Symbian Signed Improvements and Tweaks Announced

When this story first appeared I'm sure you couldn't comment on it: so here's a less cynical retort:

The Symbian signing process is slow - and monopolistic. For example: BSkyB run a platform of 8.5 Million set top boxes upon which any broadcaster can download and run applications and their model is less draconian (the app does need to be signed however). It is also regulated by OFCOM. It does not mandate signing at source - signing tools are provided to application authors and, technically, that is all that is required. Most authors ask for their apps to (initially) go through a SSSL checking process but after this all other changes are allowed at will.

I wonder how long it will be before someone (an ITV or BBC) gets tired of all this "you must wait in line or pay a premium" guff before a regulator is brought in.

This is not a sustainable model. I often wonder why the phone networks appear to have learned nothing from other markets.

regards,

Slart.

Worth checking out - http://www.maccent.com/signhelper.php

Unregistered wrote:Worth checking out - http://www.maccent.com/signhelper.php

There are benefits to making a Symbian application modular, and perhaps considering how to partition it into sis files for component parts.

However the Symbian OS capabilities and signing scheme have been chosen to support stakeholders such as the manufacturer and operator. Bypassing these in a way that could be exploited by malicious software puts your software at risk of having its signature revoked. See the posting by WillP here - http://developer.symbian.com/forum/message.jspa?messageID=65633#65633

Alternatively if this became a problem device manufacturers could restrict installation of applications to only those that have been through Symbian Signed.

ttfn