Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Approves, Then Removes In-App Ad Blocker (reuters.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the mixed-signals dept.

Mickeycaskill writes: Apple has pulled a number of applications from the App Store, most notably the "Been Choice" ad blocker, because of concerns the methods they employ to rid adverts could compromise sensitive user data. iOS 9 allows for the installation of applications that block adverts in Safari, but other apps like Been Choice go one step further and let users remove adverts from applications – including Apple News. Been Choice routes traffic through a VPN to filter out adverts in some applications, but it this technique has attracted the attention of Apple, which is concerned user data could be exposed. Apple says it is working with developers to get their apps back up and Been is refining its application for resubmission. In any case, Been says users must opt-in for in-app ad blocking and that no data is stored on its servers.

85 comments

  1. Just wait for macos to have the same level of lock by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just wait for macos to have the same level of lock down and app store only.

  2. No need anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    APK's hosts file generator already blocks all the ads I don't want to see! This guy is a true genius!

    1. Re:No need anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Truth About APK

      Think about the last time you saw an APK post on slashdot. Did it look normal? Did it look quite how you remember them? If you were paying attention, you would have noticed that something was not quite the same.

      Wall Street has all but confirmed that they have rigged the markets according to instructions from Facebook, which has been under secret leadership by APK for over 2 years now.

      Is this really the world we want our children to grow up in?

      You may think free speech ensures your right to talk openly about APK's negative influence on our society, but his powerful HOSTS file along with the Black Panthers have, in the past, used crippling libel lawsuits to silence brave citizens who did exactly that.

      When confronted with evidence exposing the truth about WW1, the Black Panthers downplayed their role significantly.

      It's hard to find experts willing to speak truthfully about this.

      No moral person can in good conscience stand by while these injustices persist!

    2. Re:No need anyway by DanJ_UK · · Score: 2

      Fucking hell mate, you have way too much time on your hands.

      --
      - Dan
    3. Re:No need anyway by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      I have it on good authority that APK has the secret moon landing tapes where it shows Kubrik directing the so-called astronauts. Also APK smuggled the infant Obama from Kenyan into Hawaii just in time for him to be "born" there. Really my neighbor's friend's cousin's roomate's college ex-girlfriend was there.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  3. Re:Just wait for macos to have the same level of l by tepples · · Score: 1

    If OS X is locked down, on what OS will Apple allow people to run Xcode?

  4. At the end of the day ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0

    ... Apple decides that big data is more important than users' choice

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  5. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm the first guy in line to shit on Apple, but having an app that routes all traffic through some unknown server is a major security issue. Apple is right to pull this until they can figure out a way to make sure the user knows the implications and/or the server operator has no way of collecting data from the users routed through his/her VPN.

    1. Re:Good by nullchar · · Score: 2

      Silly they use an external VPN. On Android, local loopback VPNs like Mobiwol work great. All the apps's traffic goes through the VPN, which is local, so you can allow/deny on the fly (can filter foreground vs background too). Mobiwol could easily add some DNS-based blacklists (aka hosts file) and do add blocking plus firewall.

      One would have to really trust an external VPN provider to ship all your traffic through. Which if you run your own VPN service or do trust one, it's safer than sending all your plain-text data through random wifi or cell carriers.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even a local loopback VPN is potentially insecure. It's still a chunk of the 3rd party developer's code that can look at all of your SSL/TLS content.

    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple knows best? What a prick you are then. How about the device owner making up their own mind, eh?

    4. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is that all vpn apps sgould be banned because of potential issues?

    5. Re: Good by nullchar · · Score: 1

      It cannot inspect ssl/tls traffic unless you add certificate authorities, which may be impossible without root. Yes, the local VPN can inspect plain text traffic, intercept DNS resolution, and block outgoing connections- that's the point. Open source solutions are ideal for this case.

    6. Re: Good by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that all vpn apps sgould be banned because of potential issues?

