Apple's Ability to Deactivate Malicious App Store Apps

[JML42691]

BoxOffice was removed???? I still have that on my phone. I really like that app. Now i'm tempted to delete it. Anyone know why it was deleted?

You don't need to worry about deleting it, it still works fine. This app was removed from the app store about a week ago. Apple never told the developer why it was deleted or make an announcement about it, they just pulled it. There was some speculation that the name of the app may have been violation somebody's copyright, but that was just speculation, there was no telling as to if it were true or not.

 

[whooleytoo]

You don't need to worry about deleting it, it still works fine. This app was removed from the app store about a week ago. Apple never told the developer why it was deleted or make an announcement about it, they just pulled it. There was some speculation that the name of the app may have been violation somebody's copyright, but that was just speculation, there was no telling as to if it were true or not.

Who released BoxOffice? Do you know if they have the rights to the info they were displaying? Perhaps that was it.

 

[JML42691]

Who released BoxOffice? Do you know if they have the rights to the info they were displaying? Perhaps that was it.

From the word of the developer, he contacted all of the sources that were used in the app and received written permission from them, it was the name of the app that was under speculation of copyright infringement, as there was a rumor right after his last update that the name would be changing to "Now Playing," I believe that he mentioned this during the info of the last update.

 

[Stella]

Apple's attitude to iPhone softare stinks a bit and is rather like Communism. "Apple knows whats best for its users, just like Communist countries knows whats best for it's people and will prevent its population from being 'corrupted'".

Let the user be responsible!!! If they run up a $1000 phone bill - so be it - Apple shouldn't nanny its users!!!

This is close to 1984 when Apple can choose to disable any application it wants.

Apple should treat iPhone restricted software like Mac software: No restrictions etc. Thankfully other smartphone software is, i.e., Symbian, Blackberry etc - despite these phones being equally able as iPhone software.

 

[-hh]

Well, a necessary evil...

It may be, but for protecting the customer by being able to kill "evil" programs simply won't work.

The basic reason why is because it is written as a blacklist, not a whitelist.

As such, the name of the "bad" appliation must be known in order to kill it off.

And as such, someone who is intent on writing a nasty application shouldn't find it all that difficult to program the app so that it installs with (or at a later date, changes to) a randomized filename ... thus making the bad program's name on each individual's iPhone unique and defeating this form of "undo".

As such, this feature will only be able to kill off well-intentioned Apps that somehow run afoul of some Apple (and AT&T) agenda item...those hackers who are determined to write something nasty will merely be inconvenienced.

FWIW, if I had an App that has already been bumped off the App store a few times due to suspicious motives, to support my consumer base, I'd be writing an "installed filename randomizer" update tonight.


-hh

 

[Solarusdude]

Apple can block specific users from third-party apps

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article. I think Apple has the ability to block specific iPhone users from running third-party applications that were previously downloaded from iTunes and installed on the device. Let me explain what happened, and then you can develop your own conclusions on what was going on.

Prior to this story, I've had two third-party apps running on my phone: Facebook and Last.fm. Last week, I received an email from Apple that my iTunes billing data was out-of-date and needed updating. I ignored the email because I don't purchase music or apps on iTunes (though I will download free apps). After that email, I couldn't download new apps (even if they were free) until that data was updated.

This is where it gets interesting: Yesterday, I noticed that both of my third-party apps could not launch from the phone at all. I figured it was a bug and that I would wait until I get home to install the 2.0.1 update, and if that doesn't fix it, re-install the apps. Well after I get home and update the phone, the third-party apps are still not working. I delete Last.fm and attempt to reinstall. I am prompted about the billing data still being out-of-date so I comply with their demands and I finally get Last.fm installed. It works, and even more curiously, Facebook works too even though I didn't bother re-installing that application.

So here is my conclusion: It appears as though my ability to run certain applications on my phone was suspended until I could update the billing data on my iTunes account. It wasn't until when I provided new billing information, that my third-party apps could run again. While the article above mentions blacklisting specific applications from everyone, it seems as though Apple can also block specific users from running third-party apps (maybe even specific apps) even after they've been purchased and installed.

 

[mkrishnan]

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article. [...]

This is interesting.... I don't suppose anyone can confirm this independently?

App Store apps in general (I know, I know, I still am on 1.1.4 for the moment) can be run in the absence of an internet connection, right? (Those two apps would be pretty useless, but I mean as a general concern). So I wonder, if what you're surmising is correct, when is the phone checking your iTunes Store status, exactly?

 

[slackpacker]

I AM RICH was a scam so I'm glad its gone.

Joker was trying to pull an EBAY'esq scam where he sold an APP that was a Picture of a Ruby for $999.00

 

[surferfromuk]

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article. I think Apple has the ability to block specific iPhone users from running third-party applications that were previously downloaded from iTunes and installed on the device. Let me explain what happened, and then you can develop your own conclusions on what was going on.

