Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
I fundamentally disapprove of the 'app' concept because running someone else's code on my device means that one more unknown entity can take control of my device (as such I run only open-source apps on my non-Android/non-IOS phone).
Apps are a fact of life though - should we also insist that the word 'hacker' should retain its original meaning of a skilled UNIX developer and 'hacking' means an expert changing code ad-hoc? Why fight windmills of very strong social trends?
In that sense I'd trust a Tesla provided and Tesla authenticated app more than I'd trust browser based functionality: browsers are huge code bases with thousands of historic vulnerabilities, while apps on the other hand:
- Apps run code Tesla provided. Browsers can easily be redirected, can embed ads which often are standalone 'apps' themselves, often malicious, etc.
- Apps typically are sandboxed, so even if they are malicious or vulnerable they only have access to what the sandboxing framework allows. And yes, modern browsers do sandboxing and other forms as isolation as well, but with an app the sandboxing and isolation is obvious, not just a design promise.
- Web pages tend to rely on a huge maze of third party functionality. Let's consider amazon.com for example, I just checked, the main index.html embeds links to and functionality from 40 external websites, only few of which are controlled by Amazon. tesla.com's main index.html is better: "only" 3 external references: service.force.com, www.google-analytics.com, www.googletagmanager.com.
- Well written native apps also tend to be faster and more obvious to use than browser based web functionality, and there's also fewer UI artifacts such as a 'back' button, 'reload' and various browser functionality the webpage has no control over.
Last edited: