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.
Upcoming EU Sideloading Bill Would 'Cripple the Privacy and Security Protections' iPhone Users Expect, Says Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sometimes ransomware doesn’t need admin/root. Just as long as it’s running in the user’s context it can access the user’s files and encrypt them. That’s just one example. I have seen lots of malware over the years running for the user alone. Changing logins and the malware won’t run. Even standard users instead of admins had some of this malware.
This is absolute BS. In my opinion EU is on the wrong side here. But it is all about the money. They see super successful US company and they are jealous of the money they get. Instead of thinking how to punish them, they should be thinking on how to create a local 'Apple'. But this is politics..
Apple should stick it to them. They should offer this "open/sideloding" option only on iPhone SE, and only on previous generation. If you want side loading - get old phone. Or even better. Offer a new line line of iPhones, a "clean" iPhone. The iPhone without the appstore, or only with apple inhouse application. Like the fist gen phone. I would love to buy one, without all this crap. I've been using iphone since they were introduced, spend thousands on apps and games, but I've noticed that now I only need it for phone, email and web. I don't give a damn about all this subscription nonsense. Never had one, never will. Anyway, this will be bad for Apple stock. I was just glad I had an option all these years to have a secure, no nonsense, no virus, malware (like android) phone. iPod came and went, iPhone will too.
ps: to all the hopeful developers, that think they will get more cash because of new payment - ╭∩╮. If they open the ios, it will be the last day I will pay for any app. cracked apps app the way. I hope they what they want, and by that I mean they have less income because of that
While I can acknowledge your point, I fail to see the "why", for example designating the SE. Use Android as an example for sideloading effect and impact. Once again, I hear your point, I just struggle to see a reason for it. Thx
Let's call them entertainment consoles.
I know I am not going to haul mine to pay for my groceries instead of my phone.
Last edited:
Until we see solutions, we won't know. IMO it would be something that would be needed to be unlocked from within Settings.
Because you could doesn't mean that is what it does. Could you morph it into one? Kind of.
Somehow I doubt my employer is going to let me work from home via my PS or Xbox.
I had to be careful where I got some open source software from. Some of those still use horrible third party sites to download it.
It would affect you because tons of devs would start requiring sideloading to run their apps at all, as a way to circumvent whatever iPhone rules.
You know what's the original sideloading, websites. Except they're way safer. I'd be happy if Apple just properly implemented PWAs and called it a day.
Root privs don't mean much. Most software running on MacOS, Linux, or Windows without root/admin mode is already far more privileged than it needs to be, enough to cause damage. Just can't do certain things like accessing other programs' memory.
Literally this. It’s one of the three key features Steve talked about.
Personal opinion: parent who allow their kids open access to their phones deserve what they get.
What I still can't get around, is why would this "OMG!!!!" issue be specific to iOS and not Android? I use both, "sideload" on my Android device, and not seeing any issue.
Oh yeah, my work: regulated is an understatement.
Good to know. Wonder if anyone here does both Google and Apple dev and can speak to how hard one is to the other.
When I was doing app development, I didn’t really find either to be difficult, but slightly different
While imo this is an issue in android, I believe on iOS malware, phishing and scam ware apps will be magnified. Of course there’s no proof as a future event has not yet happened. We will only be able to rely on hindsight.
Does it apply to “gaming devices”… Maybe Apple should do a public pivot to focus on their gaming platform(without actually changing anything). If this doesn’t apply to Xbox(basically a Windows PC) or Nintendo Switch(basically an iPad) then it has HUGE loopholes.
Last edited:
They don't have to. They just have equitable access and stop throwing wrenches.
No. They aren't responsible for other stores. Just to allow them fair access.
Almost. You're almost there.
Now let your imagination run just one tiny step further:
How about we combine "open" and "normal" iOS into one??We can just have an in-OS switch: Turn on and you're open to sideload - leave it off, if you prefer walled garden. No need to have two different OSes.
They can decide on their business model - but only within rules and boundaries permitted by law.
What the DMA (proposed) does is impose certain conditions and obligations on certain platforms that will absolutely curtail their freedom to decide on their business model
The Digital Markets Act: ensuring fair and open digital markets
Discover how the Digital Markets Act ensures large online platforms in the EU behave fairly, and allows new players to enter the market, thus developing a fast evolving digital sector.
No. But you can require companies that have developed and are selling it (be it bundled with hardware or not) in certain markets to play by the jurisdiction's rules.
Can Apple "go nuclear", decides it doesn't want to and just withdraw from the European Union market? Absolutely.
I just don't believe they're going to do that - thereby losing billions of USD in revenue and earnings.
So, why make a rule that will end up doing mostly nothing? Seems like a major waste of time all around.
But, they will still have to some how answer for. And, possibly have to support working on their platform.
So lets say someone creates a fake bank of America App, distributes it on a legitimate looking website, gets the site to the top of Google results or pays for ads elsewhere do you not think that out of millions of customers that a couple thousand at least would not try to login via the app and have their bank accounts wiped clean.
In this simple scenario, no malware would be needed, heck the app doesnt even need to operate beyond username/pass (so not flagged). Just some good old fashioned promotion of a fake app (and side loading being allowed).
IMHO Where you buy a product is as important as the product itself.
Fair point ?
But doesn’t android have its occasional reports of apps stealing data? Far more than iOS.
And does Android not give loads of data to Google for advertisement purposes? Why is that a good thing?
And do we know that governments DON’T collect vast data and monitor their citizens on Android phones?
I don’t hear Google going to bat for its users mentioning how privacy is paramount to their company values and they have no business knowing what goes on your phone. No, no… the best Google says is that “our services aren’t free and so we pay for them through advertising…. Ahem…. (Thatwecollectvastamountsofdatathatifyouonlyknewhowmuchyouwouldhateus)”
Yep you don’t need an malware App for that, just let them login directly into the fake account through the browser, get their credentials and f’ them up.
What’s next, kill the browser because it’s too dangerous?
Better teach people to not click on every crap that shows up in their mailbox.
Teach them to browse important legit sites directly as they used to do in the 90s and install the legit Bank Of America iOS App from there, instead of clicking on a shady banco-of-americanski.ru link.
The potential of getting a fake, unrelated or copycat App through the AppStore is much higher, simply because there no interaction with and no clear reference to the source of the App.
This can happen everywhere, on and offline, these people are predestined to step into traps in every area of life, if they walk blindly through life that way.
Last edited:
Tell this Putin, and wait for his answer, you’ll be astonished.
It applies to any device with a store described as gatekeepers.
When Xbox, PlayStation or switch have enough users and revenue they will be covered.
- turnover equal to or above EUR 6.5 billion in the last three financial years, or where the average market capitalisation or the equivalent fair market value of the undertaking to which it belongs amounted to at least EUR 65 billion in the last financial year, and it provides a core platform service in at least three Member States;
- it provides a core platform service that has more than 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and more than 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union in the last financial year;
- the thresholds in point (b) were met in each of the last three financial years.