Crossover: 2014

Chapter 231 Data Security Above All

At least the privileges of an enterprise-level account can still be used for some showy operations.

I don't know if Apple will stop using this permission after the test is over.

The number of Westerners he came into contact with increased, and Lin Hui did not beat around the bush.

Instead, he asked bluntly: "About the permission to use the signature to distribute the software, can I still use it after completing the test of the shortcut software?"

Elizabeth Nishi: "It's natural, Mr. Lin, why do you ask such a question, we are not so stingy on Apple's side.

In fact, among Apple's millions of individual developer accounts, only a few individual developer accounts have this higher-level signature mechanism.

Since your personal developer account is allowed to have such permissions, it is naturally considered by us after certification.

No matter from the perspective of design elements or market value, you are the best software designer.

You deserve it all. "

Although what Elizabeth Nishi said, Lin Hui was not sure if it was a compliment or the fact.

But it is still of great benefit to Lin Hui to have a personal developer account with enterprise-level account treatment.

One of the privileges of an enterprise-level account is that the signed application can be installed on any iOS device, and there is no limit to the number of installations.

Let’s talk about Lin Hui’s previous online application process.

After Lin Hui uploads the apps, it does not mean that these apps can directly face ordinary users.

After that, it still needs to go through an official review.

Despite the current situation of Lin Hui, the review/review time for each online application is very short.

But it still needs to be reviewed/reviewed, and only after the review/review can it be downloaded by other users.

There is no such constraint with an enterprise-level account.

This mechanism can be used to circumvent the review/approval mechanism of Apple's application launch for software distribution.

Technology without borders Enterprises with borders

From ancient times to the present, regardless of the interests of China and foreign countries, almost no one can escape the vicious circle of "one heart and one mind→same bed with different dreams→same room for war→same death".

Although Lin Hui has been cooperating closely with Apple since his rebirth, who can guarantee that this close relationship will continue?

Even at this time, Lin Hui and Ping Yi can be regarded as a community of interests.

But it is only a community of "interests".

The close cooperation between Lin Hui and Ping Huo is entirely based on interests.

This kind of relationship is completely different from the community of destiny/fate that shares weal and woe.

A community of interests can have a solid relationship when they share the same interests.

But when one side of the community of interests faces greater interests, it is hard to guarantee that it will not turn its back on the other side.

What's more, Lin Hui is Chinese, while Apple is an American company.

Technology may have no borders, but technology companies do.

This is doomed that even if there is cooperation between Lin Hui and Apple, these cooperations are doomed to be difficult to touch the core technology.

In the case of such differences.

In addition, there is a potential background of great powers and arts.

Even though Lin Hui and Ping Ping are in the honeymoon period at this time.

But Lin Hui has no doubt that there are many hidden dangers that may erupt under the appearance of his "honeymoon period" with Ping'an.

If these hidden dangers are allowed to erupt.

There is a high probability that Apple will not be affected by these hidden dangers.

After all, Apple is a big tree with deep roots.

It is impossible to face much threat because of a developer's rebellion.

Even if this developer is personally crowned with a series of laurels by Apple.

It is different from Apple's indifference to potential hidden dangers.

Lin Hui had to care.

Size determines many things.

Lin Hui's current strength is still not enough, once a potential hidden danger breaks out, it will have a considerable impact on Lin Hui.

And if Apple's side once puts forward some relatively harsh requirements on Lin Hui.

Although the current forest ash can resist, the probability of such resistance can only be limited.

Still can't do it to the extent that Goose Factory said "no" to Apple in the previous life.

Not to mention being so reckless as Facebook.

The technology circle also needs to speak with strength.

In the case of unequal strength, facing the hidden dangers that may erupt, what Lin Hui can do at present is to continue to strengthen.

It can only be to take precautions and take some preparatory measures to deal with the direct threat of hidden danger outbreaks.

And Lin Hui's pursuit of an application distribution method that can not be reviewed by the Apple App Store is one of Lin Hui's several preparations.

Perhaps outsiders are puzzled by what Lin Hui is doing now.

But in fact, some developers who are also Apple mobile phone software may be able to understand Lin Hui's intentions.

Apple's review/audit mechanism is not as almost non-existent as it seems to outsiders.

Unlike other app stores, the Apple App Store has many and complicated review items and is strictly enforced.

As an example, take the app's name.

Other application development stores generally seldom impose too many restrictions on the application name, as long as it does not contain prohibited words.

However, in the review/approval mechanism of Apple's app store, the palace has tirelessly stipulated:

"Software developers should choose a unique application software name, specifying keywords that accurately describe the application software.

Software developers should not try to trick the system by wrapping any metadata with trademarked terms, names of popular applications, pricing information, or other irrelevant phrases.

Application names must be limited to 30 characters.

Metadata such as app name, subtitle, screenshots, and previews must not contain prices, terms, or descriptions that do not belong to that metadata type.

The app subtitle is a great place to introduce more background information about your app.

Subtitles must follow our standard metadata rules and must not contain inappropriate content, reference other applications, or make unverifiable product claims.

Apple may modify inappropriate keywords or take other appropriate steps at any time to prevent inappropriate use..."

This is just a microcosm of Apple's strict review/audit mechanism when it goes online.

In addition, there are many complicated constraints.

Even many points and aspects that outsiders hardly notice have been constrained tirelessly in the review/review content.

For example, Apple's App Store needs to have some screenshots when it comes to software usage.

Not all screenshots can be used to demonstrate the software.

Apple's review mechanism specifically stipulates that screenshots should show the software in use, not just the title cover, login page, or splash screen.

Screenshots should also include text and image descriptions (for example: to demonstrate input mechanisms, etc.), and demonstrate extended functionality on the device.

