Apple Removes HKmap.live from the App Store

There are real benefits to having a curated, sandboxed, and audited selection of safe, quality software. Most users should never need to leave such an environment

What is necessary is an escape hatch—one that doesn't involve continual software reinstalls, or outright buying new hardware. It's fine to hide the option away in settings, where most users won't find it. But in extraordinary circumstances—like when your city is rioting against your government—people will help each other locate the switch, and download what they need to stay safe.

It's not that they're paying more for less; it's that they're paying more for a curated less. For the vast majority of Apple's customers, this works out great (provided they aren't ever going to engage in an antigovernment protest).

Please don't get it twisted. What Apple does has value to many people; it's not as black-and-white as you seem to make it out to be.

There is nothing on this world, nothing, is good anytime anywhere to anyone.

Being a software engineer I side with consumers more as I use a ton of services, but that's the flip side to the convince the consumer has absolutely no ownership to anything.

There is nothing wrong with code signing. There is everything wrong with making Apple the sole arbiter of mandatory code signing. It's the difference between being against locks, and being against someone else owning the keys to your house.

---

> I won't blame Apple, they aren't people [...] I blame people/consumers

No, you can't blame people. It isn't the individual consumer's job to consider the ins and outs of how they may be limiting their free expression in the future. That's not realistic.

Corporations are not robots; Apple is run by people, and specifically people who should be considerably more knowledgable on this subject than the average consumer. They should feel some level of social responsibility.

This will not be the last time Apple ends up in this type of situation. I hope we have the right conversations about them, and I hope they make Apple hurt. Because this was entirely predictable, and entirely of Apple's own making.

Is the web censored in HK?

Apple's position was never okay, and I hope this situation makes more people realize that.

Imagine you're a Hong Kong protester. You're spending a significant portion of your time in the streets, and the rest at work, or school, or whatever other life tasks you're responsible for. Do you really want to spend an hour reading up on how to Jailbreak your phone? And then, because this is a "tethered" Jailbreak, what happens if your phone reboots and you're not near a computer?

There is a balance to be struck here. Sideloading can't be too easy, lest people get tricked into doing it. But it shouldn't require more than five minutes, and it should be a one-time process. (Or at least nearly-one-time: making it annual might be reasonable.)

...no, sadly I'm not sure. The point I wanted to make is that banning certain apps is no better than banning certain books.

I originally wanted to write something like "We wouldn't be okay if certain books were banned on certain brands of bookshelves", precisely for the reason you mention—but I decided the comparison would be too weird.

That said, I don't think it's a coincidence that every e-reader (as far as I'm aware?) allows sideloading, including the Kindle line, which Amazon sells at a loss. The optics of any company "banning books" would just be too poor. I wish the optics on "banning software" were equally poor.

I don't like it either, but don't fool yourself: lots of people don't care. They don't care if it's "their device" or not. They're perfectly happy to pay $1200 for a high-end device they don't have full control of, because it signals wealth, and does what they want it to do.

Just look at how many people lease cars instead of buying them. It's not that different; they don't own those cars, they're really just renting them. They're not allowed to modify them, and can get in trouble if they don't follow the maintenance schedule or drive them too much. But for those people, they're fine with that.

>Microsoft tried the same crap with their store, which was fortunately rejected to a large degree.

This is probably for at least two reasons. 1) There was already a huge ecosystem of Windows software out there, long before MS tried to ape Apple. Those companies were already successful in selling their apps directly to customers, without having to give MS a 30% cut. Why would they want to adopt MS's new strategy? 2) MS being MS, they most likely bungled it in some way. This happens every time they try to ape Apple or someone else; the first few iterations are absolutely terrible and a big joke. Sometimes they persist and it finally works out for them, other times they finally give up (e.g., PlaysForSure, Zune).

And if they can, what stops a user from swizzling identifiers for the APK and reinstalling it?

This is why we need to support efforts to create and maintain such platforms. Even taking a moment to spread the word is helpful here.

In settings, enable "allow installation of apps from unknown sources". Then download the .apk file from your web browser / dropbox / whatever, and tap to install. It's literally a single-setting toggle to let you install any apk from anywhere.

>Google quietly removing HK-protest related apps

Like what? The app that Apple removed is alive and well in the Play Store: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=live.hkmap.app...