      I think he's saying that apps which claim to be a Fluffy Kitty Screensaver (or any other type that doesn't explicitly indicate that it's a VPN) that route all your stuff through their servers should be banned.

      Which is true. I'd be pissed off if I found an 'ad blocker' app I'd downloaded was doing this.

    7. Re: Good by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      It cannot inspect ssl/tls traffic unless you add certificate authorities, which may be impossible without root.

      If you read the actual article, it would appear that's what they're doing.

    8. Re: Good by macs4all · · Score: 1

      It cannot inspect ssl/tls traffic unless you add certificate authorities, which may be impossible without root. Yes, the local VPN can inspect plain text traffic, intercept DNS resolution, and block outgoing connections- that's the point. Open source solutions are ideal for this case.

      Yeah, cuz everyone has the time/skill to pore through thousands of lines of code to find the one nicely-obscured call.

    9. Re: Good by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to be everyone. It can just as easily be one person.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  6. For general use? Hell no. by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The summary is horrific because it paints the pulling of these apps as negative when in fact it's one of the better demonstrations as to why non-technical people need a curated app store.

    Be honest, your mom or other family member is is not as technically knowledgeable tells you they installed an app that routes all mobile traffic through some VPN the developer runs (never mind how they knew enough to explain that to you!).

    Would you SERIOUSLY let that stay installed, or would you run to un-install it?

    This is nothing more than a giant security breach. If you really are STUPID enough to want to run all your traffic through some strangers VPN, you can do so easily with existing mobile VPN support on any platform. They can scrub ad blockers and run MITM attacks on your bank or what have you, but at least it would have required more effort on your part to get yourself into trouble.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:For general use? Hell no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is my problem with Apple/Google and now Microsoft... Each company makes it known they are collecting 'usage data', location, and monitoring content on device. Then virtually all have ways to remotely install anything they wish... ie: a backdoor into every device....

    2. Re: For general use? Hell no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I presume there are hundreds of VPN apps on the store. If I'm correct, why hasn't all of these apps been taken down?

      They do the same thing...

    3. Re: For general use? Hell no. by Morgon · · Score: 1

      Because one is a 'VPN app' and one is an 'Adblocker app'.

      Most people downloading and using a VPN app presumably know what a VPN is, and have control over which VPN service to use.
      Most people downloading and using Adblocker app (which are becoming ridiculously popular on the App Store) only see the setting to "enable blocking of in-App ads", and do not have control over which VPN service to use. Hell, the users may not even know a VPN is being employed - I don't know the messaging this app uses - but even if they did, do you think most people would understand why this is a bad thing?

      --
      [DISCLAIMER: This post is a work of satire and should not be misconstrued as a holy text upon which to base a religion.]
    4. Re:For general use? Hell no. by macs4all · · Score: 1

      The summary is horrific because it paints the pulling of these apps as negative when in fact it's one of the better demonstrations as to why non-technical people need a curated app store.

      Mods: Mod Parent UP. This is EXACTLY correct!

    5. Re:For general use? Hell no. by macs4all · · Score: 1

      This is my problem with Apple/Google and now Microsoft... Each company makes it known they are collecting 'usage data', location, and monitoring content on device. Then virtually all have ways to remotely install anything they wish... ie: a backdoor into every device....

      Not Apple, on either point.

      Prove it.

    6. Re: For general use? Hell no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is WAY worse than that. They install a root certificate on your phone too, and thus can man in the middle apps, even if they use SSL and trust the root certificates on the device (most of them).

    7. Re:For general use? Hell no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mods: Mod Parent DOWN. This is REALLY redundant!

    8. Re:For general use? Hell no. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Apple asks you up-front when you turn on the phone, if you ever want to send location or usage data to Apple. You can say know if you care. Also Apple anonymizes that data, and unlike Google will not share it with advertisers.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  7. Honestly... by hyperar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't own, and probably never will, an Apple product, i simply don't think they worth what they cost, but i got to give a thumbs up on this one, i don't know how many of the app's users know (and understand) what was going on, and while there isn't any evidence that this actually happened, you only can "trust" they don't. Maybe if this app was advertise as such, it may be acceptable, because the user choose to trust them or not.

