In any case I hope the creator was contacted, I'd say publishing active issues like this on a popular website would be arguably as bad as releasing insecure software.
In any case I hope the creator was contacted, I'd say publishing active issues like this on a popular website would be arguably as bad as releasing insecure software.
are you Christian Monfiston? that would explain a lot.
Now because of this post, these children are arguably at greater risk than before, since anyone can follow his step-by-step instructions. If he actually cared about user safety over HN karma, he would have escalated to Apple's App Store channel rather than publishing exploitation details.
The smugness isn't the only problem, it's the irresponsible disclosure wrapped in performative outrage.
You can criticize terrible security practices without creating a ready to replay tutorial for bad actors.
that's an easily verifiable lie. the author says the developer is not interested in fixing it just 3 comments above this one. why are you lying?
reporting this to Apple doesn't make sense either. Apple doesn't develop this app. Christian Monfiston develops this app.
Apple absolutely should be contacted here: they have App Store Review Guidelines that this app clearly violates. Apps in the kids category and apps intended for kids cannot include third-party advertising or analytics software and may not transmit data to third parties. This app is transmitting children's location data to third parties through unsecured APIs, which directly violates Apple's kids category guidelines.
But you're completely ignoring the main point: by publishing this detailed technical writeup instead of escalating to Apple, the author has now made these children MORE vulnerable.
> The developer has been given responsible disclosure and I have been informed that steps are being taken to address the security concerns.
There is still no timeline or other information about the events, which is unfortunate; I'd expect the author to document and report this in such a situation.
The job offer the author received on the other hand is… something.
I understand letting them know. I agree. Painting them as equally wrong, no. "Popular website"; you mean 'theirs', right? The person with a whole 27 GitHub followers right now.
Meme-level mistake is one thing, but their wrong doesn’t grant the right to be irresponsible for the author.
I wouldn't suggest anyone recreate this process just to sanitize what's sitting around.
There you go, new trolley problem.