If you’ve ever used an online signing service to sideload apps on your iPhone before, which is typically a one-year service provided by a third party for a fee, then you’re likely familiar with it becoming revoked. This occurs when Apple finds out the Apple Developer account is being abused and thusly closes the Apple Developer account so that the signing service can’t continue.
Why does this happen? Well, according to the Apple Developer Program License Agreement, Section 3.2(f) that all Apple Developers must agree to:
You will not, directly or indirectly, commit any act intended to interfere with any of the Apple Software or Services, the intent of this Agreement, or Apple’s business practices including, but not limited to, taking actions that may hinder the performance or intended use of the App Store, Custom App Distribution, TestFlight, Xcode Cloud, Ad Hoc distribution, or the Program.
Since it can be articulated that selling signing certificates used for apps outside of Apple’s App Store on their platform ‘hinders the intended use of the App Store’ by circumventing the app review process completely, it’s easy to see why these get revoked so frequently. Still, it’s questionable as to why people pay for these services given their high risk and since users can sideload apps for free with their own Apple Developer account.
But in Apple’s most recent wave of Apple Developer account revocations, many appear to have been adversely affected whether they were partaking in signing certificate service sales or not. Posts popped up all over Reddit on Tuesday describing the instance of what appears to be an “unprecedented” high number of revocations that affect even developers that have never sideloaded an app in their life.
For example, on the /r/iOSProgramming subreddit, developers describe experiences where they’ve only ever used their Apple Developer accounts for reading Apple documentation and writing and testing their own apps. This goes without saying that they’ve never distributed their apps outside of Apple’s approved methods and they pretty much kept to themselves. Still, some of these developers found themselves revoked with rejected attempts to appeal.
It’s worth noting that as jailbreaking iPhones gets exponentially tougher with Apple’s increased security hardening with every hardware and software update that users have largely shifted to things like TrollStore, AltStore, Sideloadly, and yes, even signing services to sideload apps that have ‘elevated’ privileges on their device.
Going nuclear on app sideloading is Apple’s next logical step to stifle community-based innovation, a seemingly glaring staple of the brand since jailbreaking first came into effect, but it impacts this community in a negative way because it prevents users from sharing ideas and projects with one another without first paying the gatekeeper.
Indeed, this outwardly avaricious corporation doesn’t want you to do what you want with the device you own. They favor imposing their will on users with burdensome terms of service over allowing users to run their own software at their leisure and be happy with their purchase. If an app doesn’t meet the App Store’s criteria, then it won’t be available on the iPhone. Moreover, Apple disfavors any payment systems that circumvent their own ‘Apple Tax’ on every App Store or in-app purchase. Go figure.
If this sounds familiar, then just look at the Apple vs. Epic Games saga. Fortnite was unavailable on the iOS platform for a long period before a United States court decision eventually changed that.
Since a lot of these revocations appear to be mistaken, it will be interesting to see how Apple moves forward in making those developers whole again. After all, a trigger-happy Apple isn’t a good thing for anyone in most cases.