    1. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he doesn't think flagship android phones are worth what they cost, either.

  8. Re: Apple can't burn fast enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... he posted from his iphone ...

  9. The only people asking for that are Apple haters. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    You guys have been begging Apple to do that for years. Apple's not interested in doing it, Apple's customers aren't interested.

  10. App Developers may have good intentions but.. by Striikerr · · Score: 1

    The App developers may have good intentions around this and never contemplate using their pipeline from enduser's devices. The issue then becomes how solid they are in terms of security as this opens them up as a big target for others to compromise the user's traffic and device. This becomes a very weak point in the security walls and efforts which Apple has been building and would most certainly become a focus of parties interested in compromising iOS devices. We can't put that level of trust into just anyone who puts an ad blocker up on the App store and even if it were a well reputed company, we have seen how some companies who have this level of access to computers (anti-virus programs which install root certs) fail to be bullet proof.

    IOS App store is a curated environment and everyone knows this and counts upon it to keep their devices as safe as possible. Apple identified this content blocker as a problem because of how it is structured and pulled it.This is a good thing. It's no different than Apple force disabling Adobe Flash on OS X when vulnerabilities are discovered in it (for example).

  11. Best solution... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Jailbreak and install a hosts file. This is why I only buy NEXUS phones because they can always be easily rooted to eliminate all freaking ads.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Best solution... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      I would be right along with you if only nexus phones met both my minimum must-haves of an sd card slot and user-replaceable batteries.
      Meanwhile I use cyanogenmod on an old Samsung S3 and can do exactly the same.

  12. Re:The Truth About Apple by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    I love your bizzarro rants and will be compiling them into book form for sale on Amazon.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  13. There's a public proxy that does something similar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ipad.speedmeup.net works on apps and, combined with an ios safari filter, can dramatically speed up app and browsing experiences.

    I wouldn't want to use it with any device that does banking or other sensitive tasks, and I haven't been able to verify who manages the proxy to gauge their trustworthiness . Bruce Schneier would probably smack me for even suggesting its use.

  14. Your theory is contradicted by the summary. by Brannon · · Score: 2

    Do you find that most of your theories end up being wrong? If so then maybe it's time to acquire some reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.

  15. Does that force it off your phone too? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    Android fanboy here... just wondering - when Apple pulls an app from the store, does it force it to uninstall from your device(s) as well?

    1. Re:Does that force it off your phone too? by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Android fanboy here... just wondering - when Apple pulls an app from the store, does it force it to uninstall from your device(s) as well?

      Nope.

      So far, if Apple even has the ability to uninstall an app, they've never used it. They've never used their ability to disable apps, either (though limited to ones which use CoreLocation, since the disabling code is in there, so if you never touch GPS...).

      All Apple has done is basically prevent users from redownloading apps. But even that's not as big a limitation - you can still back up an app using iTunes. Or download the app using iTunes and install it via iTunes (recommended method for large apps). Even if the app is removed, as long as you have the IPA (the app file, similar to apk for Android) file somewhere, and iTunes is available, you can install it via iTunes. iTunes doesn't check - as long as the app is in your name and account, iTunes will install it on your device long after the developer has disappeared.

      This was how users of a particular (medical) assistance app kept using it - after the developer has been sued by some larger company or patent violations that forced Apple to remove the app, the users backed up the app via iTunes and use that to install it on every new device.

      The only thing is, it's unmaintained, so if it doesn't work with a new OS version...

      And if you wanted, using iTunes you can back up old versions of apps too, so if they try to screw you or add stuff like ads or IAPs (in app purchase) you don't like, you can always revert by installing that particular version of the app.

