If Apple is found to be negligent they need to pony up the cash to this guy
The guy was scammed and this is sad but saying it’s on Apple when the company misrepresented itself and then made a change to go undetected. It doesn’t look like Apple was negligent.
I’m not victim blaming but let’s say you had 600k cash that you wanted to put in a bank account. Would you just randomly put it in a website that you have never heard of or would you at the minimum research it beyond a generic star rating? Why would you not do this for another form of currency?
People with crypto need to be highly aware where they store their coin.
Well, I am victim-blaming here. Situations like this are literally the reason real banks for real currencies have FDIC oversight and mandatory deposit insurance, and why investment banks have SIPC oversight and insurance. This person intentionally opted out of that system. He decided to use unregulated banks, so the consequences of that decision are on him.
In agree. IMO cryptocurrencies are and always have been very questionable and one gets involved with them at their peril. Scam and cryptocurrency go hand in hand. Personally I won’t touch them with a ten foot pole.
Is this not a perfect demonstration for why all transactions need to go through Apple? I appreciate that this is bitcoin related, but one can’t help to see the analogy between Epic’s vision for the App store and the massive level of fraud that this invites.
Agreed. If Apple is forced to allow sideloaded apps the number of scams will increase by several orders of magnitude.
At that point, who are you going to sue when you get defrauded, some lowlife in a former Soviet bloc country? Good luck with that.
Oh, I forgot, you’re still going to sue Apple because- Apple didn’t fight hard enough to maintain control of its App Store.
Either way, there’s no winning outcome for Apple. They have all that cash, and you don’t.
Well, I am victim-blaming here. Situations like this are literally the reason real banks for real currencies have FDIC oversight and mandatory deposit insurance, and why investment banks have SIPC oversight and insurance. This person intentionally opted out of that system. He decided to use unregulated banks, so the consequences of that decision are on him.
So if this had been a fake app representing itself as the banking application of a regional bank and had defrauded the user that way, it would be Apple’s fault?
Apple’s scrutiny of the app and its later releases, its failure to validate the publisher against a known entity, and its failure to stop the company using fake reviews to get close to 5 stars all mean Apple isn’t running the safe and secure App Store it claims to.
At that point, it would actually be his bank's fault. There are supposed to be limits to what you can do without involving a human at the bank, and transferring $600k is well past that limit. If a human at the bank is in on the scam, it's still the bank's responsibility to fix it for you, then the bank goes after the surely-by-now-ex-employee.
You can, of course, opt out of those limits as well, but only a moron would do that, because this is the exact problem it defends against. And again, if you intentionally opt out of a security mechanism and you fall "victim" to the thing the mechanism defends against, that's your own fault.
This isn't "walking down a dark alley at night", this is "intentionally going to a city which advertises itself as a lawless, Mad Max free-for-all and waving around stacks of cash". If you do this, you are taking responsibility for your own safety. That's a feature of cryptocurrencies. It's hilarious watching blockbros rediscover all the problems with unregulated financial systems which led to the banking regulations they claim not to want.
Having been a while since I went looking for something in the App Store, I was dismayed at all the duplicate and obvious scam apps that permeate search terms.
A being able to validate legit from scam apps is a joke. I used to be a defender of Apple and only the one store model but especially in the last several years with their inconsistent application of their rules I have zero faith in their ability to deliver the original promise of Apple being the benevolent dictator and delivering the ideal user experience. Even code signing hasn’t delivered the promised panacea.
Time to open it up for those who want the option. For users who don’t go out of their way nothing would change - but there do need to be alternate paths. Life isn’t without risk and it turns out that yes, the cure really was worse than the disease
How did the app change its purpose after getting into the store? And in a way that meant this guy was fooled into thinking it was a crypto wallet?
Something sounds fishy here. At the very least there’s a hole in Apples processes.
Though I have limited sympathy for anyone who has any involvement with Bitcoin or any crypto nonsense.
If you read the source article Apple has no way to prevent it.
No way to prevent what? An app changing its purpose after App Store listing? That seems dubious. Maybe Apple haven't put processes in place to prevent it, but they probably could do so.
How did the app change its purpose after getting into the store? And in a way that meant this guy was fooled into thinking it was a crypto wallet?
Something sounds fishy here. At the very least there’s a hole in Apples processes.
Though I have limited sympathy for anyone who has any involvement with Bitcoin or any crypto nonsense.
If you read the source article Apple has no way to prevent it.
No way to prevent what? An app changing its purpose after App Store listing? That seems dubious.
That was Apple's response.
