Apple CEO Tim Cook: Sideloading Apps Would 'Destroy the Security' of the iPhone

[theonlyeyes]

The obvious solution on Apple's part would be to "enhance" MacOS security by blocking sideloading in the next version of MacOS, codenamed ThunderCats.

It could be. A Mac like iOS would be awesome. Only verified apps.

 

[Yebubbleman]

You don't have to make side-loading apps. You just have to be more flexible about in-app-purchase revenue. Because otherwise these complaints won't stop.

 

[Robospungo]

Apple is the only developer and owner of iPhone. They did set rules to have high privacy and security standards. There are a lot of alternative. People buy iPhone also thanks to its characteristics of privacy/security. You have a lot of alternative. The real choice for the people is when there are products with different characteristics.

There are 2 choices. Android and iOS. This is called a duopoly: "a situation in which two suppliers dominate the market for a commodity or service." Corporations that attain this level of power ought to be heavily regulated in a way that benefits the public and the markets they dominate.

 

[theonlyeyes]

Because customers pay Apple to make these choices for them.

Now people have choice. With the stupid idea of european commision, iOS would become a somekind of android. No more real choice for the people. And if you look at the top seller model smartphones , in the chart of fist ten position you will find all iPhones and only economic models of android. People do their choices. Maybe you don’t like it. But you have to respect it.

 

[theonlyeyes]

Take a look at the Mac App Store. When given the choice I’d hardly say most developers prefer the App Store there so I don’t buy that argument. As a developer I’d rather take the risk of side loading than constantly be under the thumb of Apple. Of course there’s a middle ground we can find here but apple clearly doesn’t want to budge and instead keeps hiding behind its security and privacy angle to protect its money.

They would make more money following the model of facebook/cambridge analytica. But they don’t. Also porno offer a lot of money. So what are you talking about?

 

[theonlyeyes]

There are 2 choices. Android and iOS. This is called a duopoly: "a situation in which two suppliers dominate the market for a commodity or service." Corporations that attain this level of power ought to be heavily regulated in a way that benefits the public and the markets they dominate.

How to compare google and Apple? Its completely different situation. Android is on more brands possible , a choice made by google affect all the other brands (for example native apps or a browser set by default). iOS is only on iPhone : Apple set high standard of privacy and security only about their products, no one can feel diked by Apple.

 

[theonlyeyes]

You don't have to make side-loading apps. You just have to be more flexible about in-app-purchase revenue. Because otherwise these complaints won't stop.

The price is better that other stores. 30% if you have more than one milion dollars by year. 15% if you have under one million. Zero for who create app for free (without set a price).

 

[threesixty360]

You can sideload all you want with a developer account.

Personally I feel sideloading should be allowed for everyone. Put it behind a switch, and multiple warnings. Mark side-loaded apps on the home screen. Require that the user accept the developer's certificate, like you already have to do for Enterprise distribution. Apple can still revoke certs that are used to sign malware, etc, much like they do with MacOS.

It's really not that big a security issue. The apps still run in the iOS sandbox and only have access to resources that you give them. Most people will still stick to the app store, including myself. Personally I'd use sideloading only for apps that aren't allowed in the app store, such as emulators.

one person sideloading an app using a dev account is way different than a dodgy store pushing out a malicious app to millions of people.

The network effect of a malicious app is a major problem. And apple would have no way to stop it from running.
Importantly, people who are none savvy will go to the apple store and say somethings wrong with their device and apple would have to look at it. The way apple do support is way different than on android phones so I can see why apple wouldnt want this to happen.

I'm also not sure there sandbox thing is really 100% either given that apple forbid you to use hidden api's. Those hidden api's if found and abused could give access to things beyond the sandbox and specific resources. Hackers love that stuff.

I just wish the dev community on apple didnt have such an outsized voice compared to consumers. Consumers have already voted to live in this protected eco-system that is iOS. They dont want android for a reason.

 

[theonlyeyes]

This isn't about iPhone users. It's about all of the other people Apple is affecting through their monopolization of the digital marketplace and their anticompetitive practices.

I recognize European bureaucrats in the comments. Are you evaluate the situation ? No one force a developer to create apps for iPhone. If they want make money thanks to intellectual property of Apple and though Apple’s products , then is right to pay a cost (better that other stores) and to respect the rules of the developer/owner (Apple) of the system that let them gain money. iTunes of music was exist before spotify. Spotify got the opportunity anyway to be on App Store and make money. Spotify signed a contract, but after they violated the contract itself asking to don’t pay. So no monopoly about Apple. No anti competitive.

 

[theonlyeyes]

Thanks for directly admitting that you are against letting some people out there use their phone in a way that has exactly 0 effect on your use of the technology, for no reason other than you wanting to inflict your own philosophical view of it on everyone else.

There are many people that use android (unfortunately for them). I don’t dike others. You want to destroy my choice. I don’t care what google do with android. You want change the system that I bought with my money.

 

[JamieLannister]

Please get that garbage outta here. I don't want any side loading any form of hack to get the iDevice to do what you want because you want to tinker. I didn't pay a fortune for an iPhone just so I can side load crap. I can do that with my android devices and that's ok. What's next unlocked boot loader as well?

Guys it may sound elitist but pricing out garbage users is a must because if I wanted all sorts of privacy issues and or problems associated with allow the 0.5% hot garbage to hack into my iDevice, then I'd rather just use something else. Tons of Chinese garbage phones to tinker around with. Please stay out of my iDevices.

 

[Absolute Trainwreck]

There are many people that use android (unfortunately for them). I don’t dike others. You want to destroy my choice. I don’t care what google do with android. You want change the system that I bought with my money.

