A look at risk-reward: Apple may nuke apps on your iPhone remotely

Summary: Apple apparently can disable App Store software remotely on your iPhone 3G. The iPhone calls home and poof the application is nuked.

Apple apparently can disable App Store software remotely on your iPhone 3G. The iPhone calls home and poof the application is nuked.

Needless to say that this has caused a bit of a blog ruckus (Techmeme). MacRumors notes that Apple has come under fire for removing App Store software without notification and the ability to simply deauthorize apps already installed on an iPhone is worrisome. iPhone Atlas points out that Jonathan Zdziarski found Apple's blacklist in a forensic analysis of the iPhone 3G.

Is this something to be outraged about? Yes, it's creepy that iPhone can phone home and deactivate your apps, but the risk-reward is clearly in Apple's favor. Let's recap:

Risk: You deactivate apps and annoy customers. Impact: Minimal. iPhone customers will stick.

Reward: By having this deactivation "feature" Apple garners some enterprise credibility. Yes, it's DRM run amok, but if you’re a company you like a little remote wiping action.

Reward: Apple has some control over security. Let's face it folks. QuickTime and Safari aren't the most secure applications every written. Apple is a big target. And a malicious app disguised as a legit piece of software could iBrick the iPhone army. That's a dangerous scenario for Apple considering the company has had its hiccups (MobileMe anyone?).

Reward: Apple has a reputation to maintain. Apple is a walled garden. You get integrated hardware and software and a great interface. Apple controls everything. That's part of the deal. If blacklisted applications were to diminish the Apple experience with crappy software a lot of the company's secret sauce would be wasted.

Add it up and the reward category wins 3 to 1 over risk. Now Apple could revise its blacklist after complaints, but assuming the company doesn't abuse its privileges the remote nuking capability may not be such a bad idea. As usual though, Apple operates in its own universe. Just imagine if Microsoft had a blacklist of apps and could nuke software remotely.

Topics: Apple, CXO, Hardware, iPhone, Mobility, IT Employment

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

158 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Your argument sounds fine...

    ...until you realise that the whole point of Apple making the app store a walled garden was to guarantee security and quality in the first place.

    I accept the point about security but since S60 apps used signed authentication (don't know about WinMo as I don't use them) it's a pretty moot point.
    Sleeper Service
    • Big Brother

      yeah security? What security? Any app from Apple has security issues, are they blacklisting their own apps? Not a chance in hell! They are trying to avoid buggy software from messing with the iPhone's OS so that they don't get blamed for it, like everyone in their brother has blamed Microsoft for. I gauruntee that you won't see people coming out and saying that Apple is "big Brother" or anything like that. They will take the stance of "its alright, its ok, its Apple". I'm so glad I don't use their products and get roped in to their way of business. I like my freedom to choice and accept the responsibility on my own. Apple should hook up with the Dems and we would have the ultimate "Nanny State". Where did the personal responsibility go, its like we are reverting to the ways of Stallen. Leave me and my stuff alone, I am a big boy now.
      OhTheHumanity
      • RE: Big Brother

        Did you mean Stalin, brutal dictator of U.S.S.R. for many years or Stallen?
        granchingon
        • Crap

          It is amazing to me that this phone has any customer base at all. It is a piece of crap in my opinion and here is why:

          - It is expensive like all Apple products.

          - It is locked into expensive cell phone broadcasting companies.

          - You have no control over what software is on it.

          - It is not small enough to carry around comfortably or large enough to type on easily

          - there are better designed cell phones available for less.

          - potential business clients can find other products that have a greater ease of use; that is what people who have to work with these things want - they are less susceptable to an advertising hyped product and compare all products
          Information_z
      • Until You Started w/the "Dems=Nanny State" Bilge

        In This Theocratic Fascist Age of The Rethuglican Traitors Bush/Cheney/Gonzalez, no less(!) - I sort of agreed w/you. I don't own an iPhone, and I have no intention of owning one so long as it's limited to being on AT&T, and so long as the apps have to be "Apple Blessed" before they're available.

        OTOH, that "Nanny State Libburuls!" crap just shows you haven't been paying attention to [i][b]who[/b][/i] has been raping the Bill of Rights for the past seven years. I give you a hint - his initials are George W. Bush....
        drprodny
        • Thank you.

