Apple’s Federighi lashes out against app sideloading in a single note keynote – TechCrunch

[ad_1]

Apple’s head of software engineering Craig Federighi took his time on the Web Summit 2021 conference stage to air a long list of complaints against the proposed requirements for sideloading apps on the iPhone, describing the practice as “gold rush for the malware industry”.

It is a topic of discussion not only because there is lively debate on the subject (although there is), but because the EU Digital Markets Act, if implemented as currently envisaged, could impose a method for putting apps on iPhone circumventing Apple’s long-standing app Storage and review process.

CEO Tim Cook already disclosed the company’s stance (tough against this, of course) in June when he said the rule could “destroy iPhone security”. So it’s no big surprise that Federighi supports the boss, but devoting practically an entire speech on stage to a series of arguably misleading and totally unchallenged statements offers the viewer slight notes of desperation.

Apple’s approach of manually reviewing every app and update has its problems, but for the purposes of malware prevention it’s a pretty good solution, that’s fair to say. But it is one thing to say that your method is better, it is quite another to say that other methods should never, ever be allowed.

“There is a clear consensus here, and that is that sideloading undermines security and puts people’s data at risk,” he said. It may very well be true, but it’s not the only consensus. There is also some sort of consensus between developers and users – not to mention antitrust authorities – that Apple has exerted a squeeze on the iOS app market that long ago became more of a hindrance than an asset to the global market.

“Our mission is to provide people with a choice of what we consider the best,” Federighi said, just before embarking on a tirade against certain choices. In his view, offering users the ability to sideload apps “would deprive consumers of the choice of a more secure platform.”

More choice is less choice, get it! He then hurried to a rather laborious metaphor that he hoped would resonate with the homeowners in the crowd. We mention it all here:

You made a choice. You wanted to protect your family, so you bought a really safe house with a great security system. And you are really happy you did. Because since you first moved in, thieves have never been more creative or more abundant. And in the real world of cybersecurity, this couldn’t be more true. Attackers virtually disguise themselves as postmen who build underground tunnels and try to scale the walls of your backyard with grappling hooks. In this world, some of your neighbors are having repeated break-ins, but the house you have has kept you safe.

But then, that new law is passed. And in the noble quest for more optimized parcel delivery, your city requires everyone to build an always-open side door on the ground floor of their homes. Some of your neighbors love this idea. But you’re not so sure, because you know that once a side door is built, anyone can walk through it. The safe house you chose now has a fatal flaw in its security system and thieves are really good at exploiting it. Simply put, sideloading is that unlocked side door, and requesting it on iPhone would give cybercriminals an easy entry point into your device. Now, we think nobody wants it, least of all policy makers who intend to offer users more choice and more protection.

Instead of creating a choice, it would open a Pandora’s box of unrevised malware-infested software and deny everyone the option of a safe iPhone approach.

This imagery, however vivid, is somehow below reality. The choice to have and use that port will depend a lot on the users and Apple has the responsibility and the opportunity to explain the risks of that choice very clearly. Google somehow failed there, Federighi pointed out, but it looks like something Apple could simply improve on. Most users won’t need or want to transfer apps, and even if they did, the idea isn’t to create a wild west – which, by the way, most computers have been for a long time. – but to create space in the market for competition.

If we go back to our “favorite house” as he called it, it’s worth noting that Federighi omitted to mention that that large secure front door has a special apple-shaped hole through which only Apple-branded packages can be delivered. It’s not just about putting another hole in the house, it’s about having literally any alternative to a system – an effective system, but a relic from another era – that has been the only option for a decade and has made it work. the already rich company is one of the richest in history.

There was a bit of fear and FUD to go along with the half-truths that Federighi was peddling on stage. Perhaps not the thought provoking speech audiences expected from someone so influential in technology.

They might just delay the inevitable, but clearly Apple will fight tooth and nail for the consumer’s right to choose what Apple has already chosen for them.

[ad_2]