• milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    61
    ·
    11 months ago

    I definitely like my computers (including my phone) being open to me, and I love having f-droid on Android.

    Even so, I think there’s a genuine case for security of a walled garden, even though I prefer the alternative.

    Having the option to install 3rd party is another attack surface, and gives a chance for the market - or authoritarian control - to to veer towards not being vetted by that walled garden.

    I.e. if a popular enough developer chooses not to publish through the app store, you either accept their personal guarantees or refuse to use that software. If your job or school decides not to… then what can you do, even if your school is not competent to keep up to date the security of their lowest-bidder bespoke app store?

    But if you can’t side-load, there is no option, which makes them use Apple’s one with its protection.

    I agree, that hasn’t turned out that way on Android… except for phones that don’t support Google Play. I hope it never does…

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      That would mean there’s no malware on closed stores, which is simply not true. Besides, you can allow more than one store and still have high security. More to the point Apple doesn’t care about protecting your rights, but their margins. More stores means lost profit and that’s the only thing Apple cares about.

      Also, assuming big companies are more capable of doing proper security is just flawed way of thinking. Just look at Sony whose hacking and leaking credit card numbers is approaching annual levels. If anything I’d say some security nut will do a significantly better job than Apple, because no company does something if they really don’t have to, especially Apple who will opt to glue piece of shoe rubber to push on GPU chip instead of losing a penny on changing soldering paste. And it’s not an isolated case either, on iPhone Max series they removed a single drop of adhesive which made sure chips were strengthened when phone bent slightly. They saved pennies there but that caused user’s phones to lose touch on displays.

      Just repeating their PR statement doesn’t mean that’s the correct way to go.

      • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        Fair point, but,

        assuming big companies are more capable of doing proper security is just flawed way of thinking

        Well, Apple and Google have a pretty good track record on that, as records go. Sure, a security nutjob might do better; and the FOSS community has done some amazing and well-trusted things, but not every contender is the same.

        As a bit of a oblique example, I have games in Epic store. Now they (Epic) want to install kernel-level drivers, which I’m not sure I’m willing to accept. If they simply weren’t able, they’d simply do without. I’d rather have Microsoft’s malware than Microsoft’s plus Epic’s. (Side note, apparently I can use an alternative FOSS launcher so that’s great!)

        And still, I prefer it this way - I’d like to have kernel level control on my computer than for Microsoft to ‘protect’ me by disallowing it. But my non-techie friends? I’m not always sure. Especially those in more hostile environments.

        (As another aside, anything that matters on my computer is in Linux and encrypted; but the recent exploit using a bios splash image opens up interesting new inter-platform vulnerabilities.)

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          Track record is all that matters. Not a guarantee but a good indicator. Still, Apple is opposing this not because of security but greed.

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Having the option to install 3rd party is another attack surface, and gives a chance for the market - or authoritarian control - to to veer towards not being vetted by that walled garden.

      Authoritarians are always going to be prefer authoritarian app stores where any app that threatens them can be swifty removed.

      Authoritarians rule in part via suppression of information. All governments can mandate that specific things be or not be installed on devices, it’s typically only authoritarians that are afraid of unknown things being installed on devices.

      • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        You’re forgetting that authorities don’t always work together. Authority sometimes threatens authority.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s true that Apple can swing their weight around in some markets. However, in places where the government is able to govern as they wish, e.g. China, the CCP gets their way every time in the end… And that’s pretty much how it goes with private companies vs governments. You either play by their rules or you seize to be a business in their jurisdiction.

    • systemglitch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I wish I could simply tell you that you are ignorant and you would think for a moment and recognize it. It’s not my crusade to educate you, and people don’t like realizing they are wrong, but now it’s out there for you to see, perhaps there is hope.