Kris Kumar
08-01-2005, 07:30 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=57254' target='_blank'>http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=57254</a><br /><br /></div><i>"I'm interested in what other developers think about getting being forced to have your apps "signed" in order to run on Windows Mobile Smartphones. It seems like more telecom carriers, and some distributors (most notably Handango), are starting to require that apps be signed. For example, Handango has recently started to boot off "unsigned" developers from their InHand program, even if the app still installs and runs fine on most devices. Signing can be tedious and expensive, and it may be necessary. But has anyone thought of banding together to form a free certification authority for mobile apps, as an alternative to (expensive) Verisign? Is it worth forming our own, completely FREE, root certification authority for the mobile industry? Have the apps signed by the people, for the people?"</i><br /><br />Mobile application signing is supposed to guarantee peace of mind for the users of the mobile applications. It indicates that the application comes from a trusted source and hence the application is safe to install on the Smartphone. It is a good concept, but the current implementation has some problems. Our reader <i>Airscanner</i> has presented a developer's perspective on the problems with the application signing process and has suggested an alternative. What are your thoughts? As a mobile user do you think applications must be signed? If you are a developer, what are your comments? Please continue the discussion in the <a href="http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=57254">original thread.</a>