News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by ben_w on Monday March 04, 2024 @08:37AM (#39590295)
> It's still wild to me how they managed to get people to argue against the freedom to install whatever they want on their device.

This isn't because of Apple, or at least it isn't in my case.

Even as an iPhone app developer with the means to do so whenever I want, and even though I find Apple's content restrictions derisory and "big brother"-y, I actively don't want a system that can install "whatever".

This is due to all the malware everywhere on the internet, and owing to this unfortunate reality, also means I think it is unwise even to have 3rd party libraries as project dependencies. I have an entire spare computer dedicated to learning scientific python because I don't feel I can rely on the absence of vulnerabilities in the stuff.

This makes me sad. I miss the old days of 2002 where I didn't feel any reason to worry about random apps from random websites. But part of my carefree youth was that I had a Performa 5200 running OS 8, which wasn't a popular targets for malware authors, and another big part was that my bank didn't have an app.

But before someone replies to point out that malware gets past the App Store tests: yes, of course it does, I see all this as a "defence in depth" strategy, not a silver bullet.

Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by didntcheck on Monday March 04, 2024 @09:05AM (#39590637)
Why would having the ability to install sideloaded apps change this? Apps will not be able to just install themselves or other apps without prompting. And we've already had zero-click exploits in Safari leading to entire phone rootkitting more than once without sideloading
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by QuadmasterXLII on Monday March 04, 2024 @09:26AM (#39590877)
Most of the apps I install are mandatory apps. It's not illegal to not have them, but if you don't install you can't access your doctor, file an insurance claim, bank, see your childs grades, enter the front door of your child's preschool, etc. All of these are malicious actors who will steal as much of my data as possible at all times, but I do actually need a preschool. As long as I can only install these through the app store, we are at an uneasy truce where these apps comply with app store rules.
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by beeboobaa on Monday March 04, 2024 @02:09PM (#39594582)
The operating system can apply restrictions to apps, and in fact already does. It does not need the officially sanctioned store for this. You are arguing for detailed privacy controls for all apps (including those installed by Apple), which is a good thing to want!
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by ben_w on Monday March 04, 2024 @09:16AM (#39590749)
> But before someone replies to point out that malware gets past the App Store tests: yes, of course it does, I see all this as a "defence in depth" strategy, not a silver bullet.
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by naravara on Monday March 04, 2024 @01:35PM (#39594117)
There are bad actors, like Facebook, who will prompt users to sideload so they can do bad things.

If the bad actors were all shady fly-by-night looking companies it’d be one thing. But once the gates are opened, if it’s easy enough, you’ll see people being pressured to open the gates by all sorts of companies that they will have no choice but to comply with. Imagine, for example, if your insurance company, in order to pay your bill, starts making you install the app through some alternate pathway that brings a side-dish of keylogging to adjust your rates based on your browser behavior.

Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by jwells89 on Monday March 04, 2024 @10:16AM (#39591439)
It’s really kinda crazy how normalized it’s become to pull in hundreds of dependencies (aggregate of dependencies and subdendencies) from unvetted sources on the regular. Combined with the popular insistence of developers to run with all protections disabled (SIP, immutable system, non-admin user, etc) it makes for a whole lot of easy targets.
Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by sgu999 on Monday March 04, 2024 @09:06AM (#39590645)
> I have an entire spare computer dedicated to

> my bank didn't have an app

Exactly my reasoning last week when I read about one more dependency attack on GitHub.

Do you have a mac? What's your setup? I need CoreML so VMs are not an option, and I'm a freelancer so I use my own MacBook for work. I have a different session for each client, but at this point I don't even know if it's useful at all. Of course I also have a personal session with banking stuff... which is what made me realise I was probably doing something dumb.

Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by ben_w on Monday March 04, 2024 @09:20AM (#39590805)
> Do you have a mac?

Yes, two.

(Well, three, but the third is in a box waiting to go to recycling or someone who wants it "for parts", as that's from 2013…)

> What's your setup?

It's literally an entire second mac. I bought an MBAir/M1 second hand, then was given an MBPro/M1 Pro; the Pro became my main machine, the Air became my "mess around" box.

Re:Apple hit with over 1.8B euro EU antitrust fine in Spotif... by skydhash on Monday March 04, 2024 @07:36PM (#39598015)
While I have two Mac (A mac mini as a workstation and a MBA for portability), I think next time I have to work on a contract, I’ll just setup a VM for the client. NPM always made me uneasy.