'Sign in with Apple' mandatory for all apps with third-party sign-in options
Apple's new "Sign in with Apple" login feature that debuts with iOS 13 later this year will be mandatory for all apps that offer third-party sign-in options to users, the company said in an update to developers on Monday.
Apple in a post to its Developer news webpage outlines a handful of updates to the App Store Review Guidelines, noting changes to the ruleset that impact app makers and their wares.
Among the modifications is upcoming support for "Sign in with Apple," a newly announced user authentication feature that enables streamlined access to apps and websites.
The single sign-on feature was touted onstage as a safe and secure alternative to ubiquitous solutions Facebook and Google, but the company failed to mention that developers offering those third-party sign-in options, among others, will be required to also integrate Apple's system.
"Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year," Apple said.
The feature allows users to create a new account with supporting apps, websites and services without exposing potentially sensitive private information. Unlike existing solutions, "Sign in with Apple" users are able to authenticate via Face ID or Touch ID and filter what information is passed on to the provider, greatly reducing their online footprint.
Unique to Apple's method is a specialized email forwarding subsystem that allows users to mask their personal address with an anonymized version generated on a per-app or service basis. The strategy not only ensures privacy, but also a means to completely terminate communications with an entity when an account is closed.
Apple in a post to its Developer news webpage outlines a handful of updates to the App Store Review Guidelines, noting changes to the ruleset that impact app makers and their wares.
Among the modifications is upcoming support for "Sign in with Apple," a newly announced user authentication feature that enables streamlined access to apps and websites.
The single sign-on feature was touted onstage as a safe and secure alternative to ubiquitous solutions Facebook and Google, but the company failed to mention that developers offering those third-party sign-in options, among others, will be required to also integrate Apple's system.
"Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year," Apple said.
The feature allows users to create a new account with supporting apps, websites and services without exposing potentially sensitive private information. Unlike existing solutions, "Sign in with Apple" users are able to authenticate via Face ID or Touch ID and filter what information is passed on to the provider, greatly reducing their online footprint.
Unique to Apple's method is a specialized email forwarding subsystem that allows users to mask their personal address with an anonymized version generated on a per-app or service basis. The strategy not only ensures privacy, but also a means to completely terminate communications with an entity when an account is closed.
Comments
The ability to mask the real email address is not a new technology. Namecheap.com's WhoisGuard feature is the same approach which masks real email address with random generated email address and it changes every 7 days (at max setting).
I don't anticipate a strong user behaviour for choosing Facebook/Google/Twitter sign in due to prior investment in those platforms as you have described. Users already have ample means to share and engage content into those platforms without signing in. I see the primary benefit of single sign in has always been about reducing the friction into using account-only features.
Facebook and Google were very smart in identifying this user insight early and deploying service as a means to drive engagement to their, otherwise tangentially related, platforms. The fact that it adds literally no other features to your facebook (or former G+) account is more proof that it's all about the seamless experience and not about bringing any tangible value to your facebook/etc. experience.
At the end of the day, providing consumers with an option to rid themselves of facebook is a good thing. It's not normal for such a service, let alone one shown to be so abusive, to be this ingrained into society and the web.
The primary reason developers use FB sign-in is to reduce signup friction, but Apple sign-in accomplishes the same thing without requiring users to give up their privacy.
Any Apple user can potentially benefit from this. Not just the ones who buy the next product. This is what sets Apple apart.
FB/Google logins have always annoyed me and it's great to see that Apple will now force a third option. I can see myself using that one, as I do not trust FB or Google at all.
People trust Apple more. They’ll adopt it.
Your short posting history reveals your agenda. Your FUD is nonsense and wasted here.
I would imagine for a well-designed app it should not be a problem. Your internal (to the app) user ID remains the same, it’s just the external service used to verify and return authenticated status that has changed.
No. You’re confusing requiring the app devs to offer Sign-in With Apple with requiring users to use it.
What people seem to have missed is the convenience of FaceID to log in. This will make login simple and faster. I'm sure TouchID will also be supported.
Add that in and I see more people using Apple than FB/Google.
Ummm WHY?
Either option logs you into the same content. What a ridiculous attempt to troll a blessing and ground-breaking innovation from Apple.
To be honest, I'm perplexed by Apple's move. Because it doesn't feel necessary. I think Apple would win this war hands down. They don't need an army on their side here, they've got God on their side already here.
I didn't mention why Apple could be defeated commercially here. I'll not explain that to make y'all think. Just remember, there are commercial forces even bigger than Apple in this world.
As I said, Apple being an option is a good thing. It's just not one that I think is going to move the needle that much.