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

iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 587 posts

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#311

Post by katbyte »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #259
GeekyBear wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only Facebook makes the Facebook app, and I find it extremely easy to imagine a Facebook app that can only be sideloaded, so that Facebook can bypass the restrictions put in place by the App Store. For instance, Apps are currently not allowed to degrade functionality if the user says no to a permissions request (e.g. location tracking).

I don't use the Facebook app. I hardly ever use FB, anyway (I am an admin on a user group for an OSS project I authored), but their app is a well-known nightmare. I use their Web interface, which, I suspect, they deliberately cripple, in order to try forcing me to use their app.

I wanted to check fb messenger on my phone for a marketplace thing so I logged into the website: wouldn’t let you look/ pushed you to the app and I couldn’t flip it into desktop mode

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#312

Post by GeekyBear »

rickdeckard wrote: post #297
GeekyBear wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meta is collecting data from people using its products to create targeting-models for advertisement. Meta has been creating shadow profiles of people who don't even use their products for over a decade now. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/11/17225482/facebook-shadow-... Google, literally, buys a copy of everyone's credit/debit card transaction data so they can spy on your bank account and not just your online activ…

Glossy Magazines sell Ads to people interested in those glossy magazines. The Magazine-content defines its target-group. This doesn't work for platform-based advertising, the platform needs to offer ways to select the target-group to address. Google purchased transaction data to connect online behavior to the real world and refine their Persona profile. Apple doesn't need to do this, because they already collect data…

> Glossy Magazines sell Ads to people interested in those glossy magazines.

It's entirely possible to sell ads based on the content of a web page, just like it's possible to sell ads based on the content of a magazine.

It's just not as profitable as relentlessly spying on everyone.

> Google purchased transaction data to connect online behavior to the real world and refine their Persona profile

Google already has more than enough data on it's customers through their search history. They don't need to relentlessly spy on every aspect of your life, including your bank account, to turn a profit.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#313

Post by yamtaddle »

wkat4242 wrote: post #291
yamtaddle wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm the opposite, as looking at android, where do we see this? 1) Android hasn't made things as hard for malware vendors as Apple has, and 2) Android's not as lucrative a market as iOS Those together mean incentives are significantly different, so we might not see the same behavior on iOS as we have on Android, from companies that are upset about not being able to to distribute as-effective malware as they'd prefer…

Android is a much bigger market worldwide. Only in the US and a few other rich places Apple is still the #1.

User count, yes. Expected value per user, and amount spent per user on software and computer services is far lower for Android, even if we only look at the US. That, combined with the relative ease of supporting a couple iOS versions on a handful of devices versus a whole universe of Android OS-device combos, is why a lot of apps go iOS-first if they're not doing dual-platform from day 1. The benefit for most monetization models is greater on iOS, and the cost of support tends to be lower.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#314

Post by tempodox »

browningstreet wrote: post #137

One upside I haven't seen discussed a lot about this: sideloading your own apps. I don't care, and don't really imagine, sideloading others' apps... but this could give rise to a hobbyist/customization wave again.

That's exactly what I want to do and what I hope this will eventually enable: Run my own apps on my own frigging devices (no distribution involved) without having to bribe Apple for the privilege (if you don't buy a Developer subscription, you have to re-install your apps weekly to keep them functional).

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#315

Post by judge2020 »

kaba0 wrote: post #303
GeekyBear wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only Facebook makes the Facebook app, and I find it extremely easy to imagine a Facebook app that can only be sideloaded, so that Facebook can bypass the restrictions put in place by the App Store. For instance, Apps are currently not allowed to degrade functionality if the user says no to a permissions request (e.g. location tracking).

What exactly are those restrictions? Ios has a good sandbox model which is responsible for security.

They don't speak of the security model. But the compliance model, ie. "you can't block the entire app until the user enables precise 'always' location tracking".

But in terms of security, every jailbreak since ~iOS 8 besides checkm8 has been via a third-party app breaking out of the sandbox. The ramifications for shipping an exploit chain like this via the built-in app store is going to be extreme (possibly being blacklisted from iOS), but a sideloaded app can run such an exploit chain in the background (to install spyware if the user isn't on the most up-to-date version of iOS) with no consequence.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#316

Post by kroltan »

mschuster91 wrote: post #82
kroltan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of which, if you don't like that kind of thing, never use a Xiaomi phone. It requires registering for a Xiaomi account to "unlock" the bootloader and install alternative operating systems (such as one without most of the spyware - why does the calculator app or the pdf viewer need a privacy policy?) This account registration is baked into the phone while the bootloader is unlocked, and you have to factory-re…

That's a side effect of anti-theft measures. Samsung is the same, you can't unlock them any more without signing in into both Samsung and Google accounts which allows the two companies to detect if the device was registered as stolen. And for what it's worth, Samsung is the worst of the bunch anyway as rooting it permanently bricks the TEE via an e-fuse.

