Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Sign In

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 544 posts

Re: Apple Sign In

#331

Post by taytus »

Permagate wrote: post #325
taytus wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what is the need to have such a knee jerk reply? Seriously, why would you say something like that? My comment meant: "Bye bye " for me. As in: I'm not using it anymore. I don't get you man.

I'm not the commenter. But taken at face value, your comment could be either bye bye mailinator.com (I'm not using you anymore) or bye bye mailinator.com (no one is going to use you anymore). Fwiw, I thought you meant the latter until I read your reply.

Thank you. I can see that. But if anyone really is curious about the meaning and needs clarification, I believe it’s best to ask.

Re: Apple Sign In

#332

Post by [deleted] »

haswell wrote: post #330
polutropos wrote: post #308

According to the App Store review guidelines update posted today, Sign In with Apple will be required for any iOS app that implements a single-sign in button. "Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

I'm really curious to see if this impacts enterprise apps that are configured by an administrator to use an internal SSO provider, or if this only applies to apps that allow users to sign up. For example, Slack can be (and is often) configured to use Okta or some other SSO provider. Does the Slack app have to implement some kind of support for Apple Sign In when such use cases are involved?

[deleted]

Re: Apple Sign In

#333

Post by katbyte »

baroffoos wrote: post #311
_bxg1 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where every other tech company swindles and manipulates consumers at every opportunity, I'm happy that at least one is incentivized to do the opposite, and has the power to do so.

Apple swindles and manipulates the user to buying a new device whenever there is any fault at all because everything is glued and soldered together so fixing anything requires buying half of the device.

I don’t think that is a fair comparison. Aside from hardware va software I personally have never had an issue with apple products last 3 or more years. Get apple care and they just fix or replace it when anything goes wrong. Better experience then my friends seem to have with other manufactures.

Re: Apple Sign In

#334

Post by dcbadacd »

w3rhn2j34oh5o wrote: post #128
dpq wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a start, I don't own, and don't want Apple devices. Also, stories about FISA overreach, PRISM, the rest of the alphabet soup plus gag orders do not particularly inspire confidence.

then use signal. friends don't let friends use telegram. Signal gives you all of this without the snake oil that telegram is selling you.

Signal requires a phone number. If anything, use Keybase, you'll also get good team handling, file sharing and bunch of other nice convinience features.

Re: Apple Sign In

#335

Post by atticmanatee »

busymom0 wrote: post #170

I develop apps myself and I am 100% onboard with using this instead of offering the signup with google or facebook buttons (can offer those as secondary options). I might even push users slightly to use this instead of others as it gives my apps a bit of extra trust worthiness imo. Only question I have is if it's possible to integrate this on websites and for non-apple products too? Because I would like my app which…

On the presentation they said it would be available on web and android.

Re: Apple Sign In

#336

Post by golem14 »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #111
golem14 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the web page, I cannot tell what pricing is going to be - looks like you go out of your way to not scare off potential users. I can't find pricing information at all via Google searches, either. That's something I really dislike. Perhaps it's a necessary evil.

It’s at the bottom of the landing page: https://idbloc.co/#pricing The goal is to explain the concept ahead of the pricing as I think it’s quite novel to most users.

Thanks. I had not noticed even though I scrolled to the bottom

Re: Apple Sign In

#337

Post by noelsusman »

basch wrote: post #300
noelsusman wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're close to parity with a giant exception that it's not available to the overwhelming majority of Facebook users.

Feature parity for most people, not userbase parity.

The ability to run on my phone seems like an important feature.

Re: Apple Sign In

#338

Post by ricardobeat »

move-on-by wrote: post #320
ricardobeat wrote: post #211

Whoa. Apple is picking up where Mozilla’s ball dropped, but with a massively better chance of success. Cheers to whoever is running this show.

Mozilla dropped the ball on this? They never had an opportunity to do this. Apple will only succeed by bulling developers that want to stay in the AppStore. Mozilla doesn’t have the market share or financial leverage to do anything like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Persona

> Mozilla doesn’t have the market share or financial leverage to do anything like this

Precisely. There was very little incentive for websites to adopt it at the time; Apple has a lot more power.

Re: Apple Sign In

#339

Post by [deleted] »

moduspol wrote: post #200
buildbuildbuild wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also have pretty strict whitelisting requirements around who can send emails to these privacy addresses. "In order to send email messages through the relay service to the users’ personal inboxes, you will need to register your outbound email domains. All registered domains must create Sender Policy Framework (SPF) DNS TXT records in order to transit Apple's private mail relay. You can register up to 10 domains a…

Neat. It sounds like this extra step prevents a situation where, for example, a dev's server-side database gets hacked and the users' relay e-mail addresses are exposed. The attacker wouldn't even be able to send e-mail messages to the users. He'd also need to compromise the registered domain's mailservers, or their DNS servers (to modify the SPF records), or their Apple dev account to add their own registered domain…

[deleted]

Re: Apple Sign In

#340

Post by josephwegner »

codezero wrote: post #252
mjlee wrote: post #3

Disposable, anonymous email forwarding is a massive step forward for privacy. I know we've all been doing it for a while, but this on a consumer level is fantastic.

Totally agree. I set this up for myself to have a anything@mytrowawaydomain.com and it's great to see when folks sell your email :) So far it's only happened once, actually, when Keen.io got bought by a PE firm, I got a bunch of spam, so they clearly sold off my email address. It's a system that would be hard to operate as a "normal" person, so this is a great step.

As a former (pre-sale) Keen employee, this makes me sad. I'm very sorry.
Post reply on HN