It's pretty easy, in fact when I got a new phone and tried to install the f-droid apk, android took me directly to the setting to toggle side loading apps. The permissions seemed even a little more fine grained than before with a seperate one to allow f-droid to install apps also, but still only one tap away once I actually tried to do it.

You can say the same about any end to end encrypted service. Setting yourself up to not be able to bow to unreasonable request is the best defense and can be quite the extra effort. And I'm thankful for companies doing so.

Thing I don't understand why Apple made that decision. In their position I'd would have fought very hard to get gov (preferably HK) order the removal and then just "having to comply". But it's probably the natural consequence of wanting to curate entire availability beyond just in-store generate content (e.g. advertising, search ranking and so on). Again, it matters what you set yourself up to be.

Well, there's a balance here. If it's too easy, some users will be tricked into installing malware.

I think Android is a good compromise. If you're even a tiny bit technically inclined, you can enable sideloading in a couple of minutes at most, and it's a one-time process.

People in favour of "more guns" are fully aware that more guns means a more dangerous society. But they consider the freedom to choose whether to own guns more important than living in a statistically safer society.

Whereas, people in favour of "gun control" consider the safety of society overall to be much more important than the freedom to own devices designed to kill people.

To me, that's what Android vs iPhone represents with respect to freedom. Android gives you more freedom to choose different devices, but at the cost of most devices not getting security and OS updates.

Likewise, Android gives you the freedom to side-load all kinds of things onto your devices, and of course the Android ecosystem is chock-full of malware.

The proponent of freedom says, "Yes, I understand that this is a much more dangerous ecosystem, but I value the freedom to defend myself."

The proponent of safety says, "There are some dangers that are best met by a centralized, platform defence, not by individuals."

Philosophically, I understand both arguments, even if I am very clearly in one of the two camps with no interest whatsoever in switching to the other.

I'd pick being able to run whatever I want over Apples choice of apps any day.

I'm technical so I like tinkering and don't care a whit for Apple's locked down ecosystem and it's cost of entry, so I avoid it. But I'm totally aware of the reasons Apple make their business decisions. Their loyal fan base and easy interoperability of their products is testament to this. It has brought many technological solutions into the hands of the non-technical consumer, which has benefitted us technical folks by bringing attention to what can be achieved by technology.

(I'm not crediting Apple with this in its entirety, far from it, but they brought non-technical attention to the technical arena)

Anyone on HN complaining that their iDevice doesn't give them sufficient 'freedom of ownership' is willfully ignorant of Apple's well publicized and infinitely discussed closed system strategy.

P.S. LineageOS for the win.

No, but I have heard of 400 million iPhones being infected by malware via Xcodeghost. This is serious data exfiltrating malware, not simply ad popup malware, and this is on the official app store and legitimately sourced devices unlike the malware in your first three links.

What do you mean? Android is FOSS not closed-source.

But it is.

You can install APKs from anyone on any phone. It's a feature of the OS.

> I can wipe my phone and unlock the bootloader to literally replace and de-Google the entire OS.

I've never had an Android phone I couldn't unlock and flash. From the original Evo to Pixel 2.

I have an iPhone as of two months ago. I just wanted to try something new. The amount of restricted access to things is boggling. I can't even download an mp3 on Safari or Chrome. I thought I was doing something wrong and spent 2 hours trying to figure out what. Then I learned it was just the phone.

If this was a straight-up choice between only the US market or only the Chinese market, they would be picking the US.

Protestors have to change that calculus.

and as we all know, governments are becoming a thing of the past. too slow too bad. I welcome our technotopia overlords

But they don't have more power than nation states. Last I checked nation states had guns, and guns are still very much the real source of all power in this world.

Apple has a lot of money. That makes them economically dependent on a larger surface area of not only nation states but other corporations. In a way it gives them less power.

A more personal analogy: a regular old Joe or Jane can say anything they want on social media with little fear of anything bad happening because their economic dependency surface area is small. A corporate CEO must watch what they say much more carefully, as Elon Musk learned with his various stupid tweets. A government official on the other hand, like Trump, can say asinine provocative things all day with little consequence because he's in a high position in an organization with guns. Xi Jinpeng is even more immune as his government has fewer checks and balances.

