Comment by josephg
1 month ago
> The browser is just a much easier mental model, especially that I can install an ad blocker on it to make them safer, which I can't on mobile apps.
I'd like that security model to be the default for desktop apps on my computer as well. Its weird that davinci resolve and spotify and all the rest have full access to look through all my files.
> It never happened once with my parents in 15 years of running Ubuntu.
Probably just because so few regular people use ubuntu, scammers & malware authors don't bother targeting it. Still good for your parents though!
> I'd like that security model to be the default for desktop apps on my computer as well. Its weird that davinci resolve and spotify and all the rest have full access to look through all my files.
That's how it works on Ubuntu, proprietary apps are usually distributed through snaps which are sandboxed. And unlike on mobile, the OS doesn't have an advertising ID or built-in ad networks.
Normal apps don't need that though because there's a chain of trust which doesn't exist on mobile.
> Probably just because so few regular people use ubuntu, scammers & malware authors don't bother targeting it. Still good for your parents though!
No, it's because the bar on publishing on Ubuntu is much much higher than on an iPhone. Nobody would ever accept those scam casino games on Ubuntu.
>which are sandboxed
Not always. The app can claim to need filesystem access and it will get it without the user knowing.
> No, it's because the bar on publishing on Ubuntu is much much higher than on an iPhone. Nobody would ever accept those scam casino games on Ubuntu.
Uhhh are you claiming ubuntu has a stricter app review process than apple has with the iphone app store?
As a rule, yes. Both Apple and Google are horrendous stewards of their respective storefronts. Their review processes are infamously capricious and black boxes, in the case of Apple they put additional moral rules on what the app is allowed to do, and in spite of that capriciousness, scamware still regularly makes it's way onto the App Store. (Scamware defined here as having a specific set of anti-features[0] that a user would ordinarily pay to remove.)
This one isn't even hard to argue against; Apple being a good steward for its storefront was true in 2011. It is no longer true today. I'd consider a tech-illiterate user less likely to randomly lose a lot of cash by using different storefronts from the Apple App Store (or again, the Google Play Store), if only because those different storefronts actually do a bit of curation instead of focusing on quantity over quality.
[0]: Most of the ones listed here apply that aren't "non-free dependency" or are meant to be a category filter like NSFW. I'd also throw in "microtransactions to unlock basic functionality", but F-Droid effectively bars those with other inclusion rules. https://f-droid.org/docs/Anti-Features/
Yes I do, none of those scam games you have on iPhone would be allowed to be published on Ubuntu.
The app review process on the appstore isn't designed for the user's benefit but Apple's benefit. There's no problem publishing a casino game but if your app doesn't pay the tax, be sure that it will be rejected.