Prior to this story, I've had two third-party apps running on my phone: Facebook and Last.fm. Last week, I received an email from Apple that my iTunes billing data was out-of-date and needed updating. I ignored the email because I don't purchase music or apps on iTunes (though I will download free apps). After that email, I couldn't download new apps (even if they were free) until that data was updated.

This is where it gets interesting: Yesterday, I noticed that both of my third-party apps could not launch from the phone at all. I figured it was a bug and that I would wait until I get home to install the 2.0.1 update, and if that doesn't fix it, re-install the apps. Well after I get home and update the phone, the third-party apps are still not working. I delete Last.fm and attempt to reinstall. I am prompted about the billing data still being out-of-date so I comply with their demands and I finally get Last.fm installed. It works, and even more curiously, Facebook works too even though I didn't bother re-installing that application.

So here is my conclusion: It appears as though my ability to run certain applications on my phone was suspended until I could update the billing data on my iTunes account. It wasn't until when I provided new billing information, that my third-party apps could run again. While the article above mentions blacklisting specific applications from everyone, it seems as though Apple can also block specific users from running third-party apps (maybe even specific apps) even after they've been purchased and installed.

Hilariously the most paranoid 1st time poster crazy theory of wild speculation I've read in a long time.

 

[KingYaba]

Yep. Never going to purchase the iPhone. I don't like this phoning home thing. Not one bit.

 

[73CortinaV8]

My com.mal.icious.Malicious app I wrote keeps getting yanked from the app store.

 

[arn]

You left out the BUYER Arn! Don't you think they deserve their money back? After all Apple approved the app for their store.

Apps they pull from the App Store still work on the phone. so no need for a refund.

I'm sure Apps that are deactivated will be refunded. Not sure why people are getting worked up about that point.

arn

 

[Rocketman]

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...

If that is the case and it is quite possible, that probably also happened with other styles of apps. Maybe some apps need an "are you sure" dialog, maybe even by default unless you actively turn off that feature. It cannot be too annoying to have such a window only when you BUY an app. You don't buy as many apps as tunes or vids potentially and those have lower fixed pricing.

Rocketman

 

[surferfromuk]

Yep. Never going to purchase the iPhone. I don't like this phoning home thing. Not one bit.

Don't take this the wrong way but realistically your going to have to be opting out of all future technology from all companies for the rest of your life and, more than likely, your going to have to 'drop of the map' and go live in the mountains.

 

[gcmexico]

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article. I think Apple has the ability to block specific iPhone users from running third-party applications that were previously downloaded from iTunes and installed on the device. Let me explain what happened, and then you can develop your own conclusions on what was going on.

Prior to this story, I've had two third-party apps running on my phone: Facebook and Last.fm. Last week, I received an email from Apple that my iTunes billing data was out-of-date and needed updating. I ignored the email because I don't purchase music or apps on iTunes (though I will download free apps). After that email, I couldn't download new apps (even if they were free) until that data was updated.

This is where it gets interesting: Yesterday, I noticed that both of my third-party apps could not launch from the phone at all. I figured it was a bug and that I would wait until I get home to install the 2.0.1 update, and if that doesn't fix it, re-install the apps. Well after I get home and update the phone, the third-party apps are still not working. I delete Last.fm and attempt to reinstall. I am prompted about the billing data still being out-of-date so I comply with their demands and I finally get Last.fm installed. It works, and even more curiously, Facebook works too even though I didn't bother re-installing that application.

So here is my conclusion: It appears as though my ability to run certain applications on my phone was suspended until I could update the billing data on my iTunes account. It wasn't until when I provided new billing information, that my third-party apps could run again. While the article above mentions blacklisting specific applications from everyone, it seems as though Apple can also block specific users from running third-party apps (maybe even specific apps) even after they've been purchased and installed.

*
wow...has this happened to anyone else...basically Apple has complete control of your iphone

 

[arn]

Let's stop with all of the disingenuous talk about these apps "mysteriously disappearing".

See, the issue isn't Apple taking apps down. I think that's understandable for various legitimate reasons. The problem is the developers have been left in the dark about it. The Box Office dev posted on the MacRumors forums asking if anyone could help, since he couldn't get a reply from Apple:

I've tried to contact them about the issue, but it's been a complete dead end. If anyone has a useful contact number for apple, please let me know.

I'm in regular contact with all my data providers, and none of them have had an issue with my app. Indeed, the response was the exact opposite. They like my app and have even asked if i would do custom application work for them in the future. Furthermore, all the data i use is licensed by the owners as 'free for non commercial use'. i.e. precisely what BoxOffice is.

So i'm stuck here not knowing what has happened, or what i can do about it.

arn

 

[RedTomato]

As someone who is involved in the art world (and yes there's a lot of crap about) I loved 'I am Rich'. It got a huge number of people talking about values and principles in life, specifically the kind of people who don't usually go to art galleries or think deeply about political theories.