Again, you’re missing the point that if you have the toggle switched to off you can literally ignore the fact it even exists and it will have no technical impact on you.

This is about you wanting to inflict your opinion on everyone else and you know it.

 

[icymountain]

The whole idea that sideloading would be the end of the world while the App store keeps us safe relies on the fact that Apple reliably filters applications. Not long ago, we saw that:

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/06/07/study-finds-scam-top-paid-apps-app-store/

Ok, FAIL.

I do not think that anyone supports the idea that it would be a great idea all users sideload their software from dodgy locations. However, I support the idea that allowing users to decide whether they would like to install what they want (knowing the risk) or stick with the official app store would make things better overall. I would probably not install anything fancy on my iPhone, but certainly wish I could install on my iPad some things Apple always said they would disallow (for starters, some compilers; I could write code on a 500g device while travelling rather than on a 1.3kg laptop...).

 

[Johnny907]

BS. if iOS is as safe as you’ve always claimed, no it wouldn’t. So which part are you lying about, Tim: is iOS not safe without limiting it to whatever apps you deem “safe,” or is iOS safe and you just want to maintain your stranglehold on profits relating in any way shape or form to your product?

 

[djlythium]

No porno on App Store. No collect and sell of personal info of the users. No ad. No virus. And you say that the reason is money? You’re funny

Um, not sure what you’re getting at, because macOS is the same way. 🤷🏼‍♂️ Happy to hear more!

 

[Yebubbleman]

The price is better that other stores. 30% if you have more than one milion dollars by year. 15% if you have under one million. Zero for who create app for free (without set a price).

For in-app goods, its still ridiculous, even if that's what Google and Amazon are also doing with their app stores. Paying for the app binary and assets to live on Apple's servers should command a price, yes. For goods and services that Apple is not storing on their servers, that just seems like gravy to them. And it's obviously gravy to them otherwise they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to protect that practice. At least Google allows for third party app stores on Android such that the argument can't be made that it's the ONLY way to play.

 

[ksgant]

Side loading should be up to the end user. It doesn't compromise the security of the phone if the user knows what the hail he's doing. I've side loaded lots of apps on to my Android phone. Zero security issues. Best security is between the ears.

Apple needs to understand that not all users needs to be coddled. We're ready for the big boys pants.

Edit: Just state standard caveat applies. If you sideload and fecal matter his the air distribution device, you're SOL.

Yeah, "if the user knows what they're doing". sure.

Meanwhile, after it's all messed up, the same user will go to the Genius Bar and go "my phone broke...fix it" and Apple will say "sorry, we can't, you did this this and this to it...we don't cover that because apparently you "knew what you were doing". And then the customer will go off and bad-mouth Apple for not fixing the phone.

I can see it already.

 

[bobbie424242]

Tim Cook:

2016: "I'm excited about AR"
2017: "I'm excited about AR"
2018: "I'm excited about AR"
2019: "I'm excited about AR"
2020: "I'm excited about AR"
2021: "I'm excited about AR" <= you are here !
2021: "I'm excited about AR"
2022: "I'm excited about AR"
2023: "I'm excited about AR"
2024: "I'm excited about AR"

 

[carrrrrlos]

That photo of Tim though.

 

[bobbie424242]

I think that if Apple was to allow side loading, they’d make it so that when you install any side loaded apps, it voids your warranty and whenever you try to contact support, they’d tell you that you have side loaded apps onto your device and they can’t help you, because they don’t know what’s happening on your device.

Ah yes, they should do the same on the mac. Won't anyone think of ****ing security on the Mac ?

 

[carrrrrlos]

“We focus on making the best, not the most” - this statement from Tim is highly arguable. Apple has its hands in so many “products” and sure, the majority of them are pretty good - there are some dogs out there. Mail is not the best mail app, Phone is not the best app, Camera app ist okay, etc. Health, Fitness, Music, Apple TV, Computers, phones, smart speakers, virtual assistant, etc. That seems like focusing on making the most.

 

[farewelwilliams]

But don’t you think restricting sideloading to trusted developers would be a good compromise? Plenty of kids use a Mac and this is how they download applications.

not really, no.

if i search Microsoft Office at the App Store, either I see it and know I can use it and trust it, or I don't see it and know that it's not available for iPhone. clean and simple. there is no "i don't see it on the app store, so i need to google it up to see if it exists outside the app store. if it exists, i need to navigate to this place to install. in order to install, i need to sign up for this account. in order to sign up for this account, i need to type in a credit card to get a trial." situation.

then if you happen to install a sideloaded app, you'll need to run these background updater services that manually checks to see if your app has an update (which eats up memory and battery depending on how many sideloaded apps you have). then every launch, it bugs you to download and install the update.

and these sideloaded apps aren't backed up to icloud, so restoring the apps will be a pain.

terrible experience. not worth whatever benefits you're suggesting.

 

[SFjohn]

Thanks for directly admitting that you are against letting some people out there use their phone in a way that has exactly 0 effect on your use of the technology, for no reason other than you wanting to inflict your own philosophical view of it on everyone else.

You are dead wrong about 0 effects on other iPhone users. I’m sure people would love to side load malicious apps: that copy contacts of people you call, take known vulnerabilities of iPhones and exploit them remotely, apps to send corrupted files, installing malware on other iPhones. You want to side load apps? Buy Android! We buy Apple products & pay more for the security, quality, and walled garden.

 

[farewelwilliams]

Now people have choice.

They always have had a choice: buy an Android. Maybe you don't like it, but you have to respect it.

 

[T-R-S]

there we no security - you could install a game that's a key logger to get all your passwords....