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

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Apr 30, 2012.

  1. macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple today sent out an email encouraging Mac developers to sign up for the company's Developer ID program so that their apps can be properly signed ahead of the launch of OS X Mountain Lion later this year. Mountain Lion's Gatekeeper feature gives users the ability to set limits on app installation, with the new "Developer ID" program providing a middle ground of security by which developers can certify that they are the developer behind a given application package.


    Should the developer be found to behave maliciously, Apple will be able to revoke the Developer ID associated with that developer, preventing applications signed with the ID from running and causing further harm to users.
    This marks the second such mass emailing to encourage adoption of Developer ID among the Mac developer community, as Apple sent out a similar mailing back in late February following its announcement of OS X Mountain Lion. The next major operating system is due for public launch in "late summer" and will undoubtedly be a featured topic at Apple's sold-out Worldwide Developers Conference in early June.

    Article Link: Apple Again Encouraging Mac Developers to Sign Up for Developer ID Ahead of OS X Mountain Lion
  2. macrumors 68020


    Jan 26, 2003
  3. macrumors 604


    Nov 26, 2007
    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?
  4. macrumors P6


    Apr 1, 2005
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    ADC did this when the first preview came out.
  5. macrumors 6502


    Oct 22, 2005
    Gate keeper? Seems eerily like some MS product.
  6. macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Aug 29, 2006
    Washington DC
    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.
  7. macrumors regular

    Dec 27, 2011

    What I thought of when I saw that graphic...
  8. macrumors 65816

    Oct 4, 2005
    Toronto, Canada
    Except that Apple's makes more sense from a castle design perspective. They didn't have windows covering the front enterance back then! :D
  9. macrumors 6502

    Dec 14, 2009
    Charlotte, NC
    Only thing missing is a cheesy flag on top.

    I was thinking something more like this...

  10. macrumors Pentium


    Jan 28, 2009
    Quebec, Canada
    This doesn't change anything to the hand-checking of every submission at all. This isn't for App Store applications.
  11. macrumors 601

    Jun 19, 2007
    Plymouth, MN
    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..
  12. macrumors 65816


    Jan 23, 2006
    Where I live
    We all know that this will come as a huge surprised to some developers when ML is released, won't it?
  13. macrumors demi-god


    Aug 11, 2003
    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.
  14. pmz
    macrumors 68000

    Nov 18, 2009
    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.
  15. macrumors demi-god


    Aug 11, 2003

    :( :mad: :(

    We don't even get a flag...
  16. macrumors 68000

    Oct 31, 2005
    It looks like they aren't getting as many as expected to sign-up. I never saw the first invite.
  17. macrumors regular

    Jan 25, 2007
    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
  18. macrumors 68020


    Feb 17, 2011
    Spokane, WA
    Because we don't need a flag. We think differently.
  19. macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Aug 29, 2006
    Washington DC
    I think you totally missed my point.

    "I hope" ...meaning a future change in policy that I anticipate/desire.
  20. macrumors 6502

    Jun 16, 2010
    The developer ID use is for non Mac App Store apps. If you are in the App Store already you are ok.
  21. macrumors 68030


    Sep 8, 2003
    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.
  22. macrumors 601

    Jun 19, 2007
    Plymouth, MN
    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.
  23. macrumors 65816

    Jun 20, 2009
    Lincoln, UK
    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.
  24. macrumors G4


    Feb 5, 2009
    This isn't antivirus software, people.

    And Gatekeeper was unveiled on February 16th. It's been in the works for a while now.
  25. macrumors 604

    Sep 23, 2003
    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.

Share This Page