And that's why we have had malware for decades.
Restricting what a user device has so many benefits that it has become the norm in companies except the very small ones.
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.
Tim Cook: Users Who Want to Sideload Apps Can Use Android, While the iPhone Experience Maximizes 'Security and Privacy'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And that's why we have had malware for decades.
Restricting what a user device has so many benefits that it has become the norm in companies except the very small ones.
The security on MacOS is perfectly fine. It already makes you jump through multiple hoops to install from outside the app store. You'll have to come up with a better excuse than that.
And your Windows laptop is less secure than an iOS device.
It's a trade between security and freedom, and luckily there are alternatives that focuses on security, privacy, simplicity before freedom and choice.
This is objectively false. 99% of the time you just have to click "open anyway" after a wall of text telling you that it was downloaded from a potentially dangerous place.
Tg
That is the owner of the device restricting what can run on it, not the seller of the device doing so.
That's only after you go to System Preferences and allow apps from outside the app store. Users literally have to opt in to this, no one's doing it by accident.
The first time a user tries to open any that was installed outside the official store, they go and do this, whether they are technically inclined or not -- this hardly counts as "multiple hoops" to jump through anytime a user tries to install an app outside of the official store.
Also, I don't believe anyone said it was accidental --- the issue is that most are not technically literate, and will not use good sense judgements. That's right, I'm saying the average user is stupid.
Most applications for macOS installs just fine by downloading them outside Mac App Store. Even for unidentified apps all you have to do is control-click on the application and choose open to install it.
You probably don't remember the Trojan Flashback which it 600 000 Macs 10 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashback_(Trojan)
Ransomware is now starting to show up for macOS also: https://www.unitrends.com/blog/mac-ransomware
The threat against mobile devices is usually larger than against Macs since its market share is so low. Different threats require different security.
The default is to allow applications to be installed from the Mac App Store and identified developers.
Also you can install applications from unidentified developers without going to System Preferences.
Right. People can make their own determination about what they do with their own machine, as it should be.
As long as you’re not an idiot who installs any old thing you find laying around the internet your machine will be no less secure than it otherwise would be.
The notion that we all need a strict nanny because some people are too stupid to be allowed a fork at the dinner table is just silly.
This is about Apple’s profits, not security and privacy.
I’m still waiting for someone to square Apple’s love of privacy and security with their recent push to spectacularly shatter both by treating every iOS device owner as a suspected pedophile.
Doesn’t really compute if you ask me.
It's more than one hoop. That's the definition of multiple. If we're going to argue about the meanings of basic words then this is going to take a long time.
Short memory. You forget the time apple failed epically and someone got tons of nudes from celebrities iCloud accounts?
People can make their own determination to buy whichever platform gives them this ability.
This is simply untrue. Once you open up the ability, the attack surface has increased, and malicious actors will abuse it. The fact you reference CSAM scanning, but think this is OK is beyond laughable.
That was the thread of conversation, but that's not the only issue. Sure, a nanny for the much greater than 50% of users who don't have good sense about security is a compelling argument, whether you agree or not is besides the point. The truth is that if you open up for side loading, then the OS itself has become less secure.
I believe it's about both.
The amount of ignorance regarding Apple's CSAM scanning technique is about as bad as the ignorance regarding opening up iOS to side loading.
And yet Android has much larger market share than iOS and it has sideloading and somehow the world has not ended.
Read again. First, it's when you open an app that you've already downloaded and installed. Second, once you've jumped through that very easy singular "hoop" for that first app, you only have to click "open anyway" which is again a single "hoop." So, for each app, there is a single hoop to jump through. The hoop changes to become much easier to jump through after the first one.
That’s how Apple shows you how much they care about your security and privacy, if course — by shouldering their way into your device to use your own CPU cycles to treat you like a suspected pedophile until you satisfactorily prove your innocence!
Short memory. You forgot the time users failed epically and used terrible passwords and were victims of spear-phishing attacks. This was not an apple security issue, but a user security issue, again proving the point that users aren't, in the general case, capable of protecting themselves.
And apple forced everyone to use 2fa after. They learned, they protected. Same could happen for sideloading. Issues will be fixed and we'll have options. Or do you not trust apple to improve over time?
If you really can’t see the difference between me choosing to do a thing to my device that lowers its security and them choosing to do a thing to my device that lowers its security, then, well, I don’t know what to tell you.
One day I might decide to go skydiving. I might jump out of that plane. I might not. But I can tell you for certain that if I do or if I don’t, it should be my choice.
iOS 15 has zero privacy by default. The included technology allows 24/7 surveillance, during the beta test only for picture hash lists, but it's expected to observe voice, text, interactions in real time in future iPhone generations, only limited by the battery.
Your only choice when using a smartphone is between who will enslave you. Apple, Google or Facebook.
If you want privacy and security, then just don't use smartphones and the internet for anything that you want to keep secure and private.
Your only choice when using a smartphone is between who will enslave you. Apple, Google or Facebook.
If you want privacy and security, then just don't use smartphones and the internet for anything that you want to keep secure and private.
What you're arguing for is more akin to at situation where Apple already had 2fa, but users wanted to not have to have 2fa (more choice!), so Apple allowed you to not have 2fa, which led to decreased security and harmed users. That's what opening up for side loading would be --- a decrease in security in the name of choice.
Many of the people raising concern were well known privacy advocates and foundations. I believe there was even a blog post from a security researcher who reverse-engineered their hashing system in a couple of weeks to get a blurry version of the supposedly encrypted image.
So for one app, it's two hoops. For two, it's three hoops. So the number of hoops is never less than two. Can we at least agree on that.
You'll always have the choice to simply not make use of sideloading... why do people not understand this?