Bitcoin Scam App Approved by Apple Robs iPhone User of $600,000+

[laptech]

Seeing the multitude of Apple defenders posts in here, it is no wonder Apple is as wealthy and powerful as it is because even if there is a hint of Apple doing wrong, the blame is always put onto others.

When it comes to the rest of consumer society and Apple, Apple fans see it as this:

Banks fail to check certain polices and procedures properly - the bank pays
Car manufacturers fail to check their cars properly - the car manufacturer pays
Property developer fails to check property properly - property developer pays
Clothing stores fail to check the clothers properly - clothing store pays

Apple fails to check apps in app store properly - consumer pays.

Apple must be the only company on the planet where they can make screw up after screw up and their customers will defend them for it.

 

[quarkysg]

Banks fail to check certain polices and procedures properly - the bank pays
Car manufacturers fail to check their cars properly - the car manufacturer pays
Property developer fails to check property properly - property developer pays
Clothing stores fail to check the clothers properly - clothing store pays

Apple fails to check apps in app store properly - consumer pays.

You must have been burnt really badly by Apple to have such contempt toward Apple.

Going by your analogy:

• Bank customer falls for monetary scam and looses all bank savings via bank transfers. Bank will not recover lost money.
• Car customer uses bad tyres and crashes car. Car manufacturer not liable.
• Property owner hacks property walls resulting in collapse of property. Property developer not liable.
• Owner of clothing washes clothe in washer when it's printed in clothing label that it's dry wash only. Clothing manufacturer not liable.
• Apple made bad keyboards. Recalls notebook and replace keyboards.

To me, context is important here.

 

[Maximara]

Seeing the multitude of Apple defenders posts in here, it is no wonder Apple is as wealthy and powerful as it is because even if there is a hint of Apple doing wrong, the blame is always put onto others.

When it comes to the rest of consumer society and Apple, Apple fans see it as this:

Banks fail to check certain polices and procedures properly - the bank pays

Not in the case of one cashing a bogus check even if they checked with the bank it was "good".

Car manufacturers fail to check their cars properly - the car manufacturer pays

Not if the owner of the car uses the wrong, worn, or bad tires

Property developer fails to check property properly - property developer pays

Kelo v. City of New London said otherwise, The developer that sold City of New London a pie in the sky tall tell paid nothing for the development that never happened. Next.

Clothing stores fail to check the clothers properly - clothing store pays

If you ignore the little label that tells you how to wash those clothes no. Also as a general rule, unless the defect is blatant or obvious it is the maker not the seller that is responsible.

Apple fails to check apps in app store properly - consumer pays.

Apple made bad keyboards. It replaced them long after the normal warranty period.

All of your examples are flawed.

 

[I7guy]

Seeing the multitude of Apple defenders posts in here, it is no wonder Apple is as wealthy and powerful as it is because even if there is a hint of Apple doing wrong, the blame is always put onto others.

So basically hundreds of millions of Apple customers are stupid, ignorant or whatever term you want to use to describe them? The expression about you can fool some of he people some of the time, comes to mind.

When it comes to the rest of consumer society and Apple, Apple fans see it as this:

Banks fail to check certain polices and procedures properly - the bank pays
Car manufacturers fail to check their cars properly - the car manufacturer pays
Property developer fails to check property properly - property developer pays
Clothing stores fail to check the clothers properly - clothing store pays

Apple fails to check apps in app store properly - consumer pays.

Illogical comparison. Banks are regulated and the remainder are physical goods. App developers don't have to be "regulated" or registered to put an app on the app store. In the same vein about the people who click on phishingware or scamware and enter personal details and wind up with a financial loss.

Apple must be the only company on the planet where they can make screw up after screw up and their customers will defend them for it.

To the original point. If hundreds of millions of customers have the same behavior maybe they are the ones that see the truth?

 

[gnasher729]

Is everyone here just trying to find a narrative where Apple isn't at fault?

Absolutely. Apple is at fault. They should 100% refund the money that was paid for the app. As they promise in their terms and conditions.

In which alternate universe do you think you can buy an app and the company delivering it to you would be on the hook if you let someone defraud you?

 

[I7guy]

Absolutely. Apple is at fault. They should 100% refund the money that was paid for the app. As they promise in their terms and conditions.

In which alternate universe do you think you can buy an app and the company delivering it to you would be on the hook if you let someone defraud you?

