Live data from Hacker News

iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

techradar.com

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe they ever claimed that it was not possible. The position has always been that it is a compromise in security controls. The counter position to that has never been that it is not a compromise in security controls. I only hope they continue to sell devices that don’t allow it, because that’s what I would choose every time, unless that choice is taken away from me.

Why do you think it's ever better to have a device that doesn't ever allow sideloading apps, over one that lets you, the owner, decide whether or not to allow sideloading apps?

Because these restrictions on iOS are legitimately valuable security controls. Apple decides what functionality is exposed to applications, decides who is allowed to publish applications, screens the applications they do publish, and ensures that I have the ability to consent to the permissions they are required to explicitly and in clear language request. I can safely install any application I want off the App Store, and barely put any thought into the security implications of doing so. The only thing I have to consider is whether I want to grant the publisher the permissions they’re requesting.

If Apple created a methodology for circumventing this process, all of a sudden it is something that I have to worry about, and it creates an attack surface that I’d rather not have to consider. It also weakens my ability to demand these standards from publishers. If a publisher has the ability to say “this app is only available outside the walled garden”, then they may refuse to publish it via the system that is designed to ensure my interests are upheld.

If the Apple curated experience happened to curtail the way I wished to use my device, then I would have more to think about. But it doesn’t, I can do everything on my iPhone that I want to do.

I do have sympathy for the developers who sometimes find themselves stuck in a Kafkaesque review process. But I consider my own interests to be much more important than theirs.

I have very little sympathy for the businesses who object to the revenue model. Apple’s system asserts my interests as a consumer above interests of business who frequently engage in anti-consumer behaviour. I don’t care if they have to pay to access me as a customer, this is something I’m intentionally opting into as an Apple user.

The only time I do object to Apple’s curation, is when they use it in a way that I view as prioritising some other agenda above my interests. Such as when Apple pulls and app, or refuses to publish one, for reasons such as it containing “objectionable” content. I view this entirely as them subverting my interests. If that started to interfere with they way I wanted to use my device, I would start to consider an alternative. But so far it hasn’t.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#303
post #208

I think Apple has also done good things with their strict app store policies (from my consumer point of view). Apple has been for example putting limits on data collection and tracking. The main mechanism is to kick apps out from Apps store if they don't play by the rules. I'm worried that side loading will be a step back here. Strong players, like Facebook, may just take their app away from the official store and di…

This is naive. Apple doesn't protect you. The prime example is that apple gives apps unfettered access to network connections. And YOU are unable to block this in any meaningful way. What apple doesn't give you is the ability to manage your own phone. You cannot really manage what apps are doing yourself. You cannot even find out what apps are doing. And you definitely will not be able to manage apple apps, they get…

Actually privacy relay is currently in public beta as a part of Apple iCloud subscriptions plans.

Unless I got it wrong when enabled it reroute all Apps trafic through this "limited VPN" to prevent tracking and access to local network.

Apps that require access to local network must ask that permission explicitly. Streaming service (Netflix, Disney+,etc) do that for obvious performance gain. I noticed Microsoft Teams did it also (and I just revoked that thanks to this thread, it's a work app I better keep that out of my home local network).

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#304
post #143

I think the central question here is: .) whether you buy a phone as a piece of hardware and then own that hardware - which gives you certain rights regarding the usage of that owned hardware or .) whether you are just paying some sort of admission fee to a tightly controlled service, and are basically "lent" a piece of hardware that you have no ownership rights over. All the other stuff about walled gardens, monopoli…

Yes. The HN crowd is overcomplicating the issue, and Apple has as much a right as an individual to design their platform as they wish. We like to talk about giving businesses the freedom to build the products that they want and keeping regulators out of the picture and instead letting people vote with their money, yet when people actually vote with their money to buy Apple products precisely for how they are built, w…

How can you "vote with your money" in these cases? Most of the problems here stem from Apple misusing their monopoly against other app makers. Only indirectly harming consumers.

