Dozens of Adult Content and Gambling Apps Found Abusing Apple's Enterprise Certificate Program

[dk001]

You bought the wrong device. Buy an Android device. You have a choice. You knew what you were buying when you bought it.

Exercise the power you have in the free market.

Good luck getting the malware/viruses off of your new Android device!

Apple uses this as a differentiator. They've done the math. They wouldn't be doing it if it didn't have a benefit to their bottom line. Apple has a series of differentiators that are clear as day.

Security, privacy, relative freedom from scamation, a high level of trust in downloaded apps.

Vs. the wild, wild west.

You can view anything you want in Safari, and to boot, Safari offers a high level of resistance to the scams/data theft/hacks that many of those sites that offer the content you'd like to be available in apps are trying to pull on you.

Your stance, if this is your belief, shows how out of date you are.

 

[jtara]

Your stance, if this is your belief, shows how out of date you are.

I just checked my Apple temporal measurement device on my wrist.

It says it's February 13, 2019 ~9:35AM PST. I trust it that that's where I am on the timeline. I could check with multiple additional sources, but don't feel I need to, given adequate prior evidence of it's reliability.

What about you?

What you seem to want to do is take away choice. You want to enforce your view on others, and remove from them to choose a mobile device platform that offers a high level of security and privacy, and in part does so by pragmatically excluding some troublesome categories from the App Store, and additionally severely restricts side-loading of apps.

You do have a choice, but refuse to acknowledge it. You can choose Android. You want to force Apple to do things YOUR way, and remove a choice from the marketplace.

Now, I do feel that that's a sad trend going on in some subset of the population, but not one that I think will prevail.

 

[dk001]

I just checked my Apple temporal measurement device on my wrist.

It says it's February 13, 2019 ~9:35AM PST. I trust it that that's where I am on the timeline. I could check with multiple additional sources, but don't feel I need to, given adequate prior evidence of it's reliability.

What about you?

What you seem to want to do is take away choice. You want to enforce your view on others, and remove from them to choose a mobile device platform that offers a high level of security and privacy, and in part does so by pragmatically excluding some troublesome categories from the App Store, and additionally severely restricts side-loading of apps.

You do have a choice, but refuse to acknowledge it. You can choose Android. You want to force Apple to do things YOUR way, and remove a choice from the marketplace.

Now, I do feel that that's a sad trend going on in some subset of the population, but not one that I think will prevail.

Have you checked my sig?

My main device is an Android. My work device in an iPhone.

 

[jtara]

My main device is an Android. My work device in an iPhone.

No, I don't read sigs. My eyes are trained to ignore them. They are redundant and unnecessary.

So, you made your free market choice. Good for you! Why do you want to take away mine?

And it appears your employer has made a wise business choice, to use a more secure device for business purposes.

I am responsible for developing and maintaining an educational app distributed on the App Store and Play Store. Both have technical restrictions implemented, such that they will only run if installed from their respective official stores.

This has made me aware of the confusion that many Android users have about the safety of apps installed from alternative locations. We get calls from students complaining that the app doesn't run. The app doesn't run because they got it from somewhere other than than Play Store, and it's been designed to not run in that case. We tell them they need to install it from the Play Store.

Unfortunately, there are many sites that scrape copies of Android apps - without the permission of the app publisher - and offer them in their own "store" or otherwise provide the APKs for download. There is no sense - unless you are a huge company with big bucks - to even attempt to go after them. You have to do your best to protect your app from running and prevent it from being picked apart, altered, re-branded by somebody else without your permission, etc. It is a jungle. I suspect that MOST Android apps in the Play Store have not really take adequate protection steps. We have done what we can, encrypting content, using a code obfuscator, etc. etc.