    2. Re:Does that force it off your phone too? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Android fanboy here... just wondering - when Apple pulls an app from the store, does it force it to uninstall from your device(s) as well?

      Nope.

      So far, if Apple even has the ability to uninstall an app, they've never used it. They've never used their ability to disable apps, either (though limited to ones which use CoreLocation, since the disabling code is in there, so if you never touch GPS...).

      All Apple has done is basically prevent users from redownloading apps. But even that's not as big a limitation - you can still back up an app using iTunes. Or download the app using iTunes and install it via iTunes (recommended method for large apps). Even if the app is removed, as long as you have the IPA (the app file, similar to apk for Android) file somewhere, and iTunes is available, you can install it via iTunes. iTunes doesn't check - as long as the app is in your name and account, iTunes will install it on your device long after the developer has disappeared.

      This was how users of a particular (medical) assistance app kept using it - after the developer has been sued by some larger company or patent violations that forced Apple to remove the app, the users backed up the app via iTunes and use that to install it on every new device.

      The only thing is, it's unmaintained, so if it doesn't work with a new OS version...

      And if you wanted, using iTunes you can back up old versions of apps too, so if they try to screw you or add stuff like ads or IAPs (in app purchase) you don't like, you can always revert by installing that particular version of the app.

      Extremely Informative, thanks!

    3. Re:Does that force it off your phone too? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Awesome! I didn't realize Apple users could pseudo side-load apps via iTunes. I also didn't hear about this medial app fiasco. I'll have to Google that one - sounds like an interesting story.

  16. I'm seriously considering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    setting up a proxy server that I point my and my family mobile devices to that strips all ads, beacons, tracking cookies, whatnot, from the data stream. I've been reading on this and it's feasible and not app dependent.

    1. Re: I'm seriously considering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did this a couple months back. I love it. I used
      Openbsd and squid. Many tutorials out there. I noticed bandwidth reduction of about 10-20% on my whole network when the squid server went live. I have about 5 mobile devices and 2 computers. All of them sit behind a proxy. For extra security I also setup a firewall in openbsd using packet filtering.

      I was using adblocker extensions and such but my mobiles always had ads. This was before they allowed ad blockers. I finally got fed up and setup a transparent proxy. If you are interested just google transparent squid proxy openbsd.

  17. Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

    I'm a firm believer that advertising should not be blocked or redirected to another advertisement service. I believe this because the application developers depend on this to obtain some reward for an application they developed at no "direct" cost to the users.

    The argument I keep hearing is: Well the advertisements are annoying.
    My answer back is: You don't have to use their application or service. In many cases the ad free apps are available at a small cost.

    IMO developers and broadcasters are allowed to monetize their efforts.

    1. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The argument I keep hearing is: Well the advertisements are annoying.~

      Well you're not listening very hard. The big issue today is that ad networks are spreading malware. It's now necessary to block ads *as a security measure* (my company blocks them at our gateway for precisely that reason). If you want to be part of a botnet that's your choice.

    2. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I posted this response in another article this morning, but it's valid as an answer here as well.

      No one clicks on ads. Money is made from imprints. This is why news sites, which used to display articles on one page, now, quite unnecessarily, spread them across multiple pages for one reason -- ad imprints. More clicks, more eyeballs. It's disingenuous. Advertising is parasitic in nature. There is no obligation that visitors view the ads. None. The website owner may wish for this so he can make money by doing nothing, but if you want to make money, erect a paywall. If your content is compelling, people will pay a couple of dollars a year for your content. If you have enough users, you'll make come good coin. Failing this, don't blame me if I don't wish to have what has become the largest vector for malware presented to me.