So you are saying Apple is on the hook for the price of the app, not the scam, which is on the users' shoulders who didn't do due diligence before entering sensitive information for their life savings?

Edit: There has been no statement from Apple on this? I wonder if this is fake, or there was some type of deal made with an NDA with the customers who claimed to have lost the money.

 

[Maximara]

So you are saying Apple is on the hook for the price of the app, not the scam, which is on the users' shoulders who didn't do due diligence before entering sensitive information for their life savings?

Edit: There has been no statement from Apple on this? I wonder if this is fake, or there was some type of deal made with an NDA with the customers who claimed to have lost the money.

I agree the timing is very suspicious.

As for Apple not saying anything that is SOP regarding cases like this as you want to vet any possible statement through your lawyers and even then it is better to keep your cards close to your chest.

 

[lederermc]

If I'm going to download my banks app, I'm going to make very sure the publisher of the app is actually my bank and not just a 3rd party app that works with my bank. Know who you're giving your credentials to. Don't just assume.

You can't rely on others to always protect you. Sounds like this guy was far too complacent and reliant on others.

This is why I don't use mint.

 

[Beautyspin]

Agree. Now can you imagine the chaos if Apple can't catch everything and multiple app stores are out there with fake apps? Apple will take a rap for something they have no control over. This is why this "apple is a monopoly" thing has to go away.

Why exactly is Apple getting paid 30% and who is paying it? It is the app developers. Apple gets nothing from the customer. Why exactly would Apple bother to safeguard the interests of the consumers? It is just a strawman argument to keep getting their 30%. Apple does not care about customer's safety. If it did, this would not have happened? We do not know how many smaller levels of frauds and scams are going on that are not getting surfaced.

 

[Beautyspin]

If I'm going to download my banks app, I'm going to make very sure the publisher of the app is actually my bank and not just a 3rd party app that works with my bank. Know who you're giving your credentials to. Don't just assume.

You can't rely on others to always protect you. Sounds like this guy was far too complacent and reliant on others.

So, Apple lets a Mybank app not owned by Mybank and charges 30% from the developer. Why? What exactly does it take the cut for? Does it not even check if it is the official Mybank app? What exactly is the advantage of curated app store if even this basic check is not done?

 

[Beautyspin]

Imagine thinking that your phone maker was responsible for you spending real money on fake internet Monopoly money... and your own stupidity in not checking the legitimacy of an app that falls into a category that said phone maker is known to disallow on it's service.

If I have to check the origin and genuineness of every app that I download, what exactly does Apple do in the curation? Why is apple getting 30%? Just to say, you have to be careful while downloading a curated app? What exactly does app curation mean? Is it check if the developer is getting paid through some other means due to which Apple is missing its cut? Is that the be-all and end-all of app curation? Pathetic.

 

[I7guy]

Why exactly is Apple getting paid 30% and who is paying it? It is the app developers.

Do people discuss Target's margins? Walmarts' margins? Apple is entitled to their margins. They build the platform, they own it.

Apple gets nothing from the customer. Why exactly would Apple bother to safeguard the interests of the consumers? It is just a strawman argument to keep getting their 30%. Apple does not care about customer's safety. If it did, this would not have happened? We do not know how many smaller levels of frauds and scams are going on that are not getting surfaced.

It doesn't matter what is a strawman or not. What matters is the ios app store is apples' property, which is opt-in by default. Apple not caring about customer safety is a false statement. Apple does care, and just like a cop will never catch every speeder, Apple will never catch all "scamware" apps. That doesn't bode well for those who want more app stores.

 

[H3LL5P4WN]

If I have to check the origin and genuineness of every app that I download, what exactly does Apple do in the curation? Why is apple getting 30%? Just to say, you have to be careful while downloading a curated app? What exactly does app curation mean? Is it check if the developer is getting paid through some other means due to which Apple is missing its cut? Is that the be-all and end-all of app curation? Pathetic.

If I'm looking to download anything related to financials, real or otherwise, I'm checking to see if the app was written by the appropriate financial institution.

Sheesh, it's like having to teach kindergarten around here.

 

[Maximara]

Why exactly is Apple getting paid 30% and who is paying it? It is the app developers.

