4 ms·
Paying qualified people to audit code would not exactly be cheap. Needs to be done every time the extension is updated too.
by frou_dh 3y ago
Paying qualified people to audit code would not exactly be cheap. Needs to be done every time the extension is updated too.
- neom 3y agoIsn't that why publishing verified code re: Apple costs $99/$299? (I actually have no clue, I just presumed that's part of why you pay Apple, to verify your code?)
- cj 3y agoChrome requires a $5 fee to submit chrome extensions. 1 time fee that's non-recurring.
- frou_dh 3y agoWell we're talking about source code here. Apple has no expectation that applications for their platforms are open-source and so they don't get to see the source code either. Scanning of the binaries, "Notarization", Developer ID signing and all that stuff is something different.
- neom 3y agoGot it, then I guess in the Apple instance I mean "confirm it's not malicious"? But sure, Apple and Oranges. BTW, I checked out the video in your bio a couple of days ago, absolutely fantastic! Thanks for the recommendation.
- frou_dh 3y agoOh, great. Makes me happy to catch people with it :)
- supriyo-biswas 3y agoApple uses some combination of static analysis and manual reviews for applications, unfortunately I don't have a reputable source to link right now.
- eviks 3y agoThat doesn't explain the failure to incorporate free information nor build the tools to convey that info to the users