      Like you, I'm in IT for almost 20 years now. I know a thing or two about how the Internet works and better yet, how it should work. The desire to "monetize" everything is what is wrong with the Internet. Not everything has to be about money, nor should it be. If your living is your website, the content needs to be compelling enough to charge for it. Free anything is just that. Free is never the best unless it's love. Free is only good if it's given freely. Expecting users to allow the largest vector for malware in order to view your "free" website is not a bargain. You "metaphorically" are exposing users to malware and evil redirects for money. You may not be knowingly doing this, but ad networks are the darlings of malware authors because they are low-hanging fruit. No one secures their ad networks well. Ask me how I know this. Paid IT security analyst who has done more NIST 800-53 work than enough. I have scanned more networks for companies to show them how insecure they really are. I have pointed out, over and over again, that security is not a product -- it's a process -- one that ad networks couldn't care less about because they get no ROI from security measures.

      Until ad companies wise us, stop tracking users, employ proper security processes, and stop selling and trading information, they are parasites and need to be treated as such.

    3. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Please go die in a fire.

      --
      Good-bye
    4. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lots of misunderstanding the arguments, and shifting the goalposts.

      The problem is not with ads. The problem with the types of ads. Too often we have ads that pop up, takeover the screen, resize, use scripts that bog down the browser, even act as vectors for malware. I don't give a shit if advertisements pay the bills, that need doesn't give them the right to run that kind of stuff, potentially putting people's systems at risk, without some sort of response.

       

      My answer back is: You don't have to use their application or service.

      And my response back: You had to use it first to know they had the ad problem, stupid.

    5. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I'm a firm believer that advertising should not be blocked or redirected to another advertisement service. I believe this because the application developers depend on this to obtain some reward for an application they developed at no "direct" cost to the users.

      Alternatively, they could get a real job, producing real products that real people are really willing to pay for.

    6. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by gnupun · · Score: 1

      The big issue today is that ad networks are spreading malware. It's now necessary to block ads *as a security measure*

      Then spend a dollar or some minor amount in-app purchase and the ads are gone. But I bet most iphone users won't spend a cent. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

      By all means, keep coming up with more BS to justify your piracy.

    7. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said anything about piracy? I'm probably missing something here.

    8. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ^ There's this...

      So many people think they should attach ads to websites, sit back and rake in the cash. Sorry. Very few websites enjoy this level of income that would make this even remotely viable as serious income source.

      I see the adblocking and ad industries entering into a war very soon. Personally, I block all ads, cookies, tracking beacons, HTTP/S referrer, visited link histories, you name it. I'm sure websites hate me, but it's not my concern. Ads are the singlemost easy way to get infected with malware in 2015. No, thank you.

    9. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would anyone want to support proprietary software anyway?

    10. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first third-party advertisement that appears in an app results in immediate uninstallation of that app (along with any other apps from the same the developer), loss of any sales the developer might have been trying to make, and no feedback.

      I don't pay for "ad removal". I find someone else to do business with.

    11. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, they could get a real job, producing real products that real people are really willing to pay for.

      Ahhh, so you fall in the category of "sense of entitlement".

      And why don't you defined real product for me because last I checked, apps are real products and so are online services.

      The fact that you are using the application and are blocking ads is sign that you are interested in the product but aren't willing to pay (sense of entitlement). That's where you way of thinking falls flat on it's face.

    12. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Well you're not listening very hard. The big issue today is that ad networks are spreading malware. It's now necessary to block ads *as a security measure* (my company blocks them at our gateway for precisely that reason). If you want to be part of a botnet that's your choice.

      Yes, because that's the reason people use ad blockers... SURE....

      Whatever floats you boat!

    13. Re:Is it me or Ad blockers BS by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      So many people think they should attach ads to websites, sit back and rake in the cash

      That isn't your decision to make. If you don't want the ads, pay for the premium service and if it's not available don't use the service. It's really that simple.

      Ads are the singlemost easy way to get infected with malware in 2015.

      I'm sure you're right (for users with outdated browsers) but you need to back you claims with numbers from a reputable source.

