zlacker

But that doesn't refute the parent's point: since the content at a URL is inherently mutable, they could judge that (at time of submission) some app is the type of content they want in their ecosystem, and then seconds after approval, it no longer is.

>>SilasX+(OP)
I would assume the terms of service prohibit that, which probably puts some liability on the developer.

>>SilasX+(OP)
It could be that the client device validates a checksum against the approved list at the store before installing? Haven't tested if this is the case, just spitballing a mechanism that would allow for the control without the hosting.

>>DDub+A9
https://github.com/substack/hyperboot

>>SilasX+(OP)
Right. Like I said, it doesn't do much for a malicious developer actively trying to subvert the process. That doesn't mean it's useless. I would guess most problematic apps are not malicious, but are an honest misunderstanding or disagreement about what level of quality is acceptable or what types of services are allowed.

A moderately clever developer could sneak something past the Apple app store review too. Wasn't there a flashlight app that included a secret wifi tethering tool?