But I can see why Apple pulled it. On a store where most apps are around $5, and can be bought with a single click, a $999 one-click purchase is just too dangerous. It's too easy for someone to buy it by accident, and then have to go through the hassle of sorting it out.

If it put them over a credit limit, it could result in all sort of nasty things - the month's rent or mortage payment might fail to go through, resulting in court action, or someone's card might get refused at a restaurant etc.

Congrats on the 'I am Rich' application. It deserves to become legendary. But now it's over.

 

[arn]

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article.

I think is just coincidence. Firmware 2.0/2.01 can be buggy. I had to restore my iPhone yesterday cause apps weren't launching. I think the fact that you had some billing issue at the same time was just a coincidence.

arn

 

[twoodcc]

well, i think this isn't a bad idea. but i hope they tell the developers why their apps are removed

 

[/dev/toaster]

Apple's attitude to iPhone softare stinks a bit and is rather like Communism. "Apple knows whats best for its users, just like Communist countries knows whats best for it's people and will prevent its population from being 'corrupted'".

Let the user be responsible!!! If they run up a $1000 phone bill - so be it - Apple shouldn't nanny its users!!!

This is close to 1984 when Apple can choose to disable any application it wants.

Apple should treat iPhone restricted software like Mac software: No restrictions etc. Thankfully other smartphone software is, i.e., Symbian, Blackberry etc - despite these phones being equally able as iPhone software.

You are forgetting that Apple and AT&T have contracts with each other that they MUST take step to prevent certain types of applications from being available. I am pretty sure each carrier has a different set of requirements as well. AT&T doesn't allow tethering on the iPhone, Apple has to enforce it.

If you think that Blackberry can do what the iPhone can do, they go develop apps for it. No other mobile device can even come close to the power of the app store or power of the iPhone and SDK. Sorry, it just can't.

Lets also not forget that Apple has contracts with many music companies. They have to enforce those contracts as well.

When Verizon, Sprint, Motorolla, Samsung, or who ever come out with something that is even close to what the iPhone is capable of ... then you might have an argument that holds water.

 

[theBB]

Yep. Never going to purchase the iPhone. I don't like this phoning home thing. Not one bit.

Do you realize that all high end cell phones can pinpoint your location through GPS for the police (and for who knows who else) and send most of your communications through one company's network? I'd think this checking your apps against a blacklist should be the least one of your worries.

 

[diamond.g]

-Netshare creates a major grey area for AT&T, Apple and their customers. Tethering is usually a premium service for smartphones. I am sure that Apple has legally binding agreements with AT&T that apps that they sell are restricted from certain activities, and they need to show good faith in this agreement. Which means that letting an app slip through may not make them liable to AT&T, but leaving it up once they know about it will.

All three have legitimate concerns - only two of them are real apps, and "Box Office" is still available, it just has a different name. Apple is wise to take down NetShare while they figure out if it violates their agreement with AT&T(or abets AT&T's customers in breaking their agreements, which Apple could also be on the hook for).

And Nullriver is playing stupid here - they know full well why NetShare was taken down. They probably were amazed it got through in the first place. Don't get me wrong - I hope they DO allow NetShare for sale with full Apple and AT&T approval, but I can't get mad at Apple for meeting their obligations to AT&T.

If tethering is a premium service, why would AT&T have Apple remove a potential source of income. For AT&T it seems like a better plan to just charge all the users that use the program data overage by the KB and just move on. When people call contesting the charge tell them oh well point to service contract and keep right on trucking. Those that want to use it properly could pony up the $60 (or whatever it is) per month and continue on their merry way.

Really Apple just needs to talk to the devs when they do this stuff. For all the crap MS gets you don't see this kind of problem in the Xbox Live Arcade camp (closest thing MS has to the App Store).

 

[/dev/toaster]

Do you realize that all high end cell phones can pinpoint your location through GPS for the police (and for who knows who else) and send most of your communications through one company's network? I'd think this checking your files against a blacklist should be the least one of your worries.

Actually, its a law that cell phones MUST be capable of basic triangulation. This is already available to law enforcement. (With a warrant or when you dial 911)

 

[na1577]

I've experienced something yesterday that's related to what's mentioned in this article.[...]

iTunes gives me the same message when I click the "Update All Applications" button. It only lets me update them one by one. (None of my applications are locked)

I AM RICH was a scam so I'm glad its gone.

Joker was trying to pull an EBAY'esq scam where he sold an APP that was a Picture of a Ruby for $999.00

It wasn't a scam. The developer made it very clear that it was only an image of a ruby, he or she didn't lie and say it had any other functionality.

When Verizon, Sprint, Motorolla, Samsung, or who ever come out with something that is even close to what the iPhone is capable of ... then you might have an argument that holds water.

Verizon and Sprint do not make phones.

 

[w00master]

well there is the answer regarding NetShare!!

I'd like to know the answer for BoxOffice though. Honestly, a movie review app getting pulled? For what reason? I think Apple owes it to the developer on why this app (which imho is the *best* movie app on the Jesus Phone) was pulled?