How Apple should implement sideloading (if they need to by legislation or otherwise do so by choice)

[turbineseaplane]

But one must say, this is one of the least disruptive methods that could be in place to enable/disable sideloading. Mind you that wifi sync enabling requiring the connection of a computer and so far it has been turned off by default.

WiFi Sync doesn't make sense to have on by default
How would the iPhone know which computer to do the WiFi sync with if you didn't connect it with a cable at least once?

In that context, connecting with a computer makes sense -- you are trying to get things from the computer (files, music, etc)

I'm not against side loading requiring connecting to a computer if there's a legitimate reason for it, but not just to "make it hard" or "punish people".

I mean... seriously...what the hell are we doing if we are "punishing" folks for simply using their own phone how they want to?

 

[Shirasaki]

I mean... seriously...what the hell are we doing if we are "punishing" folks for simply using their own phone how they want to?

You know how polarised people are on this sideloading thing, and the OP is as punishing as he could possibly spare for enabling sideloading, short of requiring a separate device just to use sideloading apps, some of which would be useless without a properly configured device with data. Requiring a computer to authenticate is the minimum amount of compromise we could spare.

Btw, safari is as trash as ever, now come with auto reset feature whenever I switch a tab to another.

 

[turbineseaplane]

You know how polarised people are on this sideloading thing, and the OP is as punishing as he could possibly spare for enabling sideloading, short of requiring a separate device just to use sideloading apps, some of which would be useless without a properly configured device with data. Requiring a computer to authenticate is the minimum amount of compromise we could spare.

Btw, safari is as trash as ever, now come with auto reset feature whenever I switch a tab to another.

Yeah, it's not completely crazy -- but I'd only be in favor of it as a "one time thing" or "one time with each major iOS release" or something.

Again - I just don't want to be pointlessly punishing people is all.

I think it's important to remember that we are talking about paying customers - valued relationships... no company should be trying to be overtly hostile towards that (Apple does seem to be trying at times though)


I agree about the OP.

That felt like a list that an angry drunk Tim Cook would come up with to really STICK IT to people for not doing things HIS WAY! ARGHH!!

 

[E.Lizardo]

1. Care to explain why?
2. Why?
3. The AppleCare(+) terms already state that they can deny service at any time if your device is modified in hardware and software, similar clausure could be created in an updated terms of service. Again, this is such that the AppleCare service remains a seamless process for all of us.
4. Why?
5. Why?

I'm open to hearing dissenting opinions.

If I may quote turbine:
"None of these concerns are valid on macOS, nor should they be on iOS
Let's not over think the room here"

Applecare terms can be changed, and if sideloading comes about no doubt will be. A Mac is a computer. An iOS device is a computer. If this happens they should have essentially the same rules, or a really, really good reason they need to be different. So let me ask you, what is different or special in the nature of an iOS device vs a Mac that warrants such radically different restrictions on their use?

 

[E.Lizardo]

If the currently easy sideloading system works on Macs, why is there so much malware on the platform?

Apple's Craig Federighi: Mac Not Meeting the Bar for Customer Protection

Apple software engineering chief Craig Federighi is testifying in the ongoing Apple v. Epic games trial this afternoon, providing details about...

www.macrumors.com

So you support locking down the Mac as you have outlined for iOS? Then come out and say so. At a certain point people have to be responsible for themselves. Stupid people are everywhere and bad actors will always find ways to exploit them.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I feel like this would be a compromise for both philosophies. What do you think?

My test case for ANY potential solution is “How easy is it for a malicious actor to call up a non-tech savvy person and talk/berate/badger them through the steps to lower the security of their system and install a malicious app”. What you list here would remove any sensitive data from the system BEFORE the system is in a state where the malicious actor would have them install the software to steal their data. As long as those vulnerable folks are just as protected then as they’d be now, fine by me.

 

[Shirasaki]

Well, it seems that based on these proposals, sideloading could be something that just forgets, especially if enabling it comes at massive feature lost (say, losing all access to Apple ID) and destruction of data (you may not be able to restore backup, essentially forcing starting anew).

 

[nastysailboat]

This post is due as a response to recent developments of Apple possibly being forced to allow sideloading.