For example, regarding the issue of screenshots, Apple specifically stipulates that screenshots and previews should be kept at a 4+ age rating in the review/audit entry, even if your app has a higher rating.

What do you mean, let's take the overseas version of the game "Life Restart Simulator" that Lin Hui made earlier.

Although the latter has a rating of 17+ in overseas app stores.

But for this game, all display screenshots must be maintained at a level of 4+.

That is to say, even if a game is hulking and violent.

Screenshots of the promotional interface must also be harmless to humans and animals.

Also similar to this one:

- "In games that contain violence, do not select images that include gruesome deaths or pointing guns at specific characters."

There's a lot more to it than that.

Under the constraints of these rules, it will naturally not pose any problems for the few games that Lin Hui has made before.

But it is not easy to find some harmless clips for some very violent games of certain types.

Therefore, before the game goes online, game designers have to consider designing some harmless screens in the game.

The warm pictures called Easter eggs in many horror or violent games in later generations may actually be specially designed scenes to cope with the review/audit mechanism.

As for why Apple has taken the trouble to impose such constraints on screenshots.

Apple believes that previews of software are an excellent way to let customers know what the app looks and functions to ensure that customers know what they will experience in the app.

Although this statement is justified.

But in fact, Lin Hui's feeling is deeper because of Apple's strong desire to control.

Although the general review/review mechanism is generally a formality.

But Apple is still relatively strict in this regard.

The reason why I remember it so clearly is because Lin Hui got stuck in review/review in his previous life because of the screenshot of the application display.

It can be said that it is very sad.

Information security is above all else!
But in the early years, it was also thanks to this strict review/review system.

This gave the mobile software a piece of pure land.

The early days of mobile software development were arguably a mess.

In the earlier days, many software developers had no idea to put it bluntly.

How do people who have no idea develop software?

Doomed to be inseparable from all kinds of plagiarism and plagiarism.

Even, simple plagiarism and plagiarism have even become a clear stream.

There are many developers who copy popular apps in the app store when developing software.

Some developers even slightly modify the names and signatures created by other developers, and then misappropriate other people's applications for their own use.

In addition, early mobile terminal software also had a large number of copying software.

Similar to copying articles, so-called copying software refers to Apps created directly using commercial templates or App generation services.

This type of software is like a flood of marketing accounts in later generations.

Although there is no obvious harm, the key is disgusting people.

What's more, some of the early developers built software and calling it "software" is an overstatement.

Although there is a form of "software", it does not even have the minimum functions of software.

Generally speaking, formal software should at least include the three most basic parts of function, content and user interface.

However, in the early days of mobile software development, many developers dared to claim to have created a piece of software after packaging the website link.

Such "software" is not only of little practical value.

And nothing new.

The whole thing is a shell software.

But in the early days, this kind of shell software was once popular.

After all, the early mobile software development industry was a mess.

As long as data such as downloads are up, even apps with no content value can fool laymen.

Especially because part of the code on the Android side can be directly mixed with the HTML on the web side.

It is making the mobile software market a mess.

And Apple's strict review/audit system has put an end to this chaos to a certain extent.

It can even be said to regulate the software development industry to a certain extent.

According to this kind of review/audit system, there is no possibility for App to fill in the numbers.

In Lin Hui's opinion, these measures can give users a better interactive experience and establish a good moral standard for developers.

If all of Apple's review/audit mechanisms revolve around interactive experience and regulating the industry.

Then Lin Hui doesn't mind this kind of review/audit mechanism very much.

Not only won't mind, but will strongly support.

But the problem is that Apple's restrictions on applications are far more than the above.

Among Apple's many constraints on software.

What Lin Hui can't bear the most or what Lin Hui fears the most is Apple's desire to control data.

Apple's review/approval mechanism contains a large number of data constraints.

Including but not limited to "Appropriate security measures should be implemented for the data security of application software..." "Developers need to ensure that the collected user information is properly handled in accordance with the Apple Developer Program license agreement and other guidelines. Apple will take certain measures in this regard. Screening..." Such clauses.

I won't list them one by one.

Although these terms are largely "good faith", they seem to be from the user's point of view.

Rather than criticizing the developers.

Nor does it interfere with the data.

But the crux of the problem is that the final interpretation of these terms does not belong to the developer.

It is owned by Apple.

How should security measures related to application software data security be interpreted?
If one day Apple uses this clause to say that the data security of the software made by Lin Hui involves certain hidden dangers, it must review user data.

However, Lin Hui ordered the software to be removed from the shelves if he refused to agree.

What should Lin Hui do then?
Defenses can not do without.

Lin Hui felt that his thoughts were not unfounded.

Apple's desire to control has not been strong for a day or two.

Even if Apple doesn't have such a strong desire to control.

But who can guarantee that the United States behind Apple will not use some provisions that are prone to loopholes to make waves?
As mentioned earlier.

Technology has no borders, but technology companies do.

Technology companies themselves may just want to make money safely and securely, and have no fancy ideas.

But what if the country behind the technology company had something else in mind?
If some of the countries behind these companies try to use some obvious loopholes to make trouble

The loss outweighs the gain for Lin Hui.

Data is not a negotiable issue.

When it comes to data issues, it often affects the whole body.

Data security is above all else.

Or to take it a step further, information security is above all else.

This has been taught in blood in previous lives.

It is impossible for Lin Hui to give up an inch of this problem.

If there is a disturbance between the software and Apple in terms of data in the future, there is a high probability that the cooperation between Lin Hui and Apple will be interrupted.

Although from a purely commercial point of view, Apple may not take advantage of these terms.

But once it is used maliciously, it will be unbearable for Lin Hui.

(End of this chapter)