Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Ability to Deactivate Malicious App Store Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not sure if it would be possible on the iPhone, as is.
I guess you could try setting up an ad-hoc Wifi network on your Mac, running Little Snitch, and connecting to that network via your iPhone and see if it catches anything - or it might only "do the sneaky stuff" when it's on the 3G/Edge connection.
I know of no other store quite like the AppStore either. It's pretty innovative.
I think Apple is doing a good thing here. People are complaining about something that hasn't even been used yet. It's insanity.
So far, Apple's actions have shown that they are policing a few applications but haven't gone so far as to deem them worthy of remote disabling. In some cases those apps may be problematic for Apple's relationship with AT&T and other carriers (NetShare) and other cases may be something Apple marketing considers an eyesore that could reflect poorly on Apple's brand (IAmRich).
I'm sure if it comes to Apple using this it will do whatever is necessary to refund customers and then get the money back from the malicious developer (along with a hefty lawsuit). Otherwise I'm sure they can expect a class action lawsuit. Now may be a good time to read the terms and conditions in more detail
...You have to remember that it's not just a phone, it's also part of a network and neither Apple, AT&T or their customers want to be in the position of having a malicious application terrorizing the network and preventing people from using their phones... or worse.
This seems like a sane (though perhaps technically questionable) approach to solving this problem.
Good. This will give me more confidence in iPhone apps.
As for this being Apple exerting TOO MUCH control.... I'd say that's unreasonable. Apple's exerting surprisingly little control, letting a flood of questionable apps onto the store. That's OK with me--buyers can make their own call--but it's almost an issue of Apple exerting too LITTLE control. And this particular malware feature sounds like a very reasonable compromise to use against a potential bad situation NOT of Apple's creation. I hardly see some massive problem here.
The feature hasn't even been used yet, and people are upset
As for this being Apple exerting TOO MUCH control.... I'd say that's unreasonable. Apple's exerting surprisingly little control, letting a flood of questionable apps onto the store. That's OK with me--buyers can make their own call--but it's almost an issue of Apple exerting too LITTLE control. And this particular malware feature sounds like a very reasonable compromise to use against a potential bad situation NOT of Apple's creation. I hardly see some massive problem here.
The feature hasn't even been used yet, and people are upset
My point is your example is flawed. You do not buy software in the app store - you lease it.
If you lease a car the dealership can come and take it back at any time depending on your lease agreement, because you do not own it, the car dealership owns it. If you buy a car the dealership can not come and take it back because you do own it.
Same with software - you don't own it - the creator does.
We're not sure that Apple removed this app because of quality. It could be that several people "accidentally" bought the app and were requesting refunds. With all the attention the app was getting, it's likely to have happened a few times. The credit card processing fees and chargeback fees on a useless $1000 app might have out-weighed 'legitimate' sales (if there were any).
Just one possible scenario...
There is a big difference between buying a physical object and a license to use something. I'm always shocked by how many people don't read or understand EULAs. This i just like the people who truly believe they OWN the music they "buy".
My comment was aimed at those critics complaining that Apple restricts the apps they allow in their store.
I also think this is a good security precaution.
This also applies to every single cell phone in the world. We don't own the software on it, we just like to think we do
And the same thing goes with the computer that people are typing on right now. The only thing we own is the phone and the computer.
.
How is a necessary evil, necessary?
I'm confused how are you guys happy that Apple can essentially assert executive control over your or my iPhone or iPod Touch? I don't like all this necessary evil stuff you are raising, beyond closing down potentially malicious applications all I see is another vector for attacks against this platform and for abuse on the side of Apple. Not to mention that calling home is widely seen by all as something that should be fully and completely disclosed to users, irregardless of the intentions on the part of Apple or for that matter any other manufacturer.
As I recall Adobe was recently slammed by the tech media for including code that called home, while it turned out to be rather innocuous, it still raised huge questions that ended in Adobe removing the code. Apple has a responsibility to its users to tell them when their software is calling home, rather than hiding it deep in application directories. But beyond this they should be offering options to turn it off, irregardless of the positive or negative effects of doing so.