In terms of practical freedom of speech and political/social action, being rich outside the protection of the state is probably the least powerful position you can be in.

Apples marketing claim in the recent years has been users privacy concerns. So why shouldn't such a move be also just as relevant as the marketing in the recent years?

I find it interesting how the blame shifting works these days. While with Blizzard, all the hate goes to Blizzard, with Apple there seem to be at least two fronts. One blaming Apple, the other aiming away from them towards China.

That the tech industry has been a primary player in enabling this.

Each and every one of us needs to have a nice long think about our own ethics and what we're willing to support.

You're totally mistaken if you believe that boycotts and the like aren't taken seriously by big companies, especially companies like Apple where the brand is more important than the product. Of course, it all depends on the size of the boycott, but it doesn't have to cost them millions to become a major problem.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/22/repost-the-non-liberta...

(search for sections 2.3 and 2.3.1)

That being said, I try to hear out other viewpoints because it’s entirely possible that I am wrong. So, tell me, what law would fix this situation? A law that forces tech corporations to allow free speech? Or a law that forces companies to put ethics before profits? I genuinely don’t know what law we could make that would address the issue while also being fair and enforceable. It seems a lot easier to get the people to rally behind a boycott than to get legislators to have a good idea and actually act upon it.

And we already see what government with laws created to restrict and punish behavior can do. Of course, our government will never do that, we know they'd always use their immense powers responsibly and for the good of the people, right? Right?!

On my Google Pixel 3a, I can download AOSP to my own computer, modify it how I wish, scrape the vendor dependencies I need[1], compile it myself, sign it myself, and use my own key to control what OS gets installed, then relock the bootloader so it only trusts updates using my key! I can choose not to use Google Play and then install whatever App I want on it.

I wish I could not have to use any proprietaryy binaries, but this is as close to an open device that you can get today [2].

[1] This is where the quasi defense comes in. AOSP has no official process to install all of the vendor binaries needed to support carriers. If you don't include this process you get broken SMS, Calling, WiFi Calling. This script helps you do it: https://github.com/GrapheneOS/android-prepare-vendor

[2] Yes I know of the Librem 5. I am a day one backer and have yet to get a shipping notification despite shipping starting in Sept. I also know of the Pinephone, it is not publically available. I await the day those types of products are viable.

As you have noticed, neither one really have consumer and citizen interests at heart.

I'm planning on taking the step of opting out completely. I plan to build my own "phone". I recently purchased a low-cost Mini-PCIe 4G module, antennas, and a USB adapter. I should be able to tether it to a RasPi.

My "phone" won't actually look like a phone; it's going to be more of a "data terminal" - something to hack on, send/receive data, and have SMS texting capabilities. I pretty much never use voice calling anyway.

Everything I plan on doing, others have already done in various forms. You can find Raspberry Pi based homebrew "cell phones". People have also made similar phones using the Arduino and the ESP microcontrollers (8266, 12, 32, etc), among others (there are probably PIC and Propellor based phones, too - heck, I wouldn't be surprised if someone repurposed a modern 8051 or 52, or Z80 core controller for such a device). Some of these phones are purely basic - make and take calls, maybe some stored phone numbers. Other run entire operating systems under-the-hood.

I guess what I am saying here is that if you have electronics hacking skills, consider a homebrew phone an option. It may not be pretty, it may not be svelte, it may not even be 4G (2 and 3G modules are cheaper and more common) - but it will be (mostly - unless you have your own mad skills at FPGA design and more) yours.

Bonus points if you make it run on TempleOS!

If you don't have those skills? Well - it wouldn't be a bad project to work towards. Don't take it on as your "first project" though - instead, build up to it, then when you think you have enough experience to take it on, go thru your idea, break it down into manageable parts, and work on those individually for small successes, and later, start merging them together - just like any large project, success is more a matter of "divide and conquer", as looking at it as a whole can lead to feeling inadequate, or being demoralized at finishing, etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqWVH38jtQo

Apple is responding to a threat from China, whereas Google is actively assisting the Chinese. Just thought you'd like to know that.

China is bad. By capitulating to them after having declared themselves the enforcer of all that is good and holy, Apple has thus committed hypocrisy.