For instance, when purchasing a music subscription through an apple device, they receive 30% and the developer 70%. Apple have their own competing service where they make 100%. This makes it impossible for others to compete on equal terms, hence you as a consumer probably see less choice than you could have.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think those alternatives are the right ones. You can sell your iphone without any issue, there are plenty of stores around me offering to buy used models to resell. I'm actually contemplating buying a used model. Can't do that with steam games. I'm also pretty confident that if apple and their services disappeared tomorrow, my iphone would keep on working just like it does today. Sure, no more updates, no mor…

> I'm also pretty confident that if apple and their services disappeared tomorrow, my iphone would keep on working just like it does today. Sure, no more updates, no more new apps, it would be frozen in the state it's in. You can hardly call that "working like it does today". It doesn't. When features on it inevitably cease to work or be interoperable, you're screwed. And every day, you're probably more vulnerable to…

>If I buy a house, I can learn to maintain it and keep it secured. I can't do that with my iPhone.

For the argument's sake, your ability to do things to your own house is restricted by zoning, by HOA and god forbid you from buying something of historical significance in Europe -- then you can't change anything inside or outside and you are responsible for it.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He'd then have to convince everyone else he wants to talk to to use Signal instead of Facebook. That's the hard part.

I was under the impression that Signal was widely popular in SE Asia.

Unfortunately, you were mistaken.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#307
I wouldn't be surprised if Google pushes its own iOS marketplace: first by making an exclusive Blink-based Chrome to get people to open up their phones if they want to download "the real Chrome".

Then there is little friction to get people to install more (because the hard part is already done), and they could even merge Android and iOS into a single marketplace for mobile apps.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually the cases show up on social media in our country. The victims post that they’ve been frauded and generally blame it on the banks. The banks then reply and say “the fraud transaction originated from customer’s device”. When you look at the screenshots of victims giving example it’s all Android as far as I can see. Generally after talking to the banks and customers discover that it was their own fault for click…

Can't the banks implement some measures so that only their own apps can do transactions?

Believe me they’re trying. They’re now mandating biometric authentication, and I don’t mean on device, I mean implemented by the banks app / backend. If you read the articles you’ll see.

Each year the central banks up the ante on security protocols to implement to stop the fraud. I should know I used to work for a finance app here in Thailand.

We have to go through strict security audits, and procedures that costs a lot for any financial institution to implement.

Doing 2 FA is already a mandate for doing transactions. However 2FA in Thailand is mostly done using SMS which is still not that secure.

Forcing everyone to use a token or a 1Password app is also not viable since that’s going to shut a lot of people out of mobile banking.

It’s a complex problem, which I think Apple has already solved. Disabling sideloading reduces so much costs downstream and made things simple and secure for the lay man.

Re: iOS 17 app sideloading might only be available in Europe

#310
post #143

I think the central question here is: .) whether you buy a phone as a piece of hardware and then own that hardware - which gives you certain rights regarding the usage of that owned hardware or .) whether you are just paying some sort of admission fee to a tightly controlled service, and are basically "lent" a piece of hardware that you have no ownership rights over. All the other stuff about walled gardens, monopoli…

I disagree. While this dichotomy might hold true in other examples, in the case of iPhones it was always possible to push custom software to your own device for development purposes. There is a somewhat arbitrary limitation that those apps only work for a week until the process needs to be repeated (unless you enroll in Apple's Developer Program), but that's a different topic. The main demand in these "sideloading" d…

>>PS: The existence of Jailbreaks further undermines the argument that you cannot control the software on your device.

How? It's like saying car manufacturers aren't really locking down their cars to hardware that only official dealerships own, because after all you can just buy a coding tool from some random AliExpress seller so it's fine. What are people complaining about.

>> in other examples, in the case of iPhones it was always possible to push custom software to your own device for development purposes.

Sure, which is still a process 100% controlled by apple and which they can pull out at any moment. Also let's not pretend it's anywhere near as easy as installing Galaxy Store on android and instantly getting out of Google's restrictions on the play store. Hopefully we'll get legislation that removes that possibility entirely.

>>The main demand in these "sideloading" discussions is therefore that Apple ought to make installing unlisted Apps easier.

I have no idea where you've seen such demands, because it's not true. No one wants apple to host apps which would otherwise be unlisted or outright banned. That wouldn't make any logical sense and would be an unjust cost on apple. I do however want to be able to install an alternative app store and install apps from it without apple butting their nose into it. Like courts have ruled in the past already - if I make some software for iOS and a person wants to buy that software, why should apple control whether I can sell them that software or worse - get a cut of the sale[0]. Because they made the platform? Well, you don't pay anything to Mercedes for making mercedes-compatible wipers, and I really struggle to see how this is any different.

[0] assuming you don't use the app store of course in which case they should absolutely be paid.

Post reply on HN