[HN Gopher] I can't understand Apple's Critical Alert policy (2023)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       I can't understand Apple's Critical Alert policy (2023)
        
       Author : logistra
       Score  : 90 points
       Date   : 2025-05-08 03:04 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (jhan.bearblog.dev)
 (TXT) w3m dump (jhan.bearblog.dev)
        
       | DecentShoes wrote:
       | It's easy to understand: Apple is deliberately abusing its power
       | to gain an unfair competitive advantage.
        
       | gambiting wrote:
       | >> By this logic, even the Health app shouldn't be allowed to use
       | it.
       | 
       | Apple is well known for giving their own apps permissions that
       | no(or few) other apps can get - it's an unfair advantage and they
       | keep getting slapped for it in courts but clearly not enough for
       | them to stop doing it.
        
       | dinkblam wrote:
       | > What's even more confusing is that I've seen general-purpose
       | to-do or reminder apps on the App Store that somehow got approved
       | for Critical Alerts, even though their use case seems far less
       | urgent
       | 
       | thats because App Store review is a.) random and b.) they play
       | favorites so the same rules don't apply to everyone
       | 
       | we got rejected because of "Mac*" in the name. we pointed them to
       | a dozen others that had it, where it seemingly was no problem.
       | didn't help.
        
         | codetrotter wrote:
         | > we got rejected because of "Mac*" in the name. we pointed
         | them to a dozen others that had it, where it seemingly was no
         | problem. didn't help.
         | 
         | To be fair, it's understandable for many reasons that they
         | don't want other companies to use "Mac" in the name of the
         | software.
         | 
         | - Brand dilution
         | 
         | - Losing trademark if Mac becomes a generic word
         | 
         | - It's also annoying actually with apps that name themselves
         | that way. Just because I'm on a Mac doesn't mean I need that a
         | whole bunch of my apps start with "Mac" in their name. Likewise
         | for apps that start their name with lowercase i on iOS, and
         | apps that end their name with droid on Android.
         | 
         | Also, for the ones that were allowed anyway, were those already
         | big outside of App Store by chance? Or have they been allowing
         | even new apps that don't have an existing user base into the
         | App Store with names like that?
        
           | Agentlien wrote:
           | > Losing trademark if Mac becomes a generic word
           | 
           | This is interesting considering that it was a common word
           | before Apple started. Both the variety of apple called
           | Macintosh and a Mac raincoat (named after Charles Macintosh).
           | 
           | Though it would be really funny if the Beatles were referring
           | to a computer in Penny Lane:
           | 
           | "And the banker never wears a mac in the pouring rain. Very
           | strange"
        
             | brazzy wrote:
             | Trademarks are specific to a kind of product or service. A
             | Mac raincoat does not violate a trademark on Mac computers
             | or software.
        
           | lapcat wrote:
           | > Losing trademark if Mac becomes a generic word
           | 
           | > Also, for the ones that were allowed anyway, were those
           | already big outside of App Store by chance?
           | 
           | These two points contradict each other. If Apple were
           | concerned about losing a trademark, they would have already
           | sued popular apps that have "Mac" in the name.
        
           | cwillu wrote:
           | So you agree that "thats because App Store review is a.)
           | random and b.) they play favorites so the same rules don't
           | apply to everyone"
        
       | indianmouse wrote:
       | They seem to shoot based on vague reasons. And they don't reason.
       | If it is a no, it is a no.
       | 
       | Time for an alternative app store. It is needed across the world.
       | Single point of failure and control is not good for any
       | ecosystem. Too much dependence on one single entity if one wants
       | to exists in that is really some sh*ty concept.
       | 
       | Break free and break good! EU has to help here...
        
         | _factor wrote:
         | Let the App Store contain backup providers that are allowed to
         | compete with iCloud while you're at it. The ability to self
         | host it yourself would be a game changer for the lockdown.
         | 
         | There are too many apps with local data that can only be backed
         | up via iCloud. For what's essentially an archive upload to
         | storage, Apple raises a lot of barriers.
        