The chances that they keep up an app that people use to gain unwanted transparency into any state is exactly 0%

privacy is not possible in a world where governments are free to suppress the speech and will of the people. any company claiming otherwise simply sees their bottom line as more important than people, whether they are employees or customers.

To me Apple is the worst here because Tim and team have no shame, they will strut upon their stage at their own conferences about how they stand for rights but when the show lights are off they act completely different.

Isn't is possible (yes) for people to care about principles in their homeland, where it matters to them more and impacts them more? I care a lot more about my hometown than BFE Chinese countryside, even though in principle I want them to have a living wage, decent time off, and good health care.

I am still angry at Apple, the NBA, Blizzard and the rest. I think this is a darker shade of grey, though.

The framework needs to change. It's possible for the value of a company to be judged on more than just revenues.

Fundamentally they moved their kit into a state owned data centre.

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208351

I mean, in the end it's the same thing as the classic "I didn't do anything wrong, I've been following orders".

The world is not that a big place. It doesn't take a lot for this to end up on everyone's laps and then it's too late to say I told you so.

The FBI requesting a backdoor to terrorist iphones was the exact same: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_San_Bernardino_attack#Pho...

Apple decided to comply with China to keep access to the market.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351

Can you link to a source showing that Apple didn't turn over control of iCloud in China to the CCP?

Not only has Apple given the iCloud keys to the kingdom to China, iCloud is actually run by the state in China

Craig Federighi testified that he’s not aware of them doing it. That doesn’t preclude the possibility that it has been done by someone else in the company without his knowledge.

Canada, USA, Mexico, what are the other 20?

In these cases I fear, in the long term, we just have to count on the human nature to want to be able to make noise.

Corporations never had a chance of filling the role because they are very undemocratic, even in the United States. Things need to get bad enough for the only democratic system we have to take action. We aren't there yet.

My views on computing freedom generally skew towards the Stallman side of the spectrum, so I'd actually be fine with a stronger norm that Apple could tell govts to screw off[1]. But I'm very aware that I'm an outlier in this sense, and expecting Apple to push back in the face of a demand like this seems well beyond consistency with the norms that currently exist around tech companies' responsiveness expect to govt demands, on grounds of what the power relationship should be between governmental and corporate entities.

[1] (and ideally stop being so heavy-handed about their own enforcement of App Store apps...but that's another story)

Of course, this is going to end up being a pretext to ban the website too, which is going to introduce China-style internet censorship to HK. Nobody wants that. The way things are going, though, I don’t see how else this can go.

So a tool that's mostly used for evil shortly after it's created is worthy of a ban (e. g. 8chan [1], Gab). But a tool which started with a more favorable ratio and slowly drifted into mostly evil-use territory (e.g. Tor, prepaid phones) isn't seen as being inherently evil and thus gets a pass. Tools that are overwhelmingly used for good will even have negative bannability (they will be actively protected and a ban will be seen as an offense) regardless of them being sometimes used for particularly evil purposes (e.g. Google, Twitter, cash).

In the present case, HKmap.live is mostly used by protesters (good usage as seen from an HN crowd PoV), so Apple's decision is seen as unjust here. But had it been mostly used by criminals early on, the consensus opinion would certainly be different.

There's a lesson for app builders: if your tool is vulnerable to bans by centralized/mob entities, it's especially important to attract enough good usage (as judged by the enforcer) early on in the history of your service.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20616055

I find it very interesting when people say they only protect the rights of "law abiding citizens", since this is usually just a veiled excuse for "we don't think people who break the law should have rights, actually, you shouldn't have rights because you might break the law too".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGruff_the_Crime_Dog

Also worth noting that K9 Units are heavily utilized by police

https://www.police.gov.hk/ppp_en/11_useful_info/pdu/index.ht...

There is a historical precedent of that association.

But I do believe that a gay CEO who grew up in Alabama really cares about privacy.

With the caveat that people are essentially forced to conform to the model of "average Chinese." I would conjecture that many Chinese do not know what regional, cultural, or ethnic indigenous groups they belong to because the pressure to conform to the Han majority is so great that their parents or grandparents self-censored when talking to their children.

