Linked by David Adams on Thu 24th Jun 2010 16:22 UTC, submitted by Governa
Thread beginning with comment 431459
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Why the App Store is not a revolution
by nt_jerkface on Fri 25th Jun 2010 18:31
in reply to "RE[4]: Why the App Store is not a revolution"
What do you call developer verification exactly ? Some kind of digital signing that (is supposed to) identify the guy who submitted the app?
Verify that the developer has a legal address and bank account. Requiring that the developer has a verified paypal account is an easy way of doing this. It's just an additional security precaution that deters criminals.
Allowing unverified submission from all parts of the world is too risky. Very little malware comes from the US and Western Europe and security policies should take this into account.




Member since:
2010-03-08
What do you call developer verification exactly ? Some kind of digital signing that (is supposed to) identify the guy who submitted the app ?
Moreover, I agree that the App store has an excellent security record... But it's just like Nokia's Ovi Store, Microsoft's Marketplace, Android's Market, RIM's I-don't-remembler-how-they-called-it or even the old $5 java games download pages in that respect : there are only little to no recorded exploits in each case, so we can't make conclusions yet. It'd be like saying "Oh, dammit, those mobile OSs are so much more secure than Windows !".
To get a good picture, we should have good data in the form of hundreds of recorded exploits. Which the mobile phone repository system does not have yet, because it's just an uninteresting target at the moment. Plus, it lacks global penetration on the market : at the moment, smartphones still are mostly used by geeks and some executives who want to show how rich they are because they can...
Edited 2010-06-25 10:30 UTC