          I agree completely. I was with that guy up until the Dems crack. I'm not saying the Dems are perfect, but they're not the ones messing up our country lately.

          And I'll never, ever buy anything Apple. My last Apple was an Apple ][e with a Gibson Light Pen. I loved that thing. But that's the end of my run with Apple. They went from their "big brother is bad" commercial to their "we're doing this for your own good" stance.
          deedeedubya
      • Big Bother, you mean!

        If you want people to actually think of you as <b>"da Man"</b>, then then you will have to show the Responsibility which goes with the term. Otherwise, one is merely "da boy"! [If even that.] <BR><BR>

        Points to consider:<BR>
        1) Use statements based on Reality. Your chances of convincing people of something improve drastically when you can show them you are RIGHT. [I mean IN the right, not ON the right!] <BR>
        2) Use arguments germane to the point! "The Dems" have nothing to do with Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, et al, except for being asked for tax breaks if the party wins. <BR>
        3) In the words of Archie Bunker: "Jeeeeez! Learn to speeeeellll!" Proper spelling and grammar make your writing readable, and thus understandable. <BR>
        Macrorie's "Telling Writing" is good, Strunk & White's "The Elements of Style" is very good, and there are quite a number of other good books on [English] Composition, Grammar, and/or Spelling. <BR><BR>

        If your intent is to be humorous, then I apologize. I assumed you actually meant what you wrote. <BR><BR>

        Note: I am not being nasty. If I were being nasty---then you would KNOW it! One of My "heroes" is H. L. Mencken!
        Master Dave
        • Indeed

          That post, Sir Master, was a piece of Art :-)
          Cheers to thee!
          petit@...
        • Proper Grammer?

          Instead of berating others, try not putting everything in "quotes"...doesn't make you intelligent...or correct.
          pmcm
          • You need to review a grammar book

            His use of quotes is in keeping with the English language. I may not agree with bashing someone for their grammar or spelling, but if your going to criticize someone's grammar like he did then you better make sure your punctuation is also correct. When your quoting directly from a source then you should use double quotes. Double quotes are also used to denote the titles of articles or books (although it's popular to italics double quotes are still appropriate). Lastly, you can use double quotes to emphasize words. When I looked over his comment, I didn't notice any errors in how he used double quotes, but I could be wrong!
            alaniane@...
      • Oh please. It's just a phone.

        Oh please. It's just a phone. How is the average Joe going
        to know if the new game they downloaded or the shazam-
        GPS feature is actually the cause of some malady. They
        won't.

        The primary purpose is a phone, calendar and address-
        book and this integrity must be maintained. If you want to
        hack around with command line and the OS, with any old
        app, then take the SIM card out, or work in a lead box. I'd
        rather buy into a model based on quality for this type of
        device, than one based on a dip-switch for every binary-
        bit on the device, then you choose the settings.

        I don't care if it's flooring, a light-bulb, or a computer, if it
        has the potential to waste my time, it doesn't get a look in.
        techrepublic@...
        • Missing the point...

          There are many phones that are more dependable than this thing. They work better. They are open to improvements from third parties.

          Apple customers are passionate about Apple products and don't care about comparisons. They say peculiar things like "It is only a cell phone". It is only a cell phone that costs $500 or $600. At that price it should be able to withstand criticism and perform orally.

          Apple's agenda is to squeeze more money out of its customers than the competition. Form always wins over function. That is why they will never get the majority of people buying into their company and products. Their market share reflects the percentage of people who buy things because the TV told them it was the smart choice.

          Don't be lazy, do a little research and determine what you really need. If having attention from paying too much for a phone is what you want you aren't likely reading this forum anyway.
          Information_z
  • RE: A look at risk-reward: Apple may nuke apps on your iPhone remotely

    Your points are fine from Apple's perspective, but from the user's prospective this is horrific. At least from my point of view when I buy a phone I expect to control the content of said phone. I expect to control what apps are installed, uninstalled, what media enters the phone, and what communication is sent and received on it. This is precisely why I refuse to buy Apple's products, as they are even worse than Microsoft about controlling what you do with the gear they sold you (not to mention for an extremely marked up price).
    rktechhead
  • Microsoft already can

    All MS has to do is flip a bit on their WGA servers and the next
    time your Vista logs in, you get a "not validated" message and
    can't do jack squat with your entire machine.

