built in to the SDK from day one.
BillPosters 15y ago
Agreed. But you're being too kind on Apple. This is the worst privacy breach from Apple in iPhone's history. No point blaming app programmers. The functionality for apps to acquire the address book without asking shouldn't exist. Dear Apple, thank you for protecting me from adult material in the app store. But, can you... er, this is awkward... can you NOT GIVE MY ADDRESS BOOK AWAY WITHOUT MY PERMISSION? Thanks. And sorry for yelling, it's just, y'know, my address book and all.
- ugh 15y ago
  The app programmers do have to take the blame. Those breaches of privacy have always been possible on desktop PCs but app programmers usually didn’t do them because that would make them a pariah. I do not know why developers for mobile apps suddenly think that has changed. But they do. That’s certainly a problem and Apple should react to it quickly. The culprit, though, are still the developers who overstepped a pretty clear line.
  - replax 15y ago
    "Always been possible on desktop PCs" Well, yes, but unlike on your iPhone you could actively do something against it. E.g. let outlook encrypt your address book, change the addressbook access permissions etc. it was trivial to bar anyone/thing from accessing your address book without having to remove the software you want to use. On the iphone, you can only chose to install an app or not, if you chose to install, you have to accept anything that comes with it.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Trivial? No, not at all. Not in the slightest.
      - replax 15y ago
        I think I did not make my point clear enough. It is trivial to make it inaccessible to programs who assume that it is easily accessible. I did not mean to include solely malicious programs. If you stick your addressbook into a truecrypt container 100% of programs (i know there is no 100% security, but there is not enough space to spell out all 99.999999s) will not be able to access it anymore without you unlocking/mounting it first. Thus, requiring your permission.

by itg 15y ago

I really think Apple needs to do something here with their next update. For every company that does the right thing by asking permission first, who knows how many are being sneaky.

loceng 15y ago

That would hurt the virality of their apps, and therefore not make their app ecosystem as useful (or as competitive, if competing with apps on other platforms).

mattgreenrocks 15y ago
"Virality" of apps is not a problem users should bear. Good apps will be evangelized by users if they are genuinely useful. I'm suspicious of the utility* of apps that need to goad non-users into joining. * Usually, 'utility' is not the primary driver of these apps, it is more in building a large userbase quickly so VC attention can be garnered.

ChrisLTD 15y ago

Yes. The API should be updated now to require a permissions modal before an app can access your address book. I'm actually shocked this wasn't built in to the SDK from day one.

BillPosters 15y ago

Agreed. But you're being too kind on Apple. This is the worst privacy breach from Apple in iPhone's history. No point blaming app programmers. The functionality for apps to acquire the address book without asking shouldn't exist. Dear Apple, thank you for protecting me from adult material in the app store. But, can you... er, this is awkward... can you NOT GIVE MY ADDRESS BOOK AWAY WITHOUT MY PERMISSION? Thanks. And sorry for yelling, it's just, y'know, my address book and all.

ugh 15y ago
The app programmers do have to take the blame. Those breaches of privacy have always been possible on desktop PCs but app programmers usually didn’t do them because that would make them a pariah. I do not know why developers for mobile apps suddenly think that has changed. But they do. That’s certainly a problem and Apple should react to it quickly. The culprit, though, are still the developers who overstepped a pretty clear line.
- replax 15y ago
  "Always been possible on desktop PCs" Well, yes, but unlike on your iPhone you could actively do something against it. E.g. let outlook encrypt your address book, change the addressbook access permissions etc. it was trivial to bar anyone/thing from accessing your address book without having to remove the software you want to use. On the iphone, you can only chose to install an app or not, if you chose to install, you have to accept anything that comes with it.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Trivial? No, not at all. Not in the slightest.
    - replax 15y ago
      I think I did not make my point clear enough. It is trivial to make it inaccessible to programs who assume that it is easily accessible. I did not mean to include solely malicious programs. If you stick your addressbook into a truecrypt container 100% of programs (i know there is no 100% security, but there is not enough space to spell out all 99.999999s) will not be able to access it anymore without you unlocking/mounting it first. Thus, requiring your permission.