         | jeroenhd wrote:
         | You can install alternative app stores on iOS (within the EU).
         | AltStore, Epic Games Store, and even a corporate-targeting
         | store from Mobivention.
         | 
         | Apple is pulling some shit that will probably be declared
         | illegal the moment it hits the courts with installation fees
         | when distributing apps outside of Apple's ecosystem, but AFAIK
         | Epic is taking care of that for AltStore and Mobivention
         | probably factors it into its corporate pricing structure.
         | 
         | There's a lack of apps on these stores, though.
        
           | nazgu1 wrote:
           | You can, indeed, but all apps have to pass Apple review. So
           | they can still reject app on vague reasons.
        
             | dewey wrote:
             | That's not true, they get notarized but not reviewed.
        
               | nazgu1 wrote:
               | You are right, apps are not reviewed by humans. But there
               | is automatic review in the process of notarization. And
               | you still need to ask apple for all entitlements you need
               | (Critical alerts, CarPlay etc), as in the case mentioned
               | in this blog post.
        
               | socalgal2 wrote:
               | guessing it won't be long until they add an LLM type
               | thing into the mix. Then they will "claim" it's automated
               | and fair.
        
               | kalleboo wrote:
               | Bullshit. "Notiarization" for iOS apps in the EU is just
               | App Review by another name, completely different from the
               | automated Notarization they originally introduced for
               | macOS apps.
               | 
               | https://mjtsai.com/blog/2024/03/17/ios-notarizations-
               | human-r... https://mjtsai.com/blog/2024/06/14/utm-
               | blocked-outside-app-s...
               | 
               | "have it evaluated based on the Notarization Review
               | Guidelines (a subset of the App Review Guidelines)"
               | https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-
               | connect/distribut...
        
           | WhyNotHugo wrote:
           | > You can install alternative app stores on iOS (within the
           | EU).
           | 
           | And you need a few million dollars in the bank to be allowed
           | to implement one (plus some other ridiculous requirements).
           | The whole system still makes it impossible for a small team
           | to develop and shift software without a huge middleman
        
         | WhyNotHugo wrote:
         | > Time for an alternative app store.
         | 
         | Not really. Just allow users to install applications without a
         | middleman. Like we've been doing since forever in pretty much
         | any other platform.
         | 
         | The whole point of an app store is to limit and control what a
         | user is allowed to run. Alternative app stores just shift the
         | blame elsewhere
        
       | Zealotux wrote:
       | Why can't I, the user, give a special permission to a specific
       | app to override the silent mode just like I can with my emergency
       | contacts?
        
         | akimbostrawman wrote:
         | Because you are always only the user instead of the owner with
         | an apple device and software.
        
           | aziaziazi wrote:
           | I understand and share your feeling, however I think OP
           | question is interesting enough to deserve a more complete
           | response. Trying to frame it another way:
           | 
           | Is that specific non-par feature voluntary from Apple or
           | might them just didn't thought about it yet? If that's
           | voluntary, what's the logic that make them think it's better
           | for their business to not allow that feature?
        
             | akimbostrawman wrote:
             | From my experience apple tries very hard to remove or hide
             | any feature it can, there argument is probably to not
             | overwhelm user and simplicity
        
               | aziaziazi wrote:
               | That's a fair hypothesis. Thanks.
        
         | jwatzman wrote:
         | For do not disturb, you can: settings -> focus -> do not
         | disturb has a section at the top for allowing specific apps or
         | specific people.
        
       | nottorp wrote:
       | You have functionality that is overlapping with something
       | provided by Apple.
       | 
       | It's possible they will find reasons to reject your app
       | indefinitely.
        
         | agos wrote:
         | if that is so they could just say that they reject the app
         | because it replicates built in functionality - it's a well
         | known cause for rejection
        
           | nottorp wrote:
           | They could be A/B testing.
           | 
           | Or more likely, Apple reviewers aren't paid so well and have
           | 3 minutes to review each submission so they just reject for
           | the first reason that comes up.
        