    The ONLY thing keeping MS from doing that is their word to you
    that they won't.
    frgough
    • Which Apple can do with their products too

      So what's your point?

      We're talking about installation of third party apps here, not operating systems, etc. I don't recall MS being able to remotely pull Photoshop from my desktop last time I looked.
      Sleeper Service
      • MSFT has had this for years...

        Microsoft has had this 'feature' since 2003. It's called Automatic Updates, and it can efectively nuke any software on your machine anytime. It is particularly effective at nuking apps that compete with Microsoft applications. Last month, the 'critical updates' started causing all kinds of prolems for Vmware. Amazingly, microsoft's virtual PC works perfectly! Why not just use that?

        Welcome to the club, Apple.
        dontcare2345456
        • It is not suprising

          That an OS update or hotfix from Microsoft might cause problems with VMware but leave Virtual PC alone. MS can make sure its apps remain compatible with the hotfix, and get it out quickly. Its up to the 3rd party vendor to patch their app to remain compatible with the OS. Not necessarily evil on MS's part, just sloppy. Now, if WGA or Automatic Updates completely uninstalled VMware, or OpenOffice, or other 3rd party app that competes with an MS app...that would be truly evil.
          btidwell
          • Exactly

            Comparing what Apple is doing here with what MS does with updates or may be capable of doing if they chose to is absurd. First of all, forget about the "what MS could do" theory as we are not discussing what Apple "could do", which would be pretty much the same as what MS "could do", we are discussing what it appears Apple IS going to be doing. And that apparently is nuking applications they have on some kind of a blacklist.

            Purposefully shutting down an application, for whatever reasons that Apple feels is good enough for them. The implication being that even if the application is working fine and your quite happy with it, if Apple doesn't want you to have it on your I phone for any reason they see fit they will purposely shut it down, and in such a scenario it appears they may want it permanently shut down any patching of the application or upgrading may likely be purposely similarly nuked each and every time.

            If this is generally what is being proposed it is nothing like MS rushing out a patch that requires an application vendor to to patch up their software so it runs on the Windows patch.

            What we are talking about is Apple specifically targeting applications of their choosing, and for their own reasons blowing away that application on your iphone remotely.

            Thats big brother extrordinaire.
            Cayble
          • Read before writing

            Even the author of the article (probably very interested in
            generating as much response as possible) did not say
            Apple or anyone else was "nuking" any applications, just
            that he thought they could. I have no way of knowing
            exactly what can be done, or why the capability exists, if it
            does, but an earlier poster suggested it was a feature that
            enterprise customers would like so they can protect their
            network/data from malware, etc. That makes some sense
            to me.

            And, as I have said before to those determined to find fault
            with almost anything Apple does, if the product does not
            suit your needs/budget, don't buy it--and lighten up on
            those whose needs are met by an Apple product. It is a
            fairly free market.
            frabjous
          • I did read, apparently you didn't.

            Apparently btidwell feels its good for him to criticize others for not reading due to the fact that he has apparently not read the subject of his own criticism himself. That is a clear sign of having blinders on when it comes to someone pointing out Apples imperfections.

            Perhaps he missed this important line:

            "we are discussing what it appears Apple IS going to be doing"

            Because btidwell cant read, at least very well, I will explain that line. The word "appears" is used because what was alleged in the article was not that Apple had already been deleting apps, but from information available it seemed that they could they could, and had motivation to do so for reasons stated in the article.

            And he also must have overlooked this real tricky phrase "going to be doing", which was used because while there was a very strong implication that this was going to happen there was no indication that it had already happened.

            Perhaps first and foremost he should have paid at least some attention to my opening line, then he might have at least gathered there was a very particular point my post was actually written to respond to:

            "Comparing what Apple is doing here with what MS does with updates or may be capable of doing if they chose to is absurd"

            In fact at no time did I indicate in any way that Apple had already done any application nuking, nor did I say that there was any proof that Apple was for sure going to do such nuking in the future in some unreasonable way. My primary point was two things. First that if indeed Apple has this capability and they do use it, it is a very powerful capability that its very nature lets it open to very arbitrary use and abuse. Secondly, other previously mentioned Windows difficulties with disabling applications due to patching and such was quite a different problem by its very nature. Its not the same thing at all as an OS having the capability to specifically target and nuke it remotely for reasons arrived at by the manufacturer and not the user.
            Cayble