[threeseed]

New opportunities for abuse do exist with Vision Pro. If you allowed free reign access to the sensors people could record the inside of your house/work, capture your face, fingerprints, retinal pattern etc.

And again with Objective-C it's impossible to prevent private API usage unless you have some sort of App Store model which can inspect the binaries and prevent abuse.

So it's ultimately going to be the same as iOS.

[Someone]

> And again with Objective-C it's impossible to prevent private API usage unless you have some sort of App Store model which can inspect the binaries and prevent abuse.

A alternative is to sandbox applications to prevent them from calling anything else than the official API, and to use a less restrictive sandbox for applications signed by a key owned by the vendor.

[TheBrokenRail]

> If you allowed free reign access to the sensors people could record the inside of your house/work, capture your face, fingerprints, retinal pattern etc.

Yes, yes they could. That's not and shouldn't be Apple's problem. That's your workplace's problem to regulate how the device is used on-site, the government's problem to regulate how it can be used in public, your household's problem on how it can be used in private, etc.

The device will be inevitably jail-broken anyways, so a walled-garden isn't going to stop bad actors.

Not to mention, most of the things you mentioned can already be accomplished with less expensive and much more subtle devices, like a standard digital camera. And those device definitely don't try to prevent abuse. (Imagine if your camera refused to take a picture because it thought you didn't have permission!)

[throwaway2990]

> Yes, yes they could. That's not and shouldn't be Apple's problem. That's your workplace's problem to regulate how the device is used on-site

Considering the vast majority of exploits on Windows are not the fault of Windows and are the fault of 3rd party applications. The fault is always put on Microsoft.

If Apple gives you free rein, and shit hits the fan. People won’t blame the company for allowing a piece of software to go rogue. People will blame Apple.

[threeseed]

At least where I live in Australia there are laws about how biometrics are managed.

Apple can't just capture them and then allow any rogue app to access it. The device would be considered a threat to national security and banned.

And no there are no other mass consumer devices which specifically store a 3D representation of your face and a high resolution scan of your retinal pattern.

[shepherdjerred]

Personally, I much prefer the walled garden approach to what you're describing.

[greedo]

Imagine if your Xerox machine refused to copy a bank note...

[saagarjha]

Private API is not a security boundary. The platform sandbox is.