       | zug_zug wrote:
       | Sounds like apple really needs a better review/appeal process,
       | official set of standards, etc. Seems like it's bad for their
       | ecosystem at this point.
        
         | threeseed wrote:
         | a) They have an appeals process:
         | https://developer.apple.com/distribute/app-review
         | 
         | b) Standards has been in place for over a decade:
         | https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines
        
           | logistra wrote:
           | The appeals process does not apply to Critical Alert
           | Entitlement requests, which must be submitted through the
           | external form:
           | https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/notifications-
           | cr...
        
       | nazgu1 wrote:
       | The same is with CarPlay for example. You need to apply form
       | entitlement. For me this is weird, it is user choice if he would
       | like to have critical alerts, CarPlay UI and so on. And Apple
       | have review process to not pass apps that abuse this mechanisms./
        
       | SuperShibe wrote:
       | This seems like something you could fix by reminding them that
       | the DMA exists (if your app is available in the EU)
        
       | petercooper wrote:
       | I could shorten this to _" I can't understand Apple"_ much of the
       | time. I love Apple products, but they do make some wacky
       | decisions that surely make sense _somehow_ (probably due to
       | scale, regulation, or business aims) but the reasoning is
       | entirely opaque nowadays. One thing I thought Steve Jobs did
       | reasonably well was at least try to justify Apple 's decisions,
       | but they don't have anyone who levels with people in that way
       | anymore.
        
       | xtajv wrote:
       | Ok sorry, I'm going to state the obvious.
       | 
       | The "Apple Critical Alerts" API is clearly intended as a
       | replacement channel for cellular emergency alerts[0]. (If not a
       | "replacement", then perhaps a "supplemental" option. Redundancy
       | is good when we're talking about whether "911" works).
       | 
       | The "Apple Critical Alert" API policy, restricting who's allowed
       | to call the API, _is a good thing_. You just _do not_ get
       | performant public notifications if you allow just _anybody_ to
       | broadcast. (Milli)seconds count, people.
       | 
       | I hate Singleton patterns as much as anybody. And I hate when
       | business happens behind closed doors, with limited public access,
       | and restricted opportunity for public comment.
       | 
       | But again, if we're talking about the choice between """ locking
       | down this _one_ special channel, because it 's responsible for
       | real-time public safety alerts """ vs. """ asking how many
       | broadcasters can possibly share that channel, before contention
       | and congestion result in human-perceptible delays to alert
       | delivery. """ Then I would opt for the former.
       | 
       | --- [0] You know how your phone will buzz REAL loud if there's
       | like, an Amber Alert or Tsunami or something? That's a feature of
       | the cellular system. To my knowledge, emergency alerts and 911
       | calls go over a separate dedicated mini-channel, which has gone
       | by various names through POTS/2G/3G/5G and beyond. A.K.A.s: -
       | Public Warning System (PWS) - Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEAs) -
       | CMAS (Commercial Mobile Alert Service)
        
         | xtajv wrote:
         | P.S. I'm sorry to be grouchy about it- I just don't think folks
         | realize that yes, 1. emergency infrastructure really _does_ run
         | over the same networks as everything else 2. That We carve out
         | special lanes for emergency /911 packets. That traffic is
         | special.
        
           | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
           | What?!
           | 
           | You mean I don't get to have every phone in a store buzz,
           | when we have a special on tinned prunes?
           | 
           | What is the feature for, if not that?
           | 
           | Overzealous marketing is why we can't have nice things.
        
         | cnity wrote:
         | I don't think it's just about latency. Actually I think it's
         | _mainly_ about not diluting the meaning of emergency alerts and
         | opening it for abuse. But yeah, I agree. I think what TFA has
         | run into is by design, and frankly I 'm kinda glad it works
         | this way.
        