It's also been repeated many times but it bears repeating that in Xinjiang China is attempting to erase the culture of ethnic Uighur people on a mass scale. China previously did a similar attack on Tibetan culture. This is not good. It is a terrible crime.

Getting that freedom back once the deal sours will be very hard, and get much harder each year as surveillance and repression grow.

Only if you are an average Chinese that toes the party line, and even then you've got to be careful. Otherwise, if you are Christian, Muslim, Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhist, or any other ideology that threatens the communist monopoly on authority then you are 'disappeared' and your organs end up in some rich Westerner or a research lab.

It is a false comparison to look at whom tyranny benefits. Tyranny always benefits someone, else there wouldn't be a tyrant. The real question is who does the tyranny harm.

It would have really tested the supposedly pro free speech stance of that site.

I mean I'm being a bit tongue in cheek there but I'm really not sure if censorship doesn't further radicalize those people by letting them rally around a "Us against Them" mentality. Wouldn't interacting with those people be better?

If you look at Google right now, their Play Store still has the app available, mostly I believe, because the CCP has little or no leverage over Google to force their hand.

I do agree, tho that allowing side loading apps would also sidestep this issue altogether.

However, I'm not trying to push any political agenda, I just thought it was interesting that this was a good example of tech platforms being too powerful.

This seems like the single most overlooked aspect of this. Bc of this, China has existential leverage over Apple.

Also they host all their Chinese iCloud data on Chinese servers now. So the "privacy" marketing is pretty bullshit anyway. At best it should be "Apple respects the privacy of some of it's users at the current time, probably".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call-out_culture#Cancel_Cultur...

But that's just it, China found their own way in! I don't think it's obvious which method is less effective. iPhones were compromised until reboot, and became reinfected as soon as the user next visited the malicious website—which a government can compel people to do frequently. That's still better than Android, but on Android, users knew they were being tracked. iOS users did not. (And of course, because iOS is locked down, it's harder to inspect your phone for signs it's compromised.)

If China hadn't found an exploit, do you think they would have given up? I think they would have required iOS users to carry dedicated trackers. Or just surveilled them more heavily.

Software restrictions don't impact the powerful, who have access to alternatives. They impact the average user, who has limited reserves of money, knowledge, and time.

Your other option is...what?

You can't buy anything electronic anymore solely "Made in America"; that is, where all the parts, design, assembly, casing, etc - are all done here. Outside of maybe a few select items (and probably certain military stuff - but that isn't available to consumers anyhow) - it just doesn't exist. And it won't likely ever exist, as it would be suicide for a business to go that route.

Anything made in other SEA countries likely use parts sourced from China. I am not sure what you are suggesting, except that we stop purchasing new electronics, and hope and pray that (somehow) our electronics manufacturing systems from the 1950s-70s magically return back to our country.

You'll be waiting a long time...

Often a story gets held up while being written and doesn't account for developments in last few days. It is just confusing as they don't state that this would be Apple undoing a previous reversal in the fate of this app.

Update: ok, Apple did initial reinstated it and has removed it again.

https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/09/apple-pulls-hkmap-from-app...

If you want to build the source code and install the app to a device, you still need at least a Dev account ($99/yr) and macOS+Xcode. Without an account you won't have the provisioning and certificates to install on a "Dev" device. You are also limited to just 100 test devices I think under a regular dev account.

Another option is to crack the phone, then you can just go through third party repos to fetch the app.

The map is online as well, I guess they also wanted the app

If you want to talk about precedent - how about polygamy in Utah? There was a long precedent of that. Substitute that if you like. I was trying to convey a feeling.

Yes, it does (assuming you mean precedent). Alabama was one of the initial members of the Confederacy, which it created/joined on March 13, 1861.

Now, this might sound like I'm disagreeing, but I would say, consider the outcome of the next several years. It is true that the United States fought this out to the n'th degree, and self-governance lost.

One relevant difference is that there is a fairly solid case that Alabama joined the United States of its own free will. (Whether they realized it was inherently a one-way trip, well, that's another discussion.) I'm not sure if I agree that Hong Kong was quite so free. But it was certainly legal.

Everyone here seems to be up in arms about an NBA exec having to retract a tweet, but the US is throwing its weight around in much more damaging ways at the moment. The entire country of Iran is being economically strangled at the moment, based on the sole, arbitrary decision of the US President, but nobody seems to care too much.