      The adverse effect of ad blocking is poor browsing experience for those who have it (when countermeasures are in place) AND the reduced value of ad prints. The results of reduced ad value is that more are published to accomplish the same level of revenue (in some cases sufficient and other cases abundant). At the end of the day, resources and labour for the work done must be paid out and if revenues come from ads, it just means the quality of the services you use will go down as revenues diminish OR you will be forced to pay to gain access to the service.
      Fortunately people like you will have a harder time making use of these ad blocking tools as many of the ad providers are shifting efforts towards making sure their ads make it to the viewer.

  18. Re:All in who 'loses' money by halivar · · Score: 1

    Apple says it is working with developers to get their apps back up and Been is refining its application for resubmission.

    It's in TFS.

  19. Probably not... but maybe able to by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Android fanboy here... just wondering - when Apple pulls an app from the store, does it force it to uninstall from your device(s) as well?

    I've had one or two apps on an iPhone that were in the store and then got pulled for various reasons (nothing malware related). The app remained on my phone and functional. Whether Apple has the ability to reach in and remove the app I cannot say but it wouldn't surprise me if they did have the ability. We've seen Amazon do that with their Kindle and obviously it is technologically possible. I've not heard of them doing this yet and I presume it would be newsworthy if they did.

  20. Re:Just wait for macos to have the same level of l by spire3661 · · Score: 0

    How does this drivel get modded insightful? Sent from my mac mini.

    --
    Good-bye
  21. Re:Just wait for macos to have the same level of l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    XCode will be Windows only.

  22. Re:You don't pay enough by gnupun · · Score: 3, Informative

    You don't pay enough to use a phone without ads.

    Are people really this stupid? You pay a lot of money for the iphone. But who pays the developers who develop these millions of useless to useful apps? Not Apple and not the consumers either (the vast majority refuse to spend even 99 cents on apps). Therefore, the developer has a better chance to make money via ads.

  23. Re:Just wait for macos to have the same level of l by macs4all · · Score: 0

    Just wait for macos to have the same level of lock down and app store only.

    How long have we seen this Hater Meme?

  24. Re:You don't pay enough by 0123456 · · Score: 2

    And the reason there are so many half-assed, barely useful apps on the app store is precisely because they can 'make money via ads'.

    Without ads, the actual useful apps would be much easier to find than they are under the tsunami of adware crap.

  25. Re:You don't pay enough by gnupun · · Score: 1

    It's easy to distinguish between crap and good apps: the star ratings, number of downloads and user review comments. It doesn't take a lot of time to filter and get the good apps.

  26. Re:Apple can't burn fast enough by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    No Apple may be evil and I hate them but I also want them to stay (don't expect me to help them though).
    We may love to make fun of them for marketing every little feature as revolutionary but we must admit that they aren't without technical merit. And most importantly, they create competition. Without Apple, I don't think Android would be half as good as it is now.
    And while I love Google, I think it is a good thing that Apple (and Microsoft, and Facebook, ...) are here to keep them in check.

  27. Re:You don't pay enough by 0123456 · · Score: 1

    Yes, because people pushing out crap apps to bring in ad revenue would never post fake reviews.

  28. Re:You don't pay enough by gnupun · · Score: 2

    And how will the fake reviews drown out the torrent of bad reviews/ratings from real users?

  29. Re:You don't pay enough by 0123456 · · Score: 1

    And how will the fake reviews drown out the torrent of bad reviews/ratings from real users?

    You're new to this, aren't you?

    I can't speak for the App Store, but one of the worst movies I've ever seen has a near five-star rating on Amazon, because they keep pushing fake reviews, and reporting every real review to get them removed. If those people put a tenth as much effort into making movies as they do into faking reviews, they'd be millionaires.

  30. Re:You don't pay enough by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

    Oh, people would pay for them if there was no alternative in the app store. This is kind of what I'm hoping to happen -- adblocking kills that industry, and people can start charging real money for software again. More money in my industry (software development), and a better user experience. I'd really have no issue spending $5-$50 for most of the apps on my phone if they aren't showing me ads or tracking me, and having them compete on features.

