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

Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

pocketables.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#101

Post by alts »

activepeanut wrote: post #53
kstenerud wrote: post #19

Most likely, their "piracy detector" was nothing more than checking for "MobileSubstrate" (a library present in all jailbroken phones) under the silly assumption that jailbroken = pirated. Booby trapped software is NEVER a good idea. No matter how clever you think you are, you're not clever enough.

What do you think of disabling IAPs if IAPCracker or IAPFree is detected?

But there are better ways of attacking fraudulent IAPs. Perhaps more effort, but certainly fewer false positives. http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Networ...

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#102

Post by darkstalker »

Apps posting tweets without consent of the account owner is a violation of the Twitter rules [1]

  Get users' permission before sending Tweets or other messages on their behalf. A user authenticating through your application does not constitute consent to send a message.
[1] https://dev.twitter.com/terms/api-terms

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#103

Post by MrJagil »

nfg wrote: post #100
MrJagil wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oy, I should have known better :) I know how pregnancy works, and I'm not repulsed by that in and of itself at all. My younger brother was born at home so I have experienced it quite closely. Further, I hope to have several children myself one day, being present at their birth and all that follows. The biggest fear in my life, and i mean that with every cell in my body, is that this wont be realized for one reason or…

> There is no reason for you as pregnant woman to wear a bellyshirt, unless you're desperately attempting to call attention to yourself. How can you possibly post this sort of nonsense and expect to be taken seriously?

Ok, to me, a bellyshirt seems to have two functions: Comfort and/or as a device to appear more attractive, perhaps explicitly so. Attractiveness is understandably important to her (It's not like pregnancy makes you not-human), but to me, a belly shirt at least borders on being a sexual incentive, which is why i feel it is out of place. Comfort could indeed be the answer, and if that is the case, well, alright, my analysis was bullshit. (I would try to keep my baby warm, but I guess it can get pretty hot in Japan)

Pop-psychology...

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#104

Post by pdonis »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #87
pdonis wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He had to give the app access to his Twitter account. That doesn't mean he explicitly gave it permission to post to his Twitter account on his behalf.

No, that's exactly what that particular permission is (from a technical standpoint). What's at issue here is that the tweet the software generated wasn't exactly an authorized use of the account.

What's at issue here is that the tweet the software generated wasn't exactly an authorized use of the account.

Which means that, regardless of the technical point that "access to the Twitter account" gives the app the ability to post, the user did not give the app permission to post.

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#105

Post by pdonis »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #91
pdonis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see where he gave permission for the app to post Tweets for him. He gave it access to his Twitter account, but that's not the same thing. To continue your analogy, the stranger was invited into his home, gave him a form to sign that said he could inventory the items there, got it signed, and then proceeded to publish the information in a way that wasn't mentioned on the form.

But isn't it written, when you give access to Twitter account, that it could be used to post things for you?

I don't know since I don't use the app; from the description given in the blog post it seems highly doubtful that the app specifically told him it was going to post to his Twitter account on his behalf without telling him.

Also the app appears to be in violation of the iOS guidelines (see another post upthread), which means that it is not generally understood that apps can post on your behalf without telling you just because you give them access to your Twitter account.

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#106

Post by kstenerud »

activepeanut wrote: post #53
kstenerud wrote: post #19

Most likely, their "piracy detector" was nothing more than checking for "MobileSubstrate" (a library present in all jailbroken phones) under the silly assumption that jailbroken = pirated. Booby trapped software is NEVER a good idea. No matter how clever you think you are, you're not clever enough.

What do you think of disabling IAPs if IAPCracker or IAPFree is detected?

Jailbreaking and installing those hacks is difficult enough that your losses from it are likely to be low. So the question comes down to what your motivations are. Money-wise, it doesn't make much sense to tack on any more anti-piracy measures than there are already. You'd effectively be working for pennies designing and implementing your schemes with the amount of revenue they'd likely generate vs your losses from goodwill in the inevitable anti-piracy screw ups.

Personally, I prefer the pragmatic approach to the idealist. It's far less stressful.

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#107

Post by cormullion »

cobralibre wrote: post #97
trotsky wrote: post #18

im confused about paying $50 for a dictionary app

The short, glib answer is that if you have to ask why you would want to pay for a dictionary, then you aren't the kind of person who needs to pay for a dictionary. The long answer is that good dictionaries, such as American Heritage Dictionary, the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, and the OED itself, are produced by scholars and experts, guided by editorial panels comprised of scholars and experts, require a great…

For those living in the UK, it's probable that you can access the online master OED through your local council's library web site, using your ridiculously long library card number as username.

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#108

Post by [deleted] »

__david__ wrote: post #73
cs702 wrote: post #24

It would be obviously wrong and illegal for a stranger to come into your home, secretly inventory all physical items in your possession, and then impersonate you on, say, a global TV broadcast in which you're wrongly accused of stealing things. It should also be obviously wrong and illegal for any app secretly to inventory everything in your phone and then impersonate you on a Twitter broadcast in which you're wrongl…

Well, to continue the tortured analogy, the stranger was invited into the home, they didn't break in. Then they presented a release form to the homeowner saying they could impersonate him on TV, which the homeowner signed . Only then did they go on TV and "impersonate" him, saying things he didn't expect. I don't think it's so cut-and-dry as you are making it out. It's definitely shady, but I dare say there's nothing…

[deleted]

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#109

Post by SonicSoul »

__david__ wrote: post #73
cs702 wrote: post #24

It would be obviously wrong and illegal for a stranger to come into your home, secretly inventory all physical items in your possession, and then impersonate you on, say, a global TV broadcast in which you're wrongly accused of stealing things. It should also be obviously wrong and illegal for any app secretly to inventory everything in your phone and then impersonate you on a Twitter broadcast in which you're wrongl…

Well, to continue the tortured analogy, the stranger was invited into the home, they didn't break in. Then they presented a release form to the homeowner saying they could impersonate him on TV, which the homeowner signed . Only then did they go on TV and "impersonate" him, saying things he didn't expect. I don't think it's so cut-and-dry as you are making it out. It's definitely shady, but I dare say there's nothing…

i believe the user agreed access to his tv channel, and not that he could be impersonated on tv. maybe that was in the fine print, but i'm pretty sure nobody would sign this agreement knowing such impersonation was an option

Re: Dictionary app auto-posts piracy accusations on users’ Twitter accounts

#110

Post by troels »

praptak wrote: post #11
Karunamon wrote: post #5

Booby trapped software. Very clever, except for when it blows up in your face. At least they only posted to twitter instead of [1] something a lot worse (think file deletion, etc). Generally a bad idea, if you're of the leet warez d00d type, to give any illicitly acquired app your credentials to anything important, at least until you've verified that it's safe. The armchair lawyer in me wonders if someone could get a…

> The armchair lawyer in me wonders if someone could get a libel/defamation suit going because of this. As a professional certified internet laywer I'd also add impersonation.

Eh .. off topic, but why did you write lawyer with Y and W switched around? You emphasised it, so I assume it was on purpose?
Post reply on HN