I guess it depends.

Show me the state where you can show full penetrative sex on public TV at 9pm, like you can in europe, and I'll agree they're independent.

EDIT: OK, that was a dumb example. Substitute banning guns, or lowering the drinking age, or lowering income tax. Country-level things.

There is no analogy within the US for Hongkong because the US have always been sucking in territory since they were founded, and never had any territory taken away.

A similar situation would be if the Japanese Navy had forced the US to sign the Cape Cod area, or parts of Long Island over to Japan, and then imagine what Americans would think of that.

Didn’t Americans freak out when Black Lives Matter protesters blocked the highway? A tactic the Hong Kong protestors are using?

Didn’t Americans make fun of Occupy Wall Street?

None of which changes the facts that China owns and shares a land border with HK, China is 200x bigger than HK, and might makes right.

Of course I can't know the inner secrets of a billion minds, but it's my genuine belief that what I wrote is at least mostly in the right direction.

It's pretty simple: China claims territories that were part of the Qing dynasty until 1911, and internationally recognized as such (except outer Mongolia). Tibet was never internationally recognized as an independent country, and both the PRC and ROC have consistently maintained that it is part of China. That was also the internationally accepted legal view. The PRC and ROC agree that Taiwan is part of China - they just disagree about what "China" is. The PRC and ROC both resented British control over Hong Kong, which is understandable, given that it was taken in the Opium Wars.

I wish people discussing the issues here knew the basic background. The idea that China is trying to gobble up territory, and will next try to annex Vietnam or Laos is just not supported by the historical facts. China's position on territory is pretty clear and has been consistent over time.

I don't know what you imagine I might have to gain from "spreading propaganda". I'm simply trying to explain, from my understanding, how "the other side" often feels. I don't know where you think "bias" enters into it. I've even explicitly said I totally disagree. I don't know what else to say?

Puerto Rico is not a better analogy. It's never been America proper and it's not even connected to the mainland.

HK was China, it was occupied by force for a hundred years and now China has got it back. As far as China is concerned HK is China and that's the end of it.

My analogy was flawed, yes, but nitpicking it doesn't really change the basic facts. I note that no-one is arguing that the Chinese don't think like I said.

- Remotely delete from everyone's devices (Apple has never used this capability, they say the ability is there in the case of malware)

- Remove from the App Store completely (keeps running if you had it installed, you can back it up to iTunes and reinstall from there, can't download from the store. I think they did this with apps that worked their way around AT&T tethering restrictions back in the day when that was a thing)

- Removed from sale (if you installed it before, you can still re-download it from your App Store purchase history)

I don't think certificate revocation is applicable to app store apps - e.g. I can revoke my own dev distribution certificate and it only kills self-hosted Ad Hoc builds. They may have per-developer app store certs only available internally as well but I think they'd use one of the capabilities above instead

> The promise not to use the law for political crimes is worthless knowing that history.

That fear is certainly reasonable. But the HK Chief Executive has officially announced the withdrawal of the law about a month ago. How do you justify the continuing violence and destruction since then?

> early on the police were ordering people to disperse even though there was no violence at that time.

But did the police use violence first?

> late in July there were increasing attacks on protesters in which police stood by as people were attacked with poles. It seems that in this case, it was the police that were allowing violence and destruction, not the protesters.

When you treat the police like your enemy, how do you expect them to rush to your help the moment you need it? And seeing that the protesters were more than capable of violence themselves, why would the police rush to help?

> the first bullet even fired in this whole situation was a police officer shooting an 18 year old high school student.

The officer was under attack and fired in self defense, you know that better than I do.

> Peaceful protest is definitely better when possible, but in many cases throughout history it simply has not been feasible.

In a place without law and order, it may not be feasible. In Hong Kong? It's definitely possible.

Your account is 6 days old. Your account's activity is 100% directed towards China-related threads and your comments take on a CCP angle.

I'd like to know what brought you to HN and what you hope to accomplish here. Where do you live? Where did you study? What are your political leanings? I would love to open a line of dialogue.

It's amazing is it?

Censorship is of course bad, unless they are the ones doing the censoring, then of course it's the right thing to do.

The app is probably just much more convenient.