Every Windows Mobile–based device implements a set of security policies that determine whether an application is allowed to run and, if allowed, with what level of trust. To develop an application for a Windows Mobile–based device, you need to know what the security configuration of your device is. You also need to know how to sign your application with the appropriate certificate to allow the application to run (and to run with the needed level of trust).
Windows Mobile 5.0 Application Security
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
We all know Microsoft is exactly the type of company we want to trust…
This controversial scheme poses major hurdles for users and developers alike and most would agree that Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot with that stuff.
they are pushing the boundaries to insanity. yes, this guarantees fewer people will stick with Windows. me and most folks around here are on Linux already and the rest are Mac fans. i still consider myself a newbie but from what i can tell Linux rocks!
No, it’s not insane. Windows Mobile is heading for phones exclusively in a few years, and there are many these who say that the next big security problem for people will be mobile phones, not desktop OSes. Microsoft simply tries to make this [future] problem smaller by putting boundaries to what executables can do. I think it’s a good idea on their part. Popular decisions are not always the best you know.
DRM spells suicide for Microsoft. you can make a system secure(e.g. Linux is still more secure despite M$ sponsored studies) without using that creepy DRM crap. who in the world would want that? all it does is give people even more reason to switch to linux. the more people switch the sooner M$ is out of business.
you are right: security != DRM. that’s exactly what the guy meant so you both are right. i’d agree that microsoft don’t do themselves a favor by trying to push DRM. most people are smart enough not to fall for it.
I hate to tell you well informed people this but to get a app on a brew/j2me device it must be signed with a valid verisign certificate. For j2me you can get it on there without signing however to access the advance functionality it must be signed. I won’t even mention brew because you need to provide your 1st born and then some to get a test app on the device.
So Microsoft is only doing what is necessary. + Sun/Qualcomm did it 1st
Also i would not buy trust my carrier if they didn’t require something like this to protect my privacy
I don’t know what you are even talking about. brew? j2me? Qualcom? The only word I recognize is Verisign which was some crooket company back in the days. Man…
Microsoft brainfuck
Linux is still more secure despite M$ sponsored studies) without using that creepy DRM crap