Security and Perception

There's been a lot of media interest in security recently.  Apple has refused several applications to it's store from Unity engine developers due to one company using an API to harvest users data from the IPhone.  Unity responded by modifying the API's.

In the UK T-Mobile have admitted several of it's employees sold contract data (e.g. name, numbers, contract end, address, etc) to brokers who then sold it to other networks.  This meant the other networks could "steal" customers from T-Mobile at contract renewal time.  It was T-Mobile that came out and named themselves as the media and regulators wouldn't name the network responsible.

Whilst it's tempting to lambast the companies, the major problem would seem to be perception.  How do the public percieve this?  T-Mobile will likely suffer, but will Unity?  Whilst both came out with immediate action it is the perception that matters.

Unity customers that were refused by Apple will simply have to re-submit and hope Apple are happy the API's don't take IPhone data.  So for Unity customers the problems were minimal and affected only a few, but surely Unity knew these API's could be used this way.  Unity is gathering a lot of attention and this is not what the industry needs.

 Do Iphone customers care that there data is being taken less than T-Mobile customers?  There can be an argument that as it is casual games the effect is less, but is this something the industry should look out for and possible create a standard definition of what is passed through networks?