Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's kind of bullshit too though that you are required to add an apple login.


It's not just bullshit—it's diabolical.

On your iOS device, you are logged in with one Apple ID at a time. This Apple identity is the one that makes In-App Purchases ("IAPs"). So if a user makes a purchase in your app signed in as "bob", and then logs out of your app and signs in as "alice", they still have that IAP. Therefore, the simplest, most correct way to have an app with IAPs and third party auth is to exclusively use Sign In With Apple, because Sign In With Apple is tied to your device's currently signed in Apple ID and all of its IAPs.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63272699/how-do-you-hand...

I considered removing my other third party auth methods but have kept them in to see how it goes... :|


Apple account is not the same as login with Apple. IAPs have always been tied to the Apple account. It’s a pain in the ass to handle all the cases. It’s not any easier on Android either.


Right, but Sign In with Apple is tied to your Apple account. I have no way to make an IAP autorenewable subscription and tie it to “bob” in my system. It’s tied to the iOS Apple account.


You can’t tie it to bob. You have to look at the receipt and reward from that. So bob logs in you look at the receipt and bobs your uncle you have the subscriptions.


And then what if, on your service, `bob` signs out and `alice` signs in? Then `alice` not only has `bob`'s subscriptions, but she also can't buy her own.


Apple doesn’t see it that way. Apple ID has the subscription, not the the user account.


Apple has supported switching between multiple user accounts on a device for years, but since you're not a school or a company, you can't have it. Buy four iPads.

It's pretty stupid.


Technically, you still have that capability. After the user is authenticated with their Apple ID, you can present a profile to provide username/password/email.


Yep, but then all username/password/emails that log on using that device share the same subscription IAPs—namely, those that belong to the Apple ID that's sign in to iOS.


I have a Patreon page and a recipe in Zappier that sends new Patreons to Mailchimp. It seems Patreon allows to Login with Apple, because a few of my Patreons used it but never received any newsletter (it's one of the perks). I checked and it was because the email address that Patreon received and tried to send to Mailchimp failed. I lost a few Patreons because of this, because they thought I never sent the newsletter to them.


>I checked and it was because the email address that Patreon received and tried to send to Mailchimp failed. I lost a few Patreons because of this, because they thought I never sent the newsletter to them.

AFAIK apple's private relay only accepts mail signed by the corresponding developer. In other words, no third party can use the private relay address.

edit: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/120112


Honestly I don't know, I never developed anything with Apple. But as a content seller that was my experience :(


Seems like that could be a problem for some business models.

Is an app allowed to prompt for a real email address if it uses Sign in with Apple?


> Is an app allowed to prompt for a real email address if it uses Sign in with Apple?

It can ask, but cannot require it.


As a user I love it. More privacy for me.


As a developer it was a pretty exotic experience. Their OAuth service is unlike any other big name provider I'd used. Some day soon I hope to open source my Apple backend integrations in TypeScript, because Apple provides no backend SDKs, at least not for Node/JS/TS.

Lots of people seem to use Sign In With Apple, though. They make it really nice for the user. The email relay thing is pretty neat.

The thing that troubles me with OAuth is that if you don't provide apps with some other way to sign in and you lose access to you OAuth account, you lose access to all your applications.


It was pretty painless to implement in my case, though I was already familiar with communicating with Apple backend services.


Agree. It's made me sign up for many services that I never would have otherwise.


No. You can't get an Apple ID without providing a phone number, street address, and email address.


As with others, I trust Apple to safeguard this information waaaay more than constantly rolling the dice with shady app publishers every time I sign up to something.

That I can sign up to TikTok with "Sign in with Apple", with an auto-generated Apple Privacy email address and literally no other information, is quite amazing and useful.


Apple surrenders customer data on over 30,000 customers per year to the US government without search warrants or probable cause.

This is disclosed in their own transparency report (FISA).

This isn't optional; Apple has to provide data on any user account the USG demands of them, without a search warrant.

Your trust in them is misplaced.


I’m not sure what your point is. This is unavoidable for any company subject to FISA or you know, laws.

I care far more about companies like Google and Facebook taking my information and using it in tracking and advertising, or selling it to whomever wants to pay for it for whatever reason to build a profile about me and using that to take advantage of me.

On that front, I trust Apple far more than any of the other options. They’re using it as a competitive advantage and it’s working.


Where does it say that this information was provided on demand without a warrant? The only exception to a warrant requirement is a FISA letter, and all US persons are required by law to respond to those.

And in terms of NSLs, they only turned over data for under 500 of them so far this year (and it could be a lot fewer since the bucket size is 1-500).


Most of us are more worried about scummy advertisers than three-letter agencies.


Advertisers can't put you in jail indefinitely without trial because you published something they didn't like.

The USA IC can and will.


Yes, but the odds of that are quite low for the overwhelming majority of us.


Did you want Apple to have the power of the Dutch East India Company? How else would Apple resist national governments?


They could not collect the information in the first place, especially for free customers who just want to download free apps.

Or how about this, be able to install free apps without any apple ID!


All companies operating in the US are going to be subject to the same.


That must be recent, I didn’t provide a street address.


I recall having to provide this around 2013 or so around the time I got an iPhone 5. But possibly it was part of their credit card verification? That could explain why some have been asked and not others.


The street address is not verified/authenticated, but the email and phone are.


Sure, but you can have an anonymous email address and phone number in the US.


How do you get an Apple ID without a street address? There are still places in the US that don't have street addresses, even after 911 attempts.


This is a serious question since many of our students don't have a street address. Many reservations only have PO Boxes.


A P.O. Box address should be fine.


Lol, privacy? You think that's what it is?

Apple forces you to use in-app purchases, Apple forces you to stick with their crippled browser ecosystem, it has no compatibility outside of Apple. Their protocols for messaging and device interop are closed-source; they have tech that tracks all your devices + these new beacons, and all your devices are those beacons too.

You are more heavily tracked under Apple than you are in any other system. Did you think your iphone would be a location tracker for another device?


You're mixing up "privacy from Apple" and "privacy from random third-party developers when using 'Login with Apple' specifically".


You could have saved yourself a fair amount of embarrassment with just a little bit of reading. Apple can’t decrypt beacon locations. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/sece994d0126/...


It is even worst when your App isn't actually the content owner but a shell or client to existing services.

Which means you cant add Apple Login, and that also means the end of your App.


It’s only required to use Sign In with Apple if you use other third party logins—which wouldn’t be possible with your scenario anyways since you couldn’t do an oauth dance if you don’t own the private key.


White-label apps never use Google or Facebook authentication and not Apple?


A white-label app would be the content owner. This sounds like describing a GitHub or IRC client or something


I don’t fully understand. Have a link to describe the issue?


Imagine a 3rd party HN app - they can't control the login options, and thus can't add apple login.


Login with only the site is ok; if you have Google or FB login then Cupertino requires Apple login too.


There are a few APIs I use where the OAuth dance would show users site and Google login options, but not Apple.


Only if you allow login with other 3rd party login services. Honestly this seems pretty reasonable so apps are guaranteed usable even if you don’t have a Facebook or Google account. There are apps that only have social logins what with the “outsource your auth” marketing a few years back.


As a user, no it’s not bullshit or diabolical, it’s a godsend. I’m glad they enforce it, saving me from handing out my email and a ton of other info to every random app I want to try for a while.

Only predatory devs would complain against this rule, and I won’t miss them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: