SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Today the Electronic Frontier Foundation launched a new app that will make it easier for people to take action on digital rights issues using their phone. The app allows folks to connect to their action center quickly and easily, using a variety of mobile devices. Sadly, though, they had to leave out Apple devices and the folks who use them.
Why? "Because we could not agree to the outrageous terms in Apple’s Developer Agreement and Apple’s DRM requirements. As we have been saying for years now, the Developer Agreement is bad for developers and users alike."
The EFF has a petition to try to get Apple to change their abusive and anti-competitive policies. The EFF does a lot of good work defending everyone's rights and freedoms online. Consider signing it. Note: you can sign on any browser, including mobile browsers on an iPhone
(Score: 3, Informative) by pendorbound on Friday January 09 2015, @03:32PM
There’s nothing in the Developer’s agreement that prevents EFF from producing their app for iOS. This is purely EFF on an ideological high horse. They’re *not* going to win this one, so end users suffer because EFF can’t acknowledge that some functional compromises are reasonably acceptable. Doing nothing if you can’t get everything 100% your way is not a reasonable posture in any exchange involving compromise between two parties.
Their petition doesn’t cite chapter & verse in the agreement, but at least the last time I read the thing cover to cover (a year or so ago I think), it didn’t impose a gag order about the agreement itself or on talking about jailbreaking.
It *does* require Apple to approve all updates. This is unequivocally a GoodThing(TM). Compare the prevalence of Android versus iOS malware. Apple’s review process is without a doubt responsible for increased functional security of iOS users.
It also requires all apps to be DRM’d. BFD… If you don’t want the DRM, publish the source, and anyone who wants to can either jailbreak or pay the $99 for developer certs and compile your source for their own devices. The fact that 99% of users can’t modify your app realistically has nothing to do with DRM restrictions and everything to do with the fact that 99% of smart phone users don’t know what a compiler or source code even is. The DRM does not serve as a functional barrier to anyone who has the understanding to make productive use of the source code. Anyone who knows how to compile can either figure out how to jailbreak or (given they own a $700 cellphone) can probably scratch up an extra $99 for developer keys.
Would it be better if there were a highly secured way to side-load apps without paying money to Apple? Maybe.
Does that make any difference to most users? Nope.
Could the majority of users keep their phones secure if there was an easy/free way to side load? Not a chance in hell. If you think they could, please see the WireLuker malware. That was essentially Apple-independent side loading by way of a compromised Enterprise signing key. End result? Tons of infected phones. The vast majority of smart phone users lack the technological expertise to make informed decisions related to running arbitrary executable code on their devices. Leaving that decision to Apple certainly places restrictions on those users. The trade off is for significantly enhanced security. It’s a judgement call whether that tradeoff is in the user’s benefit.
The alternative is Android for those who don’t believe the tradeoff is in their benefit. It’s dishonest of EFF to make this out as a case where Apple is restricting users’ choice. Users have made the choice for the security versus flexibility tradeoff in Apple’s favor. EFF is being pedantic here at best.
See also WireLuker malware: http://www.macrumors.com/2014/11/05/wirelurker-malware-affecting-macs-ios-devices/ [macrumors.com]
(Score: 1) by HiThere on Friday January 09 2015, @05:16PM
Based on prior comments, it appears that if the application were made for use on the Apple, it could *ONLY* be distributed via the Apple store. If the EFF accepted those terms, I'd be rather reluctant to trust them. Now if someone were to take their software and use it as a basis for an app to be distributed via the Apple store, I'd be rather surprised if they didn't allow that, though it would be better to either do a thorough re-write or to get their approval ahead of time. (As the license holder, they are allowed to issue the software under multiple licenses, and GPL licenses with waivers of various terms have been used before, though I'm thinking of Gnat rather than the EFF.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 10 2015, @03:39AM
Your post makes me sad.
Apple, Intel, Sony, etc. adding back-doors and controlling how you use the hardware you supposedly OWN is pathetic and dangerous. No, Apple acting as gatekeeper for apps (and updates) available to users is NOT a good thing. It IS censorship (Apple even refused a comic strip app since it was politically edgy).