Report: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard

Heck, before Apple came up with 30% percentages well north of 50% were the norm. More over that 30% now only applies to developers making over $1 million. (though the reports are a little confused as to that being $1 million gross or $1 million net ie $1.3 million). That has been the case for over three and a half months now.

 

[I7guy]

So, Apple lets a Mybank app not owned by Mybank and charges 30% from the developer. Why? What exactly does it take the cut for? Does it not even check if it is the official Mybank app? What exactly is the advantage of curated app store if even this basic check is not done?

Whom is Apple going to call to make sure an app that seems close to another website is actually authorized by them? Brand x subcontracts with IT firm y to make an app on Brand x's behalf? When IT firm y submits the app to the app store who will apple call from Brand x? Now maybe for the first time submission Apple should have an investigative team due their due diligence, but that means app launches could be delayed. And having that on Apple would just be more criticism.

 

[Beautyspin]

Whom is Apple going to call to make sure an app that seems close to another website is actually authorized by them? Brand x subcontracts with IT firm y to make an app on Brand x's behalf? When IT firm y submits the app to the app store who will apple call from Brand x? Now maybe for the first time submission Apple should have an investigative team due their due diligence, but that means app launches could be delayed. And having that on Apple would just be more criticism.

So, why is Apple taking 30%? What does Apple actually mean when it says its Appstore is curated and safe when it does not do this basic check?

 

[Beautyspin]

If I'm looking to download anything related to financials, real or otherwise, I'm checking to see if the app was written by the appropriate financial institution.

Sheesh, it's like having to teach kindergarten around here.

If I do all the checking, what exactly is Apple doing to get the 30% cut? Sheesh, no questioning spirit. Just blindly think what Apple is doing is right and try to find reasons for Apple's failure so that the blame can be deflected on to others. I am quite sure I will be happy if Apple says - Yes, we take 30% cut, we cannot guarantee that any App is not a scam, you are at risk using the Appstore, I still will take 30% cut, if you check everything about the App, then this is a safe platform. See how funny it is? If the user is going to check everything, what exactly is special about Appstore. They can do so on third-party stores also.

 

[Beautyspin]

Do people discuss Target's margins? Walmarts' margins? Apple is entitled to their margins. They build the platform, they own it.

It doesn't matter what is a strawman or not. What matters is the ios app store is apples' property, which is opt-in by default. Apple not caring about customer safety is a false statement. Apple does care, and just like a cop will never catch every speeder, Apple will never catch all "scamware" apps. That doesn't bode well for those who want more app stores.

Target or Walmart guarantees certain things. They do not scam people. I have nothing against Apple's margin. There should be a reason why it is commanding a margin. If you are doing nothing, you should be ashamed of taking the margin. Touting that Appstore is safe is a false advertisement. Apple is scamming its entire userbase. I see how having a different App store ala Android will hinder the Apple ecosystem when Apple's own Appstore is so broken, Time to get rid of Apple's monopoly since it has failed to provide the security and safety to the users.

 

[I7guy]

So, why is Apple taking 30%? What does Apple actually mean when it says its Appstore is curated and safe when it does not do this basic check?

Apple is taking 30% because it’s their platform. They provide hosting, management plus more. What’s being highlighted is an industry problem; only to be made worse by multiple app stores.

What basic check do you Apple to do? Apple does its due diligence. There is a limit and customers have to take sone responsibility also. Something that you think maybe easy may be difficult and if implemented can disenfranchise the small developer. But a consumer has to be smart, if a camera app asks for an SSN; customer may want to think about it.

 

[I7guy]

Target or Walmart guarantees certain things. They do not scam people. I have nothing against Apple's margin. There should be a reason why it is commanding a margin. If you are doing nothing, you should be ashamed of taking the margin. Touting that Appstore is safe is a false advertisement. Apple is scamming its entire userbase. I see how having a different App store ala Android will hinder the Apple ecosystem when Apple's own Appstore is so broken, Time to get rid of Apple's monopoly since it has failed to provide the security and safety to the users.

Don’t think Apple is ashamed nor is it doing nothing, contrary to your assertion nor is Apple scamming people. Here is their internet agreement forvyour perusal.

Legal - Internet Services - Apple

www.apple.com

There is no monopoly, by the way.

 

[quarkysg]

So, why is Apple taking 30%? What does Apple actually mean when it says its Appstore is curated and safe when it does not do this basic check?