I read the WaPo article carefully and didn't find anything as explicit as what you've said. "Apple does not allow these sorts of changes, but Apple says it does not know when they occur" is the closest I can find, but that just means they don't know with the data they have right now, not that there's no conceivable way to achieve it.
Is this not a perfect demonstration for why all transactions need to go through Apple? I appreciate that this is bitcoin related, but one can’t help to see the analogy between Epic’s vision for the App store and the massive level of fraud that this invites.
Agreed. If Apple is forced to allow sideloaded apps the number of scams will increase by several orders of magnitude.
At that point, who are you going to sue when you get defrauded, some lowlife in a former Soviet bloc country? Good luck with that.
Oh, I forgot, you’re still going to sue Apple because- Apple didn’t fight hard enough to maintain control of its App Store.
Either way, there’s no winning outcome for Apple. They have all that cash, and you don’t.
But part of the reason why they have all that cash is the promise that they are curating the content. If they fail in that, then they share in the blame.
Does a bank promise to keep your money safe and then after a bank robbery or fraud event say "Wow, sorry about that - it turns out all of your money was stolen." ? No. The bank is on the hook.
In my book, Apple is responsible here. I'm not saying the user is blameless, but he trusted Apple's promises in good faith. Whether or not that means Apple should cover his losses... well, a lawsuit is probably the best way forward.
How did the app change its purpose after getting into the store? And in a way that meant this guy was fooled into thinking it was a crypto wallet?
Something sounds fishy here. At the very least there’s a hole in Apples processes.
Though I have limited sympathy for anyone who has any involvement with Bitcoin or any crypto nonsense.
If you read the source article Apple has no way to prevent it.
The gentleman had purchased a hardware wallet from Trezor which he had good success with, and when seeing the "matching app" in the App Store would be forgiven for downloading as it had with a matching logo, name and description, and considering Apple's vetting of each and every app, would have been comfortable with it being from Treznor. Worse the only way Apple becomes aware that the app morphed is for users to report it. By that time damage is done.
I don't know why but I had simply assumed that by a human vetting the apps they could not do the exact same thing we read Android apps sometimes doing. So what's the difference between the two stores?
The big difference is not between Apple App Store and Google Play Store. The big difference is between Android and iOS. Android allows downloading apps from third party app stores and sideloading from the internet. Those are the main reasons why Android has a lot more malware and is a bigger security risk, when it comes to users data.
Just because the two apps stores are more similar that they are different, it doesn't mean that Google Android is just as safe for users, as Apple iOS. As you try to make it seem.
This issue, along with the Fortnite update makes it obvious that Apple is more lax in vetting updates than the first time an app is submitted to the app store. That is the obvious hole to plug.
However, I agree with @EsquireCats - stuff like this would increase by orders of magnitude if Apple loses control of the app store.
Is this not a perfect demonstration for why all transactions need to go through Apple? I appreciate that this is bitcoin related, but one can’t help to see the analogy between Epic’s vision for the App store and the massive level of fraud that this invites.
Lol - everything goes through Apple and this still happened. So yes, by all means stick to the same already failed model
You’re dumb. My pet peeve is dumb people who think they’re smart.
If Apple’s model is “failed” then WHAT is the alternative? This is like calling Michael Jordan a crap player because he missed a shot.
Also, NO. Not everything goes through Apple. I don’t think you understand how Bitcoin works.
Is this not a perfect demonstration for why all transactions need to go through Apple? I appreciate that this is bitcoin related, but one can’t help to see the analogy between Epic’s vision for the App store and the massive level of fraud that this invites.
100%!!!
Had the transaction actually went through Apple, they would have replaced this man’s money easily or at least been liable. Though something like Bitcoin would be a little tricker.
Having been a while since I went looking for something in the App Store, I was dismayed at all the duplicate and obvious scam apps that permeate search terms.
A being able to validate legit from scam apps is a joke. I used to be a defender of Apple and only the one store model but especially in the last several years with their inconsistent application of their rules I have zero faith in their ability to deliver the original promise of Apple being the benevolent dictator and delivering the ideal user experience. Even code signing hasn’t delivered the promised panacea.
Time to open it up for those who want the option. For users who don’t go out of their way nothing would change - but there do need to be alternate paths. Life isn’t without risk and it turns out that yes, the cure really was worse than the disease
My goodness that last paragraph is worse than the post I last quoted.
Having 100 app stores and scam apps uploaded every hour is not a solution. Imagine all the fake websites side-loading on everyone’s iPhone and the crap “app stores” that are 100% scams?
imagine that! A 3rd party App Store or even an “App Store” posing as Apple’s where ALL apps are fake and ask you for your credit card info. If you thought sneaky email scams were good just wait til you see this!!
