Potential Apple Store restrictions

I guess it may be tricky to get SafeApp into the Apple store.

@moderators might be worth spinning this into a new topic as I think it’s a useful thing to capture: What if Apple/Google ban SafeApp?


yeah, my 1. thought was also that Safe isn’t gone to be allowed on iStuff devices after i read that fortnite was kicked from the apple app store for using a custom payment solution and not the “intended” apple pay (or what ever its name is).

When you buy products from amazon using their iApp apple don’t take a cut.

When you buy products from ebay using their iApp apple don’t get a cut from that either.

It’s a blurred line.

You can buy e-products on amazon that are delivered to your kindle and to the amazon app.

Thinking "How do we make that a good thing :wink: "


Yes, MaidSafe IOS app has no future. It is well known fact. Maybe it can be used as a library in the apps for storage, etc… Since every upload is paid with coins than it is very likely apple platform will be limited to only read only browsing of the content uploaded by te developers server. Something like, user generates a content, app sends it to the server. Server uploads it to the Safe Network using devs credentials(or private credentials managed by the server), ios app can browse content without using any coins. So there could be some limited market on IOS for the network. If google bans Safenet apps in the app store, they can still be installed using direct link, but IOS has not such option.


Absolutely. It was always going to be an issue at some point (and with Android). What’s the point of imprisoning users if you can’t use that to maximise profits or pursue some other commercial imperative.

We need to consider this and how we can make use of the fact.

It certainly doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. I suggest that we make preparations on this basis, for example to be ready to change how we do things. We can consider what features we expect and be ready to to modify the UX to ensure it is still a good experience that helps adoption. Also, how we can use the issue to show the contrast between the walled garden and the Safe Network.

This phase was always going to come, and watching how this plays out now allows us to prepare.

Nah, see above :wink:

1 Like

Noting that there is an iOS Onion browser, would indicate to me that read only access might at least be a start: so browser, private data viewer, remote vault monitoring etc.


Apple has human review process. They for example denied Facebook Gaming app, because facebook had there own intant games store. Facebook has exactly same instant game store in FB app, and in messenger and there was not a problem. But new gaming app was a problem for them. Facebook was fighting with them and had to remove Instant games from that app, and it was released just as a social gaming platform, without any actual games. They removed Fortnite without hasitating. Our company is dealing with Apple review process for a decade now. Our apps are randomly rejected by reviewers for random reasons. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes you get a stubborn idiot reviewer and he locks your app until you remove a feature that thousands of other apps are using in the store without any restrictions. They often reject app without breaking any TOS. If they don’t want your app, they will reject it doesn’t matter how much you make it TOS compliant. Our experience is, when they reject you first time, it is super hard to make it into the store even if you make all the required changes.


Yes, we do have alternatives. Web based apps, usually means a server is involved. So controlled by a person/corp and can be subjected to spying via agencies etc. However Safe Network is a huge server with no controlling influences.

So a Safe Network browser absolutely should be cool. If some “sites” in the network allow login (get my keys), pay folk, access apps etc. then that’s cool.

However we could go further than this, it could be interesting in many ways. If the browser was banned then … round 2.

Safe though is a utility token and that may also make a difference, but it would seem to put us in fortnite territory. Imagine though apple users could not access the internet, it could push back on them in a giant slaying way.


That’s very useful, and we can learn from your experience as well as others including the above crypto app, and I think the litigation by Fortnight makers which they have deliberately triggered.

Does this suggest we should start with something innocuous and gradually add capabilities to see what happens? I imagine that being under the radar will help too.


Aye, those two points on twitter to me read like “no vault” and no “no defi apps”. Any app could have a SAFE login to do your safey things (including write), so long as you’re not earning on the device itself.

I read part of that thread as a ‘no-dice’ for the Safe Network app though, i.e. they don’t like an app that ca link through to other apps/sites that might do bad-apple stuff.

This would be a bit of an inconvenience for folk, and they wouldn’t get a consistent experience cross platform, but not a deal breaker.

1 Like

Yeh, I’d agree

1 Like

I don’t know. My experience si with games only and that is much less restricted than utility apps. I don’t know how hard it is to push there let say browser app , or remote drive app, or anonymous coin wallet. Those reviewers are humans. Give them internet browser + SafeNet browser in a single app and they will check internet browser part mostly:)


Not to mention that all countries and EU are pushing hard at Google and Apple for antitrust violations. Might be a good time to support such movements.