Slashdot Mirror
Kaspersky Lab Files Antitrust Complaint Against Apple Over App Store Policy (macrumors.com)
Cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab has filed an antitrust complaint against Apple with the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service relating to the company's App Store distribution policy. From a report: Kaspersky's complaint is specifically to do with Apple's removal of the Kaspersky Safe Kids app. In a blog post on the Kaspersky website, the firm says it received notice from Apple last year that the app, which had been in the App Store for three years, did not meet App Store guidelines owing to the use of configuration profiles. Kaspersky was told by Apple that it would need to remove these profiles for the app to pass review and remain in the App Store, but the Russian firm had argued this action essentially crippled the app. "For us, that would mean removing two key features from Kaspersky Safe Kids: app control and Safari browser blocking." The first allows parents to specify which apps kids can't run based on the App Store's age restrictions, while the second allows the hiding of all browsers on the device so that web pages can only be accessed in the Kaspersky Safe Kids app's built-in secure browser.
Pretty sure they won't win. It is Apple's garden, you want in you do what they want. They reserve the right to kick you out at any time for any reason, including no reason at all.
YEA! I want apple to Allow apps, that can change the configuration of my phone and change embedded security settings!
Oh wait... I don't
I want trust of Apps on the App store will work on my phone and not damage my experience with it. This is a phone device which is always on connected to often an insecure network. I am actually surprised that there hasn't been a major iPhone vulnerability that was widely taken advantage of. I expect it is partially due to Apple Strict App store policy.
However if I need to do real work, and run real programs, I do it on my PC not my phone.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
BareBones doesn’t distribute BBEdit through the App Store for somewhat similar reasons - certain functionality isn’t allowed for App Store apps. I think with BBEdit it has to do with command line tools and possibly having the ability to edit files which need admin permissions to access.
Of course BBEdit was already well entrenched before the App Store even existed, so not being in the App Store is unlikely to impact their bottom line (note: they did have an App Store presence for a while). It might not be as easy for newer companies. To be honest, though, I don’t know what percentage of software on the average Mac comes from the App Store versus other more traditional sources. I don’t use the Store much, but then I’ve been doing this for quite a while.
#DeleteChrome
As a parent I've spent months investigating Apple's built-in settings that provide me with control of the phone while my children learn self-control. What I've found:
1. Reporting of screen time is spotty. I've got 4 boys. 2 of their phones has never (iPhone 7s) reported, 1 occasionally reports (5), and 1 usually reports (6).
2. The time controls are embarassingly easy to circumvent. They routinely exceed the alloted time and occasionally well over.
3. There is no way to force them to wifi when at home where I can filter sites so I've have to rely on Apple's controls (which are already suspect) and have no easy way of log review to know the controls ARE working.
And that's what an anti-trust court is going to determine - it's not whether Apple has a monopoly, its whether they are abusing their position.
Sure, it's a walled garden on only Apple products, but it's a large part of the overall app market and a significant amount of revenue - a court could certainly place limits on what Apple can and can't do in its own garden, if it finds Apple is abusing its position as gatekeeper.
This is going to happen in the EU in the next year or so as well - I think Apple has something to worry about.
Aside from the fact that every jailbreak done on an iOS device is an exploit of a vulnerability, including lots of early ones where you just had to visit a website to jailbreak, App Store breaches are fairly regular, you just seemed to have tuned them out.
And that's when Apple isn't doing stuff like allowing apps to secretly record your screen, without your knowledge and without any guarantee that your personal information is secure.
Configuration profiles offer a lot of control of a device, and can pose asecurity risk. Nothing really prevents a developer from distributing the app and configuration profile independently though, just makes it harder for the end user. If all the functionality is really in the profile though, it becomes easy to bypass the sales mechanism.
First link I found on the subject: https://www.howtogeek.com/1761...
No lie needed - Apple only cracked down on it after it was exposed. Up to that point, Apple explicitly allowed it, as all the apps using it had to pass App Store reviews multiple times, so they had Apples express permission to use it.
This is something that that walled garden is supposed to prevent - but it didn't.
I think you missed the bit, where this matter was going to be settled in a Russia court and not a US one. I am pretty sure Kaspersky will win. The Apple solution, will inevitably end up being different stores for different countries. So Kaspersky software will sell in the Russian Apple store but not in any other.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen