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.
Security Researchers Discover 10 App Store Apps Engaging in Ad Fraud
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So based on the context of my post. You are suggesting Google have higher standards? Wow.
You don't simply let an app sideload, you install an app by choice each time. Sideloading grants more user rights and freedoms. It's safer for power users than punting on walled gardens like the PlayStore or AppStore, because it requires greater user interaction and places responsibility solely into the users hands. That's suitable for a minority who deserve it by right, if they own the computer and filesystem (what do we purchase?). If you pay attention to any fine print during installations from services like PlayStore/AppStore you might realise it is impossible to use any modern online tech equipment with any true privacy, tracking human activity has largely become the point of this technology, and any assumption of safety in the current arena is a huge false sense of security.
Obsessing over Apple's AppStore monopoly is like trusting secretive Pfizer studies instead of understanding the technology and dynamic at play.
These enormous profit driven companies aren't slightly trustworthy.
It might prove to be a situation where everything is compromised, so it's best to have maximum control, accurate info and self reliability. That's not something someone will sell, it's something to own everyday.
I really had a good time with Cydia and spent some coin there.
Sideloading on Android offers similarly beneficial offerings, but these micro-satellite devices have really evolved since my iOS days. It's all garbage now and there isn't any user ownership or control that's legitimate.
All devices are deeply compromised from factory. The value of user information is a strange phenomena, as is the programmed enabling ignorance that fuels most opinion on this topic.
Do you honestly believe your last sentence?
Think about it, unless you made and installed the app on your device yourself, it was loaded from a third party who has no incentive to care about you. The author has no control or oversight of their published and profited offerings. Just as the IC/SoC engineers can't control their products. Too much trust is placed on dodgy potentials. I prefer to trust myself and have had no issue sideloading on any device.
Adjusting for population PlayStore is twice as bad as iOS for this ad fraud issue. The takeaway is, neither app delivery methods are completely infallible and deciding to trust that it's close enough just means you're too lazy to do due diligence on where your data comes from and have no idea what your processors are doing or are capable of, and likely don't care.
This is really the basis of your argument. And it’s simply not true. The responsibility may lie on the user, and most users don’t have the ability to decode an app made by a sophisticated bad actor.
Low crime didn’t mean no crime. What we can’t deny is that Apple’s walled garden approach has been beneficial in weeding out more shady apps compared to if there were no such safeguards in place to begin with.
The question us whether this is worth losing features such as the ability to freely sideload whatever app you want, and I guess this ultimately hinges on who you ask. I believe that the App Store model results in the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of users, and the desire of a few more tech savvy “power-users” to download torrents and run emulators on their devices should not override or take precedence.
That walled garden is working well I see Apple, apparently nothing gets passed your review process
Yep. And it does. If you got that far, you read that the same team found seven times as many adware apps in Google Play. That’s decent support for a curation policy! Or do you expect zero out of the App Store’s five million apps to be fraudulent?
No, it isn't. A filter that catches 75% is *worse* than nothing because it cultivates an false sense of security.
By your logic, since the police can’t catch 100% of all crime, are you saying it would be better to dismantle the police force altogether, otherwise it may cultivate a false sense of security in our citizens?
Police don't catch 100% of criminals either. Does that mean there should be no law enforcement?
This is the result
"The BSA's most recent Global Software Survey revealed that 37 percent of software worldwide is unlicensed and the BSA estimated that the commercial value of unlicensed software worldwide was $46.3 billion"
I'm sure Chinese people say the same about American Apps
Security is a game of cat and mouse, there is no system that's going to prevent it all, but it does work and works well. Compare what the iOS App Store has vs the Google Play store to see the difference.
In the vein of unsubstantiated comments.
- Honest tech companies who collect data: Google collects the most data, followed by Microsoft, followed by Apple
- Dishonest companies: one never knows because they aren't honest!
Data collection is necessary as it enables (tech) companies to tailor an experience. Personally as long as the data is not going to 3rd parties unknowingly I'm good with it and the privacy policy details where the data is going.
Last edited:
Not true at all. If I want the Wall Street Journal app, I can get that app on the competition app store. (Not to mention the WWW)
So far as I can tell Apple (for the most part) abide by a countries laws. Non-government VPN's are illegal in China (and a few other countries) and Apple could probably have been sued for aiding and abetting.
My car also isn't broken, but I still need to do roadworthyness tests to ensure it meets new or existing standards, even if it's been sitting in a garage. Why should an app be any different.
You think product placement / marketing is free (in any store)?
It's Apple. Nobody bats an eye when Are Technica reports on new malware found in the google play store, but find a few in the iOS App Store and suddenly, the sky is falling.
What does Apple do with that data?
Pretty much everything that happens on your device phones home to Apple and they collect it in some fashion unless you go APM. Apple gives broad headlines without really saying anything. It sounds good until you start looking deeper. Then Apple says “contact us” if you have additional questions / concerns / issues. Try it.
Apple is far less open and sharing than either MS or Google. It’s how they operate.
Realize I am not saying if this is good or bad. It just is.
I did!
You could hear Apple laughing from half a State away! 😂😂😂
Then again, as a projects manager, I can kind of see their point.
That makes no sense.
The police are reactive while the App Store and Play Store are supposed to be proactive.
I am not saying one is better or worse than the other. I am just commenting on the how the data is handled and visibility to This.
What does facebook or google or MS do with the data? Can you quantify to a level of detail to show what other tech companies do with PII and extended and derived PII?
No company really says anything. Can you tell every way that facebook, google and Apple use your data of birth?
It does sound good. You cannot tell every place in tech companies code that use your PII.
No they aren't. It's a mischaracterization.
The way it is, there is no way to know every single place or how a company uses your PII.
Oh I agree, but without substantiation from some accredited source, it's only an opinion that's a 50000 foot generalization.
Not true. Police are both proactive and reactive.
So is The App Store. Proactively they prevent a huge number of Apps from getting in (in 2021 it was over 500,000). Reactively they remove bad Apps once discovered and will often make a patch to plug any security hole to reduce/prevent a specific behavior later on.
No, we can say which is worse. For starters, follow the money. Google gets 80% of their revenue from targeted ads. Only made possible by massive data collection. Without this data they cease to exist. A company that relies on something to survive is far more likely to abuse it to stay in business and keep the money flowing.
Google is an advertising company, first and foremost. Apple makes so little off ads it’s a rounding error on their earnings reports (despite many trying to over-inflate their ad business in some lame attempt to say Apple is no different than Google).
Then there’s data collection. Google has trackers in millions of websites around the world that not only collect massive amounts of user data/habits, but does so without your permission. You don’t need to use any Google services in order for them to mine your data. Same goes for Facebook and many others (even Adobe is in this game). Can you show me any website with an Apple tracker embedded?
We can also look at their behaviors. Remember when Google found an error in Safari that allowed them to track users even when they didn’t want to get tracked? Instead of reporting it to Apple they exploited it. They got caught and were fined a measly $22 million. I imagine if they did the same today the fine would be substantially higher. Or Facebook, which is now being sued for trying to bypass App Tracking Transparency. Companies that need this data to survive can’t be trusted. Their own history proves this.
I think it’s more that people are leaving trails of interactions all over the internet. Some small, some large and wide. Even the most careful person posting on the internet is providing a way for them to be tracked, so the only way a “block” button could be implemented would be that, when it’s tapped, the device turns off.