Also, to the people suggesting Apple look closer into every app uploaded.... this is not 2008. There are over a million apps now.
I’m all for Apple reviewing every app for quality purposes but it’s not like Apple can hire 10 dudes to strictly review the 100s of thousands of apps submitted annually. Then they would have to re-evaluate every app monthly and evaluate every update carefully.
Apple may be able to hire an extra 10,000 people for this but don’t bit** and complain when the funnel is backed up 100,000 apps and your app won’t finish the vetting process for another 8 months.
So here's the base problem. In any iOS or Android app, you have the capability to create what's known as a web view inside the mobile app. This web view could look like a standard mobile application, for example using mobile frameworks such as React-mobile, or Adobe's Cordova, App Guyver, etc. These web views use a url to access the display of the web site in a mobile look and feel matching that of the mobile app. Now here's the big kicker: anytime AFTER app approval by Apple, all the nefarious developer has to do, is change the purpose of that mobile application looking page at that url since its being hosted by their website.
How did the app change its purpose after getting into the store? And in a way that meant this guy was fooled into thinking it was a crypto wallet?
Something sounds fishy here. At the very least there’s a hole in Apples processes.
Though I have limited sympathy for anyone who has any involvement with Bitcoin or any crypto nonsense.
If you read the source article Apple has no way to prevent it.
No way to prevent what? An app changing its purpose after App Store listing? That seems dubious. Maybe Apple haven't put processes in place to prevent it, but they probably could do so.
So here's the base problem. In any iOS or Android app, you have the capability to create what's known as a web view inside the mobile app. This web view could look like a standard mobile application, for example using mobile frameworks such as React-mobile, or Adobe's Cordova, App Guyver, etc. These web views use a url to access the display of the web site in a mobile look and feel matching that of the mobile app. Now here's the big kicker: anytime AFTER app approval by Apple, all the nefarious developer has to do, is change the purpose of that mobile application looking page at that url since its being hosted by their website.
Comments
You can, of course, opt out of those limits as well, but only a moron would do that, because this is the exact problem it defends against. And again, if you intentionally opt out of a security mechanism and you fall "victim" to the thing the mechanism defends against, that's your own fault.
This isn't "walking down a dark alley at night", this is "intentionally going to a city which advertises itself as a lawless, Mad Max free-for-all and waving around stacks of cash". If you do this, you are taking responsibility for your own safety. That's a feature of cryptocurrencies. It's hilarious watching blockbros rediscover all the problems with unregulated financial systems which led to the banking regulations they claim not to want.
Does a bank promise to keep your money safe and then after a bank robbery or fraud event say "Wow, sorry about that - it turns out all of your money was stolen." ? No. The bank is on the hook.
In my book, Apple is responsible here. I'm not saying the user is blameless, but he trusted Apple's promises in good faith. Whether or not that means Apple should cover his losses... well, a lawsuit is probably the best way forward.
Just because the two apps stores are more similar that they are different, it doesn't mean that Google Android is just as safe for users, as Apple iOS. As you try to make it seem.
However, I agree with @EsquireCats - stuff like this would increase by orders of magnitude if Apple loses control of the app store.
You’re dumb. My pet peeve is dumb people who think they’re smart.
If Apple’s model is “failed” then WHAT is the alternative? This is like calling Michael Jordan a crap player because he missed a shot.
Also, NO. Not everything goes through Apple. I don’t think you understand how Bitcoin works.
100%!!!
Having 100 app stores and scam apps uploaded every hour is not a solution. Imagine all the fake websites side-loading on everyone’s iPhone and the crap “app stores” that are 100% scams?
imagine that! A 3rd party App Store or even an “App Store” posing as Apple’s where ALL
apps are fake and ask you for your credit card info. If you thought sneaky email scams were good just wait til you see this!!
And of course, morons will still sue Apple.
I’m all for Apple reviewing every app for quality purposes but it’s not like Apple can hire 10 dudes to strictly review the 100s of thousands of apps submitted annually. Then they would have to re-evaluate every app monthly and evaluate every update carefully.
Apple may be able to hire an extra 10,000 people for this but don’t bit** and complain when the funnel is backed up 100,000 apps and your app won’t finish the vetting process for another 8 months.
Instead of deciding if a program halts, now decide if a program does what the developer says it does,
No, Apple cannot and will never be able to validate a program. Apples curation process must do something far less.
And this is used A LOT by the banks.