Sideloading brings great choice for the user and by itself is a positive thing, but I understand all the privacy and security concerns around it. I've used Android for quite a while and just recently switched back, and the problem on the platform is not that sideloading is a choice (that's a positive thing), but rather an easy choice that is easily accessible.

I have several relatives that have sideloading clones of apps on their devices (mind you, they have little to no knowledge of technology) that obviously pose security and privacy risks, because sideloading on Android is too easy (yes, even though the system responsibly warns them of the risks).

That's why I feel Apple has the opportunity to do sideloading right, and yes, that would mean making it harder to do so than in competing platforms, to deter people who are not knowledgeable enough to understand the real disadvantages of sideloading to do so, and to prevent Apple issues in the support stage (both hardware and software).

This is how I can imagine it they should do it:

1. The sideloading state should be a switchable state and should only be controlled by a switch that must be activated or disabled on a computer, Finder on Mac and iTunes on Windows.
2. When a user wants to enable the sideloading state, a factory reset should be required. The user will, then, be prompted for an iTunes or Finder backup. This is so the secure, walled state of the device is ensured in backups. Users, of course, could have the choice to restore those same backups on devices with the sideloading state on.
3. AppleCare(+) coverage and support should be limited unless the sideloading state is turned off, again through a Windows PC or Mac, requiring another factory reset. A factory reset on-device when the sideloading state is on would turn it off.
4. Backups are disabled when the sideloading state is enabled. Again, this is to ensure users ONLY have secure backups of their data.
5. Certain iCloud and secure iPhone functionality could be disabled for security (like iCloud Keychain and the like, if Apple (who has actual security knowledge of these things) determines it is a risk).
6. As always, when users sideload an app, there should be a prompt warning the users of the possible risks.

I feel like this would be a compromise for both philosophies. What do you think?

I am one of those against side loading. I don’t think it’s good for the every day user, it think people choose iPhone over even getting a computer these day due to the simplicity, the security, and the fact that it just works. That being said I think side loading or alternative App Store is a bit more of an advanced user thing especially on phones. I don’t the the every day user uses many apps even. And I think your ideas here could actually work if apple was forced. I actually really like your ideas on this. Side loading is not something I would ever use even if it was my only option for an app. But for those that can’t seem to go without it I think this is fare.

 

[nastysailboat]

1. Yes to switch. No to requiring a desktop computer because this restriction could be easily circumvented in an even less secure way (say, on a public library computer) and PC ownership is on a long term downward slope.
2. Yes to requiring a backup (perhaps Apple could create a special backup file for sideloaders). No to requiring a factory reset because it is too disruptive. Also because it could destroy data or settings for non tech-adept users who just want to download a "trending" game or app because of FOMO.
3. No because it is too restrictive on all iOS users.
4. I think it would be better if Apple developed a specific backup process for sideloading-enabled devices rather than preventing anybody who sideloads from backing up their devices.
5. Yes.
6. Yes.

----------
edited to fix typos

I think the apple care is more thank fare apple shouldn’t have to fix your phone if it’s not setup to run the way they intended and something goes wrong

 

[nastysailboat]

There isn’t. Believe it or not, Apple will sell the Mac down the river to defend the control they wield over their most profitable platform.

But there actually is more malware on computers in general than on the iphone

 

[boss.king]

But there actually is more malware on computers in general than on the iphone

There is, I’m not disagreeing with that. But there’s not “so much” malware on macOS.

 

[turbineseaplane]

But there’s not “so much” malware on macOS.

In fact I’ve had no malware issues on any Mac in my entire extended family, save for one.

An older relative who got sucked into installing MacKeeper through safari pop ups and other advertising convincing her it was a “good idea”

I don’t even know if that is true malware (to me it basically is)

But other than her, we are talking 15+ years of over 12 people using dozens of Macs to do basically everything in their work/home lives.

No viruses. No malware

The concern on this front is mostly just FUD that Apple is helping to stir up

 

[nastysailboat]

There is, I’m not disagreeing with that. But there’s not “so much” malware on macOS.

I would say there is more on Mac than there is on iOS

 

[boss.king]

I would say there is more on Mac than there is on iOS

There is more, but both are negligible.

 

[nastysailboat]

There is more, but both are negligible.

I disagree

 

[boss.king]

I disagree

?