Many folks in MR forums have explained that the 30% cover many activities and services that Apple provides via the App Store and services of the eco-system to developers. Regardless of the fees charged, it is up to the developers to decide if those are of value to them if they decide to develop for the Apple eco-system.

IMHO, Apple tries to ensure that their devices are protected against malicious exploit, and thus ensure the safety of their users. One example would be preventing the use of private APIs that may potentially result in data loss or from the device being compromised.

With respect to the app reviews, all organisations have rules and guidelines that they check against based on their quality system, including Apple. It's not possible to check against everything. It's easy for you and me to sit on our chairs behind a keyboard to critic, but realistically we all work in a world of constraints. Apple likely has a list of stuffs, some automated, to check for all apps submitted, and that list are the guidelines that is made known to the apps developers in the T&Cs. Apple likely will not check for others, or developers will be screaming bloody murders accusing Apple for not being transparent. There's a reason Apple continuously update their T&Cs for developers, so as to improve their services. I suppose this incident will result yet another review and update to the T&Cs.

An analogy for this issue would be where a country with reported low crime rate doesn't mean there's no crime in said country. It's citizen should still be aware not to fall for scams.

 

[Maximara]

So, why is Apple taking 30%?

Unless you are making more than $1 million through the app store Apple is not taking a 30%. Based on what they are doing I think Epic has no concept of Report: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard, "that was then this is now", or even common sense. Thankfully Australia saw Epic's fishing expedition for a court for what it was and "said the proceedings will continue to be suspended in Australia if Epic continues to pursue its case in the US, but could bring the case back to Australian courts depending on the outcome in the US."

Taken literally even if Epic wins at the lower court level (which I doubt) they would have to defend appeals on the case ie "continuing to pursue the case".

 

[Beautyspin]

Unless you are making more than $1 million through the app store Apple is not taking a 30%. Based on what they are doing I think Epic has no concept of Report: Steam's 30% Cut Is Actually the Industry Standard, "that was then this is now", or even common sense. Thankfully Australia saw Epic's fishing expedition for a court for what it was and "said the proceedings will continue to be suspended in Australia if Epic continues to pursue its case in the US, but could bring the case back to Australian courts depending on the outcome in the US."

Taken literally even if Epic wins at the lower court level (which I doubt) they would have to defend appeals on the case ie "continuing to pursue the case".

So, what has that got to do with my question? I do not play any Epic games. I do not play games at all.

 

[Beautyspin]

Many folks in MR forums have explained that the 30% cover many activities and services that Apple provides via the App Store and services of the eco-system to developers. Regardless of the fees charged, it is up to the developers to decide if those are of value to them if they decide to develop for the Apple eco-system.

IMHO, Apple tries to ensure that their devices are protected against malicious exploit, and thus ensure the safety of their users. One example would be preventing the use of private APIs that may potentially result in data loss or from the device being compromised.

With respect to the app reviews, all organisations have rules and guidelines that they check against based on their quality system, including Apple. It's not possible to check against everything. It's easy for you and me to sit on our chairs behind a keyboard to critic, but realistically we all work in a world of constraints. Apple likely has a list of stuffs, some automated, to check for all apps submitted, and that list are the guidelines that is made known to the apps developers in the T&Cs. Apple likely will not check for others, or developers will be screaming bloody murders accusing Apple for not being transparent. There's a reason Apple continuously update their T&Cs for developers, so as to improve their services. I suppose this incident will result yet another review and update to the T&Cs.

An analogy for this issue would be where a country with reported low crime rate doesn't mean there's no crime in said country. It's citizen should still be aware not to fall for scams.

This would be true in the case of third-party App Stores. Who knows, maybe others can step in do the job better compared to Apple. Maybe they do not need to have billions of Apps, but well-curated Apps in thousands catering to specific categories?

 

[Beautyspin]

Don’t think Apple is ashamed nor is it doing nothing, contrary to your assertion nor is Apple scamming people. Here is their internet agreement forvyour perusal.

Legal - Internet Services - Apple

www.apple.com

There is no monopoly, by the way.

If I or anybody else cannot run my AppStore on iOS, if the user cannot install Apps of his choice from a place of his choice, then there is a monopoly. Apple is not really doing nothing, it is happily getting 30% cut for allowing scam apps on the store. Win-Win for Apple and the scamming developer. Poor user has no choice but to keep downloading from the same Appstore even though there is no quality check of any kind.