Apple: Using alternative browser engines in the European Union

> Program security requirements

>> You must do the following:

>>> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within other languages, within the alternative web browser engine at a minimum for all code that processes web content;

AFAIK all major engines are written primarily in C++. This "features that improve memory safety" is worryingly vague, and we already know Apple goes out of it's way to make these rulings less useful.

I wouldn't be surprised if they rejected both Firefox and Chrome on these grounds.

It's mind-boggling they are doing all these gymnastics instead of just allowing alternative app stores and browsers everywhere.

> Requirements

>> To qualify for the entitlement, your app must:

>>> Be distributed solely on iOS and/or iPadOS in the European Union;

I assume this means you have to release a separate App like "Firefox EU" to be able to use Gecko, right? Practically speaking, would any major players actually do it? It just sounds unlikely to me but I may miss something.

It's mind-boggling they are doing all this gymnastics instead of just allowing other browsers and app stores everywhere.

> To qualify for the entitlement, your app must:

> Be distributed solely on iOS and/or iPadOS in the European Union

These jokers. This is the usual malicious compliance.

> Meet the above test suite requirement if Just in Time (JIT) compilation is unavailable (e.g., if Lockdown Mode is enabled by the user)

Interesting, I wasn't aware that Lockdown Mode disabled JIT. Does it do that system-wide, or only for third party apps?

> Program privacy requirements You must do the following: Block cross-site cookies (i.e., third-party cookies) by default

I wonder if chrome will implement their sandbox on IOS first because of this

I'm all for Apple opening up to other browser engines on iOS but at the same time I'm worrying that this is gonna end up in furthering Chrome as "the web" over time.

Especially considering iOS is far from having majority marketshare in EU compared to Android... this feels like forcing a minor player (iOS in EU) to help a major player (Chrome).

This is weasel wording but with actions. I’d expect better from Apple

The arrogance of thinking you can take on an entire continent.

Besides that I wonder what happens if I travel outside of the EU. Will they just remotely disable everything I could do while in the EU?

OK, then Apple should also be transparent and show how they meet all of these requirements no? Actually this should probably be judged by an independent organization. Great idea Apple!

Kind of ironic that they are also requiring WPT compliance while they are the worst scoring major browser there.

The main question is whether they will allow Firefox, Chrome and Edge to use their own engine or not. The guidelines leave enough room to deny any potential browser engine if they want to, so it depends entirely on how Apple will decide on actual cases.

I just want to use firefox with ublock origin on the iPhone.

It's honestly weird to me how much work they put into their hissy fits. It's not like their bottom line or their stock price would notice it when they would just open up their OS a bit more.

Why only in the EU?

Can anyone explain why is Apple so opposed to having different browser engineson iOS? Is it really just about security? I don't understand what is Apple to gain by not allowing 3rd party engines everywhere in the world.

I wonder if WebKit would pass these requirements.

So, will Electron apps be an option now, for better or worse?

>Apple will only authorize developers to implement alternative browser engines after meeting specific criteria and who commit to a number of ongoing privacy and security requirements

Smells like malicious compliance.

Why don't apple just dump EU instead of adhering all its bureaucratic regulations?