3 ms·

Well, given that mobile is a much newer platform, and a lot more regulatory scrutiny than desktop, perhaps the itchy regulators at the EU and the current FTC mi

Well, given that mobile is a much newer platform, and a lot more regulatory scrutiny than desktop, perhaps the itchy regulators at the EU and the current FTC might be predisposed to go after those companies, especially since most of them are already in their crosshairs for other misdeeds. I don't think regulators are going to be asleep at the wheel and just let Meta force users to use a Facebook store stuffed with trackers. Not to mention, what if Apple still exerted influence over alternative app stores by providing the SDK and certified security/privacy standards for them to build them? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667144 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667144

LeoNatan25 3y ago
Facebook’s shady coding in the past was all using sanctioned APIs, including the VPN it was using to spy on teens. With a private store also goes the static analysis of private API usage, which can enable software some looser restrictions (but not much, as some fear—most stuff is protected for at the kernel level).
- Apocryphon 3y ago
  Maybe static analysis can be imposed at the OS level, like macOS notarization? https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing_macos_software_before_distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizin... I don't think the regulators are going to mandate that Apple not retain any consumer-protecting mechanisms.
  - LeoNatan25 3y ago
    See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667740 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667740 Static analysis is very easy to be fooled. iOS security comes from its kernel enforcement by means of entitlements, which you can’t easily break.
    - Apocryphon 3y ago
      Given that it’s already present in App Store apps as you say would show that the App Store itself, and perhaps the current app review process, is insufficient!
      - LeoNatan25 3y ago
        I don’t know. It’s a cat and mouse game, and you can only win in such games if you don’t play. By moving the security from static analysis to kernel, Apple has sidestepped most malicious API mishaps. My project isn’t malicious, it just uses API not as intended, but it can do little malice in wrong hands. I think this is a good system overall.

LeoNatan25 3y ago

Facebook’s shady coding in the past was all using sanctioned APIs, including the VPN it was using to spy on teens. With a private store also goes the static analysis of private API usage, which can enable software some looser restrictions (but not much, as some fear—most stuff is protected for at the kernel level).

Apocryphon 3y ago
Maybe static analysis can be imposed at the OS level, like macOS notarization? https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing_macos_software_before_distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizin... I don't think the regulators are going to mandate that Apple not retain any consumer-protecting mechanisms.
- LeoNatan25 3y ago
  See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667740 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37667740 Static analysis is very easy to be fooled. iOS security comes from its kernel enforcement by means of entitlements, which you can’t easily break.
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    Given that it’s already present in App Store apps as you say would show that the App Store itself, and perhaps the current app review process, is insufficient!
    - LeoNatan25 3y ago
      I don’t know. It’s a cat and mouse game, and you can only win in such games if you don’t play. By moving the security from static analysis to kernel, Apple has sidestepped most malicious API mishaps. My project isn’t malicious, it just uses API not as intended, but it can do little malice in wrong hands. I think this is a good system overall.