    Until that day comes I have no problem blocking ads to do my part to kill this monster.

  31. MITM attack execution by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Downloaded BEEN when first posted online. I expected it too good to last. Here's why:

    Websites are unusable due to advertisers banner attacks. Apps are quickly monetizing to un-usability too. BEEN stops that Shit! Not only did I download, install and turn on BEEN, gladly, I added VPN capability to Stop app advertising pollution.

    Why? BEEN is my MITM gatekeeper. I have the Internet back ad-free and yes Shit from advertisers is trapped before It can waste my time in-app or online.

    Advertising is POLLUTION. Stop that Shit at source. BEEN.app Thank you. Now I have only one MITM. No worry. It's BEEN. There's a problem? I have one place to go. BEEN is scrubbing Internet emissions at the source like smokestack emissions does for EV automobiles.

    It's a fair trade-off no advertising pollution, screen contaminants and network degradation in exchange for a MITM scrubber at the source. Or you can follow the automobile tailpipe analogy spewing Shit out every user's car by the millions.

    BEEN there. Thank you VW you lying builders of "Clean Diesel" advertising. Now I have control. I know my weakness. I know who it is. Ain't beholden advertising Shit ever again.

  32. Re:You don't pay enough by macs4all · · Score: 2

    Yes, because people pushing out crap apps to bring in ad revenue would never post fake reviews.

    Sure they can. But I personally use the same guidelines I do when doing any online shopping with "User Reviews":

    Items with less than 10 User Reviews are very suspect. I pretty much assume those are fake Reviews (especially if there are good and bad ones, or all good ones) and skip those Items completely.

    Items with 10-50 User Reviews are less suspect, but I generally read all the reviews.

    Items with greater than 50 User Reviews are generally pretty valid.

    Sure, someone can get a few of his friends to post a fake Review; but almost NO ONE can come up with 50 (or even 10) individual User IDs that will be willing to shill for someone.

    Of course there are exceptions; but I haven't personally gotten burned yet with those guidelines on any product I've purchased online. Oh, and I do (generally lots of) additional research, too, above and beyond User Reviews. I also look at the "Distribution" of the Reviews, and make sure I read ALL the "Bad" ones, just because.

  33. Thank-You... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & "pats self on back"/agreement 110%...

    * :)

    APK

    P.S.=> We do our best... apk

  34. Ads steal our speed & infect us #1/2... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a SMALL partial only sample of OpenBid/realtime bidding & other ad networks malware makers have taken advantage of to infect you with:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.wired.com/techbiz/m...

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023...

    http://news.slashdot.org/story...

    http://www.itworld.com/securit...

    http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...

    http://www.zdnet.com/ad-exec-o...

    http://search.slashdot.org/sto...

    http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...

    http://www.securityweek.com/ea...

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    APK

    P.S.=> See subject & those links (+ ads not only INFECT US, but STEAL BANDWIDTH & SPEED WE PAY FOR MONTHLY+ track us too)

    ... apk

  35. Ads steal our speed & infect us #2/2... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's yet another SMALL partial only sample of OpenBid/realtime bidding & other ad networks malware makers have taken advantage of to infect you with:

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/0...

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/0...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://apple.slashdot.org/stor...

    APK

    P.S.=> See subject & those links (+ ads not only INFECT US, but STEAL BANDWIDTH & SPEED WE PAY FOR MONTHLY+ track us too)

    ... apk

  36. Re: Just wait for macos to have the same level of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xcode will be authorized developers only, $4665/yr and per seat, subject to background checks and also otherwise at the discretion of Apple.

  37. Re: Just wait for macos to have the same level of by tepples · · Score: 1

    Applying Nintendo-class developer qualifications and overhead costs would just hand the market over to Windows and Android. Apple knows this.