         | iLoveOncall wrote:
         | > The "Apple Critical Alerts" API is clearly intended as a
         | replacement channel for cellular emergency alerts
         | 
         | I don't see how it is "clearly intended" for this purpose, and
         | nothing seems to be indicating that.
         | 
         | Apple's own applications use it for a lot of things that are
         | not at all related to those large-scale alerts, and so do many
         | other applications. Their critical alerts API is just about
         | bypassing the silent mode when needed.
         | 
         | You say it yourself, there is another system for large-scale
         | alerts, which is unrelated to Apple.
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | That would make sense if Apple's description and usage didn't
         | completely contradict what you wrote. It's not "clearly
         | intended" for that purpose if Apple uses it for other purposes.
         | This seems like your interpretation rather than Apple's policy.
        
         | gagik_co wrote:
         | Agreed. Apple also has the category of Time-sensitive
         | notifications which is available to all apps and would fit fine
         | for this usecase. Worst case one would need to direct users to
         | add the app as a Do Not Disturb exception.
        
         | nurumaik wrote:
         | Yet zenduty is allowed to use critical alerts api while being
         | unrelated to public safety in general
        
           | threeseed wrote:
           | Zenduty is very much related to public safety depending on
           | the industry.
           | 
           | If you're at a power company an incident could mean a life
           | saving medical machine goes offline.
           | 
           | And I've personally seen a P1 related to a power outage at an
           | infectious diseases lab.
        
         | rezonant wrote:
         | The article, and Apple's messaging therein, contradicts your
         | understanding of this feature.
         | 
         | > Because Critical Alerts are disruptive, they are meant to be
         | used for a very restricted number of purposes. This include
         | medical- and health-related notifications, home- and security-
         | related notifications, and public safety notifications.
         | 
         | Only the last use case matches what you describe. And as the
         | article says, Apple's own Health app uses this feature, along
         | with, apparently, simple TODO apps. Apple's health app makes
         | sense, since Apple specifically calls out medical apps. Is a
         | medicine reminder app a medical app? I would say so.
         | 
         | Apple's developer documentation states:
         | 
         | > Critical alerts ignore the mute switch and Do Not Disturb;
         | the system plays a critical alert's sound regardless of the
         | device's mute or Do Not Disturb settings. You can specify a
         | custom sound and volume. > > Critical alerts require a special
         | entitlement issued by Apple.
        
         | HelloImSteven wrote:
         | Apple's Critical Alerts aren't a broadcast system though. It's
         | just an API to bypass the mute switch and DnD, but users have
         | to go into settings to enable it on a per-app basis. The alert
         | is otherwise just a normal notification.
         | 
         | It does tend to be used for public safety notifications, but
         | it's strictly opt-in. There are also several apps using it for
         | smart home security alerts, health reminders, etc. already.
        
         | filleokus wrote:
         | I haven't seen any hint that the Critical Alerts entitlement
         | would use any special infra compared to regular push
         | notifications.
         | 
         | It's just metadata in the notification body indicating to the
         | device to ignore silent mode etc.
         | 
         | It's e.g used by Pagerduty [0]. It's just a way to override
         | notification settings.
         | 
         | The software for the systems you mention have this entitlement
         | (or some equivalent), but are otherwise completely unrelated to
         | this.
         | 
         | [0]: https://support.pagerduty.com/main/docs/mobile-app-
         | settings#...
        
         | hofo wrote:
         | Nah it's for apps like those that monitor a user's continuous
         | glucose meter. In addition to simple monitoring they alert the
         | user when the reading is on the extreme ends of a safety range.
         | The app for Abbott's Freestyle Libre requires the setting to be
         | enabled and will not allow the use of the app without it
         | enabled. I suspect that's what Apple means in their rejection.
         | I can turn it off but the app won't work without it.
        
       | uni_baconcat wrote:
       | I have checked all apps on my phone. Besides Apple first party
       | apps such as Home and Message, only one earthquake alert app has
       | this level of notification.
        
       | bitpush wrote:
       | People should realize that Apple plays favorites and lets their
       | own apps use private APIs. Developers that bet on Apple platforms
       | (iOS in particular) are at the mercy of Apple, and the company
       | doesnt even try to play fair most of the time.
        