I guess having an account enables that deterrance, but I don't see how it is related to unlocking the bootloader if there was not an account bound beforehand.

If signing into an account can be preserved despite the "unlocked" bootloader, there has to be some sort of hypervisor/"secure chip" type deal denying access to the part of the device the account info is stored, no? Otherwise one could erase the account info and pass the device as untainted anyways.

So, if that information is secured against alternative operating systems, then there is no harm in allowing them by default or upon local user authorization.

In other words, if it was strictly for theft deterrence then surely you would need an account to be able to factory reset the device at all, even with the bootloader locked?

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#317

Post by waboremo »

HeckFeck wrote: post #239
Vespasian wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your concern and share some of them. However the solution to overreaching unaccountable private cooperations cannot be to hand all the power to another private unaccountable company. Apple is venturing into advertising and that'll tempt them to weaken privacy protections sooner or later. Additionally their app store rules went far beyond enforcing security and privacy. They gave themselves an advantage a…

> the free market failed to implement a meaningful competition for central app stores. I don't want every component of my phone OS broken apart and subject to what some legislator or lobbyist thinks is 'competition'. The competition is between Apple and Google making mobile platforms and we already had a choice. I chose Apple's approach after a few years with Google. I miss the headphone jack, but having no tacky tra…

>but having no tacky tracky shit shovelled throughout the OS

Like ads for icloud services in settings? Apple TV and Music subscription promotions appearing above all other the settings links? Personalized tracking being enabled by default?

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#318

Post by Eric_WVGG »

TexanFeller wrote: post #10

I'm dreading this. I want privacy hostile companies like Facebook to have to comply with the app store rules and respect system settings relating to privacy. As a user, I'm thrilled when Apple wields its big stick to stop big tech companies from overreaching. Before there was a bit of a compromise, I could use evil apps with some peace of mind that they wouldn't do something egregious. Now I suspect evil apps just wo…

Has everyone forgotten that bit where Facebook sent representatives out to college campuses and paid students twenty bucks to install their VPN app (distributed via Apple's beta or testflight or whatever)?

Apps like Instagram are popular enough that, if Meta wants to move them to their own app store (possibly incentivized via exclusive new features), people _will_ follow. And the VPN thing shows that there's no depths to the level of trickery and and violation of privacy that they will indulge in.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#319

Post by justapassenger »

Edd314159 wrote: post #56
TexanFeller wrote: post #10

I'm dreading this. I want privacy hostile companies like Facebook to have to comply with the app store rules and respect system settings relating to privacy. As a user, I'm thrilled when Apple wields its big stick to stop big tech companies from overreaching. Before there was a bit of a compromise, I could use evil apps with some peace of mind that they wouldn't do something egregious. Now I suspect evil apps just wo…

I agree, and the idea of a sideload-able iOS makes me very uneasy. I like the idea of Apple aligning itself with the user to protect me and, more importantly, my tech-unsavvy friends and family, from scams, data-hoarding apps, and just generally crappy software. I don't mind that they take a portion of revenue in return for providing that platform (30% feels too much, but you can't argue that it should be zero). Unfo…

> I agree, and the idea of a sideload-able iOS makes me very uneasy [...] Sideloading is full of risks, and I don't love it.

Luckily, there's very simple solution for you! Just don't use sideloaded apps.

Re: iOS 17 will reportedly set the stage for sideloading apps on iPhone

#320

Post by tenebrisalietum »

TexanFeller wrote: post #10

I'm dreading this. I want privacy hostile companies like Facebook to have to comply with the app store rules and respect system settings relating to privacy. As a user, I'm thrilled when Apple wields its big stick to stop big tech companies from overreaching. Before there was a bit of a compromise, I could use evil apps with some peace of mind that they wouldn't do something egregious. Now I suspect evil apps just wo…

The setting that Facebook hates and evidently bet the whole company on - "Ask App Not To Track" - probably wouldn't go away for sideloaded apps.

Honestly, given things like this ...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/montana-lawmakers-vo...

I think Apple may not have a choice. This is a move that will leave Apple free (or freer) of liability in various situations. For example, Apple is no longer liable if you sideload an app that is outlawed by your locality, and Apple removing apps from the App Store for violating App Store TOS can no longer be as strongly framed in a censorship debate.

I'm looking forward to it because quite a few apps that feature adult content can exist on iOS now and not have to be clunky web apps.

Post reply on HN