I'm confused how are you guys happy that Apple can essentially assert executive control over your or my iPhone or iPod Touch? I don't like all this necessary evil stuff you are raising, beyond closing down potentially malicious applications all I see is another vector for attacks against this platform and for abuse on the side of Apple. Not to mention that calling home is widely seen by all as something that should be fully and completely disclosed to users, irregardless of the intentions on the part of Apple or for that matter any other manufacturer.
As I recall Adobe was recently slammed by the tech media for including code that called home, while it turned out to be rather innocuous, it still raised huge questions that ended in Adobe removing the code. Apple has a responsibility to its users to tell them when their software is calling home, rather than hiding it deep in application directories. But beyond this they should be offering options to turn it off, irregardless of the positive or negative effects of doing so.
as noted above, i'm sure this'll just be used for malicious apps causing harm (if they manage to slip into the app store in the first place, of course!)
let's hope that's the case anyway. because if apple starts pulling apps it doesn't like off people's phones i doubt they'd be too pleased..!
let's hope that's the case anyway. because if apple starts pulling apps it doesn't like off people's phones i doubt they'd be too pleased..!
Well, I was thinking about where the money would come from? Yes its easy to credit peoples accounts..but how can apple get back the 70% that the developer got? I'm sure the details are in the fine print of a developer contract.
If they banned "I am rich" Steve should be very ashamed of himself. I found it one of the most clever apps made for the App store. I clearly was not going to buy it and noone else in their right mind would but if they ban I am rich they also should ban iLight and all the seriously retarded apps we see on the App store. I am rich has now gotten the status of art by all means!
They just take them of the next statement. Thats how they do it in the music store.
MY example?
1 - Bob Knob makes a post saying the app store is like every other store on the planet.
2 - I make a post disagreeing, saying that this store is different than other stores.
3 - You (and 2 or 3 other people) all respond to me and explain how software is different from the real world, and thus this store is different from other stores.
It seems like you should all be telling Bob this, and not me. But since there are more than one of you saying the same thing, I'll admit that I must be the one on crazy pills. I obviously did something wrong in my post. I'll drop it now and let the conversation get back on track.
You did not read the App Store user agreement did you? You agreed to it before you installed 2.0 or itunes or a new set up a new phone. That agreement spells it out perfectly clear. If you did not read it its your fault not Apples.
There is no store on earth (well there could be but I can't think of any) that can take a product back from you once they have sold it to you. That is an important distinction that you are quite obviously missing. If General motors makes a product recall you have the right to take advantage of it but aren't forced to do so, as far as I know.
Sorry the actual context of what you said only applied to removing apps from the store itself not the actual phone. Apple has every right to do that. I got ahead of myself and thought you were implying it was ok to take apps people had already purchased off of their phones. My bad.
Wouldn't the fact that the config is in CoreLocation and the site is clbl (i.e. corelocation blacklist) imply that these are just apps blacklisted from using the corelocation functionality? It's possible that apple would do this if someone released an app sending them everyone's current location and using it in a malicious manner, I suppose...
They would still need to issue a refund. Personally, I don't think that enough NetShare licenses were sold in the few days that it was available to justify blocking it.
Besides it's one of those apps that is used largely by a technical audience. if it were blocked, most of the legit users would just jailbreak to get the functionality back. Blocking it would be a lose-lose for Apple.
Bs!
I own the iPhone. Not them. If I want to put a frikkin app on there that I paid for, or is free, that's my business, not there's. This is terrible, how is it any better than the other trojans that have been found in Sony, Real Audio, etc? I will hack it out as soon as I can!
I own the iPhone. Not them. If I want to put a frikkin app on there that I paid for, or is free, that's my business, not there's. This is terrible, how is it any better than the other trojans that have been found in Sony, Real Audio, etc? I will hack it out as soon as I can!
Yes we should be reply to Bob and not you. Welcome to the world of posting on the bottom of a page - the next page can be a little confusing.