         | threeseed wrote:
         | Apple has always considered their apps to be part of the OS.
         | 
         | It was only because of legal disputes that they were ever split
         | off.
         | 
         | And it is shocking that Apple the OS company has a favourable
         | relationship with Apple the app company. Never happens in IT.
        
       | mimsee wrote:
       | If this reminder app to take meds can't access this API, how can
       | HomeAssistant's iOS app access it where, I the user, can base the
       | trigger for a critical notification on virtually anything?
        
         | logistra wrote:
         | Yeah. That's why I am so confused.
        
       | os2warpman wrote:
       | I don't know if a pill reminder app rises to the level of
       | importance where a critical alert is needed.
       | 
       | There are only five apps on my phone, out of over a hundred, that
       | use critical alerts.
       | 
       | PulsePoint, if someone near me is having a heart attack
       | 
       | Messages, if one of my kids is in trouble
       | 
       | Health, if I am having a heart attack
       | 
       | Home, if my smoke alarm is going off
       | 
       | ActiveAlert, my fire department's dispatch notification app,
       | which will tell me where to drive the ambulance if someone is
       | having a heart attack
       | 
       | If I'm in a darkened theater and someone nearby needs cpr, my
       | house is on fire, or one of my kids is in trouble I want the
       | phone to make a sound.
       | 
       | I want someone else's phone to make a sound if they get those
       | notifications, too.
       | 
       | If it's time to take their atorvastatin I don't give a shit their
       | phone better stay shut the hell up.
       | 
       | If someone's calendar app slipped through the cracks and got
       | permission to issue critical alerts, THAT is the problem, not the
       | fact that a pill reminder app can't.
        
         | Martinussen wrote:
         | If I miss the dosing window by more than an hour or so it'll
         | either ruin my sleep or ruin my day after lunch, I have
         | responsibilities and can easily lose track of time for an hour
         | or two while working or in meetings, so the iOS medication
         | reminders are very useful to me personally, at least.
         | 
         | edit: though if I remember or see the initial reminder and log
         | it, it obviously won't go off with sound. If it pings, I've
         | basically always already forgotten.
        
           | xattt wrote:
           | With all due respect and without knowing your clinical
           | history _at all_ , this level of sensitivity to a statin
           | probably warrants a review of your med with your provider.
        
         | BrandonSmith wrote:
         | Now evaluate a glucometer.
        
           | os2warpman wrote:
           | Bluetooth-enabled continuous glucose monitors are medical
           | devices and have access to critical alerts.
        
         | kalleboo wrote:
         | > _I don't know if a pill reminder app rises to the level of
         | importance where a critical alert is needed_
         | 
         | Doesn't that depend a lot on the types of pills a person takes
         | and their mental needs?
         | 
         | > _If it's time to take their atorvastatin I don't give a shit
         | their phone better stay shut the hell up._
         | 
         | I have it on good authority that some people's phones even make
         | sounds when they get something as trivial as _a phone call_
        
           | TZubiri wrote:
           | But not in dnd
        
       | bArray wrote:
       | I think the main point is being missed here:
       | 
       | > Apple's own Health app uses Critical Alerts for its medication
       | reminders, so I assumed my use case would qualify. I submitted a
       | request for access to the API, but it was rejected.
       | 
       | I think what is being developed is a competitor to a space that
       | Apple are in and want to be more involved in, and that is why you
       | will not get permission to use the necessary API.
        
         | LadyCailin wrote:
         | That anti competitive stance has been working very well for
         | Apple lately.
        
         | maratc wrote:
         | I use "Apple's own Health app" medication reminders and from
         | what I can see, _they do not use Critical Alerts_. They behave
         | differently from the app I use that prompts me of the sugar
         | levels of a relative (that app _does_ use Critical Alerts, and
         | the difference is very clear.)
        
           | terabytest wrote:
           | Critical alerts are available as an optional setting for
           | medication reminders in the iOS Health app.
        
       | lapcat wrote:
       | For some reason the submission title is labeled (2023) even
       | though the blog post is dated 08 May, 2025.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-08 23:02 UTC)