Apple Again Encouraging Mac Developers to Sign Up for Developer ID Ahead of OS X Mountain Lion

Gee, I wonder what prompted this?

I don't recall Apple previously saying developers can sign up for gatekeeper already.

Oh... Do I not have to do anything special? Is this the same code signing I have to do to get my apps on the Mac app store already?

ArtOfWarfare said:

I don't recall Apple previously saying developers can sign up for gatekeeper already.

Click to expand...

ADC did this when the first preview came out.

Gate keeper? Seems eerily like some MS product.

Here's one area where I hope iOS learns from the Mac.

If this proves successful with Mountain Lion I sure would like to see the iPad take this approach over the app-approval process it has now.

I think it will happen eventually. Hand-checking every submission is only going to get harder and harder for Apple as time goes on.

Variant said:

Gate keeper? Seems eerily like some MS product.

Click to expand...

What I thought of when I saw that graphic...

Tinyluph said:

Image

What I thought of when I saw that graphic...

Click to expand...

Except that Apple's makes more sense from a castle design perspective. They didn't have windows covering the front enterance back then!

Tinyluph said:

What I thought of when I saw that graphic...

Click to expand...

Only thing missing is a cheesy flag on top.

I was thinking something more like this...

Small White Car said:

Here's one area where I hope iOS learns from the Mac.

If this proves successful with Mountain Lion I sure would like to see the iPad take this approach over the app-approval process it has now.

I think it will happen eventually. Hand-checking every submission is only going to get harder and harder for Apple as time goes on.

Click to expand...

This doesn't change anything to the hand-checking of every submission at all. This isn't for App Store applications.

KnightWRX said:

This doesn't change anything to the hand-checking of every submission at all. This isn't for App Store applications.

Click to expand...

I think he's referring to the iOS App Store. I think what he wants is the ability to install native apps not available on the iOS App store on an iOS device by having iOS implement some function of Gatekeeper were apps can still be signed but not have to go through an approval process..

We all know that this will come as a huge surprised to some developers when ML is released, won't it?

Walled garden?

This is the walled castle with a moat and a drawbridge, approach.

Step away from the computer. The tribunal has deemed your coding to sub-par and sloppy. We are going to have to revoke your keys.

pdjudd said:

I think he's referring to the iOS App Store. I think what he wants is the ability to install native apps not available on the iOS App store on an iOS device by having iOS implement some function of Gatekeeper were apps can still be signed but not have to go through an approval process..

Click to expand...

I don't really see the benefit.

I'd rather my apps be approved by Apple. They've done a great job, all things considered. I really have no need of any apps that are not approved by Apple and use private API's.

That's what the jailbreak community is for, if you really need it. I no longer do.

Tinyluph said:

Image

What I thought of when I saw that graphic...

Click to expand...

We don't even get a flag...

inkswamp said:

Gee, I wonder what prompted this?

Click to expand...

It looks like they aren't getting as many as expected to sign-up. I never saw the first invite.

Coming soon:

• Apple Security Essentials
• Warnings for drivers which haven't passed OS X Logo testing
• OS X Malicious Software Removal Tool
• OS X Security Center
• OS X Defender

lostngone said:

We don't even get a flag...

Click to expand...

Because we don't need a flag. We think differently.

KnightWRX said:

This doesn't change anything to the hand-checking of every submission at all. This isn't for App Store applications.

Click to expand...

I think you totally missed my point.

"I hope" ...meaning a future change in policy that I anticipate/desire.

ArtOfWarfare said:

I don't recall Apple previously saying developers can sign up for gatekeeper already.

Oh... Do I not have to do anything special? Is this the same code signing I have to do to get my apps on the Mac app store already?

Click to expand...

The developer ID use is for non Mac App Store apps. If you are in the App Store already you are ok.

pmz said:

I don't really see the benefit.

I'd rather my apps be approved by Apple. They've done a great job, all things considered. I really have no need of any apps that are not approved by Apple and use private API's.

That's what the jailbreak community is for, if you really need it. I no longer do.

Click to expand...

The jailbreak community bypasses the security of the platform, and uses security holes to do it. That second part is the important bit. If you have a 100% secure platform, you can't jailbreak. If you can jailbreak through say, Safari, that represents a serious security risk in the platform that needs to be fixed.

Having a gatekeeper does tend to stifle some types of random innovation through "We don't want a second browser", and "We know what is best for the core UI" principles. I understand Apple's stance, but some of what they buy and learn from are people who do it anyways.

So, if they were to allow apps signed with a Gatekeeper certificate onto iOS in the future, that would start to get benefits from signing in the security model, while at the same time, getting the key benefits that the jailbreak community provides as well. One of the things that Microsoft has screwed up with their signing model on Windows is making everyone pay Verisign for the certs. That meant that signing is not universal, which erodes and undermines the security benefits very quickly.

pmz said:

I don't really see the benefit.

I'd rather my apps be approved by Apple. They've done a great job, all things considered. I really have no need of any apps that are not approved by Apple and use private API's.

That's what the jailbreak community is for, if you really need it. I no longer do.

Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your bubble but there are several apps that just are not going to ever get distributed in the MAS - in many cases it's just fundamentally incompatible with the way their business operates.

pmz said:

I don't really see the benefit.

I'd rather my apps be approved by Apple. They've done a great job, all things considered. I really have no need of any apps that are not approved by Apple and use private API's.

That's what the jailbreak community is for, if you really need it. I no longer do.

Click to expand...

There are a few types of app that are not suitable for the Mac App Store, but users will want.

There is software that is too expensive for the store. Adobe Creative Suite, Maya and 3DS Max for example.

Also, apps that may be too adult in content. This will include some games.

Plus apps coming through another distribution sources such as Steam.

And then there is open source software that has licences that clash with the Mac App Store EULA.

All of these will include many trustworthy sources. It is good that Apple are allowing developers an alternative.

This isn't antivirus software, people.

And Gatekeeper was unveiled on February 16th. It's been in the works for a while now.

So has apple issued any of these codes to devs or apps?

Sure doesn't seem like it considering that on 10.8 even apps downloaded from apple give a warning that it's from a developer who hasn't been approved. So what's the holdup? If they want to test this new security system, better make it possible for devs to have signed apps sooner rather than later so things are good to go well before the release of ML.