3 ms·
> Program security requirements >> You must do the following: >>> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within othe
by BoppreH 2y ago
> Program security requirements
>> You must do the following:
>>> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within other languages, within the alternative web browser engine at a minimum for all code that processes web content;
AFAIK all major engines are written primarily in C++. This "features that improve memory safety" is worryingly vague, and we already know Apple goes out of it's way to make these rulings less useful.
I wouldn't be surprised if they rejected both Firefox and Chrome on these grounds.
- mariusor 2y agoWould Safari even qualify?
- znpy 2y agoSafari is based on WebKit, which is written in C++ afaik. So I'd say no.
- KolenCh 2y ago> … or features that improve memory safety within other languages So it is not based on language only.
- nephanth 2y agoYes, but it is still very vague. Do c++ smart pointers qualify? If so, what percentage of pointers should be smart pointers? It's very easy for AAPL to make this rule say whatever they want it to
- mariusor 2y agoMy question was rather rhetorical. :)
- anal_reactor 2y agoI really think that if they don't allow Firefox they'll get another lawsuit. The way I see it is that they allow Firefox and Chrome, but nothing more.
- 0x073 2y agoIf they allow chrome they must allow every browser with blink engine or they'll get also a lawsuit. (At least from the big)
- timeon 2y agoTime to pour resources to Servo.
- EasyMark 2y agodid the judge say it had to be written in a memory safe language? Honest question. Otherwise, this seems just like they're looking for a loophole knowing neither their browser nor chrome or Firefox are written in completely memory safe languages. Seems like grounds for a big fine.