I'm lucky that I'm informed by having previously worked on a app that's used by personnel working on critical infrastructure, and the company paid a handsome sum for a security assessment - which was followed by months of remediation - mostly for Android vulnerabilities. So, I am privy to the take-away from that, and also that led to strengthening of the security features of the cross-OS platform that was used (Which is also the one I currently use), which was subsidized by a Fortune-50 corporation.

So, I can tell you that there is SO MUCH MORE that has to be done to protect Android apps from meddling vs iOS, and that most companies simply cannot afford to do it.

Some students have told us that they don't use the Play Store to install apps. We tell them that they have to. I think many somehow think that just because the app is listed in the Play Store, it is safe to run even if they get it from somewhere else. It is not. For these students, it is the first time they have ever installed an app from the Play Store!

iOS users have no such confusion. If they load an app in some other way, they damn well know what they are getting into, and they know there is an element of danger to it.

 

[nt5672]

. . .
Aside from any moral judgements that Apple may or may not be making, it is a FACT that the types of content that are banned are associated with a MUCH higher level of skulduggery on the part of: advertisers, hackers (who might hack into backend servers, or even unwittingly hack the app source code itself... some companies are stupid enough!), or even the site/app owners themselves. . . . .

You miss the point. It is MY device. You would not accept the manufacturer limiting your use of your TV to certain channels, your car to certain locations, your radio to certain channels, your computer to certain software, your toaster to certain types of bread, etc. Why do you accept it for an iPhone?

There is no need for Apple to restrict the app store. Installed apps on Apple Mac does not risk Apple infrastructure or significantly risk the users computer. We know from the article that installing these apps using the enterprise key did not risk Apple's infrastructure. We know that Apple can make sure these apps are not seen by snowflakes and children.

So the only reason left is to be a nanny. It boggles my mind why people have this investment in being a nanny and deciding for everyone without understanding that the underlying reasons are for PR only and not based in any real facts.

Apple could give you what you want and still support freedom of speech and freedom of use that I want and that America was founded on. Why don't they? There has to be another reason. Too bad most people don't care to or dare to question when Apple discriminates and censors content. At some point you won't be able to question it.

 

[jtara]

You miss the point. It is MY device

No, it is not! It is your employer's device!

Your employer made one choice. You made another.

Too bad most people don't care to or dare to question when Apple discriminates and censors content

You misunderstand the Constitution. Entirely.

Private individuals and corporations are not enjoined from censorship. The government is.
[doublepost=1550086116][/doublepost]

You would not accept the manufacturer limiting your use of your TV to certain channels, your car to certain locations, your radio to certain channels, your computer to certain software, your toaster to certain types of bread, etc

Whatever limitations I will not accept, I will not buy the product. The world's largest public corporation (on certain days of the week...) is I think in no danger from a consumer boycott from those with your viewpoint.

For the record, my toaster only works with certain types of bread. It has thin slots, that will not accept thick bread slices. Would you want to have my toaster impounded, and force me to buy an ugly toaster with fat slots?

Why do you accept it for an iPhone?

Why do you care? It is MY choice! Why do you wish to impose your choices on others?

You are free, however, to do that - IN YOUR HOUSE. The App Store is Apple's house.

 

[Jakewilk]

No. The correct analogy is disallowing my scanner from scanning porn because it reflects on the manufacture or the scanner. I paid for the phone, I should be able to put the content on it I want. If Apple wants to keep the content out of the Apple store, then let me install my own software. Otherwise they need to allow it in the store. Remember it is MY device, or is supposed to be.
[doublepost=1550076753][/doublepost]

No the point is the iPhone is MY device, period. I bought it. Apple has no right to restrict what software I install on it. If Apple wants to keep the App Store so locked down, fine. Just let me install the apps I want outside of the App Store. Simple and clean.

Actually they have every right to restrict what you download on it, because that’s the service they provide. You can argue that it’s bad for business, but you can’t argue that they are doing anything morally incorrect. Keurig coffee machines do the same thing. You don’t like being restricted to using their proprietary flavor cups? Buy elsewhere... simple and clean