Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
security-embedded.com
Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
1–10 of 213 posts
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#2> there are a lot of folks reasonably asking if they can trust Apple to be in the loop of deciding what apps should or should not run on their Macs. My argument is - who better than Apple?
... The user?
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#3This is exactly my point of view on this. I've seen people complain about Apple on HN about this in all the other posts, but to be fair, this is actually a really good thing.
It protects users, and it works well 99.9% of the time (actually, I am not aware of a previous outage of this system). So, why bother? It's been like this for a while, it is actually very useful to the vast majority of users, and Apple being Apple, even if they collected data, it wouldn't be up for sale like it would on a Google machine.
All the people saying they need to look for alternatives now that they found out that Apple is sending information about applications to its servers will need to think about this post. It's not like Apple is doing this to track users.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#4The problem with the argument given is that it basically gives up to Apple because it thinks that the situation that Apple provides is the best default experience for the majority of users. It probably is, but the problem is that 1. Apple doesn’t really explain any of this stuff anywhere so a technical user may read about it and make an informed decision nor 2. do they really provide a way to alter the process to use someone who isn’t Apple: just because they are a good default shouldn’t mean they should be the only provider that your computer will ever trust. And I think 3. is anger that a system Apple put in place failed in an entirely foreseeable fashion and essentially knocked a bunch of people’s livelihoods offline without warning or explanation and people are sick and tired of their things breaking for opaque “security” reasons.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#5> there are a lot of folks reasonably asking if they can trust Apple to be in the loop of deciding what apps should or should not run on their Macs. My argument is - who better than Apple? ... The user?
Anyone who has programmed or developed anything....knows that the end user can never be trusted.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#6This is exactly my point of view on this. I've seen people complain about Apple on HN about this in all the other posts, but to be fair, this is actually a really good thing. It protects users, and it works well 99.9% of the time (actually, I am not aware of a previous outage of this system). So, why bother? It's been like this for a while, it is actually very useful to the vast majority of users, and Apple being App…
Besides the privacy implications, 99.9% means per definition that it does not work for 8.77 hours per year. This is way too much. It is my computer and it should just work how it is meant to be without any external dependencies.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#7> there are a lot of folks reasonably asking if they can trust Apple to be in the loop of deciding what apps should or should not run on their Macs. My argument is - who better than Apple? ... The user?
Anyone who has programmed or developed anything....knows that the end user can never be trusted.
I have programmed and developed things. I am also a user.
I want to run the apps I want to run, thank you very much. No one else should have any say in that. It's my computer.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#8Can this site maybe consider specifying a better contrasting font colour between the text and the background?
On my firefox browser both on the desktop and mobile it looks like a rather light grey on white background. That is just plain difficult to read and is just terrible UX.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#9> there are a lot of folks reasonably asking if they can trust Apple to be in the loop of deciding what apps should or should not run on their Macs. My argument is - who better than Apple? ... The user?
I was really torn on whether to up or downvote here...
On the one hand, no. Probably, statistically, apple will know better.
On the other hand, despite the above, if you want to call apple devices "owned" (vs "leased") then yes, the user must be the ultimate decision maker. They might want to delegate these things to apple (or someone else for that matter) most of the time. But they must have the possibility to simply run what they want.
I think we're seeing the "HN crowd" be so frustrated about this because it is a pretty transparently anti freedom thing to do, and HN folks do love themselves some freedom.
Re: Application trust is hard, but Apple does it well
#10> there are a lot of folks reasonably asking if they can trust Apple to be in the loop of deciding what apps should or should not run on their Macs. My argument is - who better than Apple? ... The user?
I was really torn on whether to up or downvote here... On the one hand, no. Probably, statistically, apple will know better. On the other hand, despite the above, if you want to call apple devices "owned" (vs "leased") then yes, the user must be the ultimate decision maker. They might want to delegate these things to apple (or someone else for that matter) most of the time. But they must have the possibility to simpl…
You shouldn't downvote things you disagree with. This place would be a lot more interesting if less people did that.