iMazing 3.6.3 Restores Sideloading of Removed iOS Apps via macOS After Apple Authentication Changes
Developers of iMazing have released version 3.6.3 that restores the ability for home users to sideload applications previously removed from the App Store onto iPhone devices. The update works exclusively through macOS at present, while Windows users must wait for further fixes.
The release resolves authentication and download errors affecting macOS 26 and earlier versions. After applying the patch, developers strongly recommend rebooting the computer. Support for macOS 27 Golden Gate and Windows has not yet been restored because these platforms require additional development work.
The problems originated after Apple modified its backend systems. Tools such as iMazing, ipa_downloader, 3uTools, and others stopped receiving installation files from the App Store media library, with servers returning HTTP 403 Forbidden errors. According to participants in the ipatool project, Apple began rejecting both new and legacy authentication methods in CommerceKit, deactivated old tokens, and revoked certain certificates.
Even previously saved IPA files often proved insufficient because transferring an application to another device still required a valid digital signature. The restrictions have hit Russian users especially hard, as they used iMazing to recover banking and other applications removed from the App Store following sanctions.
Related articles
Inserting Contracts into ChatGPT Risks Major Fines Under Russia's 152-FZ Personal Data Law
A detailed analysis examines the legal consequences of uploading contracts containing personal data into foreign AI services such as ChatGPT under Russian Federal Law 152-FZ. The article clarifies that even standard supply agreements include names, positions, passport details, INN numbers, phones and emails that qualify as personal data. It breaks down applicable administrative penalties from Article 13.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, including 150-300 thousand rubles for processing without a proper legal basis and separate fines for failing to notify Roskomnadzor. Cross-border transfer rules under Article 12 require a dedicated notification to the regulator before sending data to services hosted in the United States or European Union. The piece also reviews recent court practice, including a Moscow district court ruling that treated uploading commercial information to DeepSeek as disclosure of trade secrets. No criminal liability under Article 272.1 of the Criminal Code applies to ordinary business use, yet the absence of a data processing agreement with OpenAI or similar providers creates ongoing compliance exposure.
Ideco NGFW Novum Earns Highest Customer Rating in Quadrant Technologies Import Substitution Study
Ideco NGFW Novum achieved the top customer score of 6.9 out of 10 in the Matrix of Import Substitution 2026: NGFW research conducted by Quadrant Technologies, surpassing the market average of 6.3 and outperforming seven competing Russian solutions. The study evaluated vendors based on specialized revenue alongside 18 criteria covering product quality and functionality, with ratings provided directly by specialists who deploy and operate the firewalls in production environments. Ideco excelled in 11 parameters above seven points, including administration convenience at 7.9, technical support and partner network at 7.6, Zero Trust segmentation at 7.3, and both integration capabilities and core NGFW functionality at 7.2. Despite strong product scores, Ideco remains in the Development quadrant rather than Leadership due to lower profile revenue volume, positioning the company as a prime candidate for advancement with increased sales and large-scale deployments. Complementary testing by Infosystems Jet laboratory showed Ideco NGFW Novum passing 189 of 242 checks under Methodology 3.0 and becoming the sole participant to complete an eight-hour stress test. The broader Russian NGFW market is shifting away from emergency import substitution toward demands for real-world stability, updates, documentation, support, and usability, with product cost cited as a rejection factor by 37.5 percent of respondents.
Kubernetes Audit Policy Review: Checklist Targets Common Blind Spots in Rules
An experienced Kubernetes administrator shared a detailed review process for audit policies that often remain untouched for years after initial deployment. The 580-line policy was rebuilt using the Kubernetes Threat Matrix from RedGuard as the primary reference. The author highlights recurring issues such as outdated exceptions, missing coverage for new components, and legacy comments that obscure actual security intent. The resulting checklist focuses on principles rather than cluster-specific findings to help other teams perform effective policy audits. Key recommendations address rule completeness, exception management, and periodic full-scale reviews instead of incremental patching. The approach aims to restore audit policies as active security controls rather than accumulated technical debt.
Avoiding a Leaky Kubernetes Audit Policy: Real-World Configuration Breakdown
Kubernetes Audit Policy is typically configured once during cluster setup and then left untouched for years while accumulating exceptions for new components. Over time the policy stops functioning as a security control and instead becomes an archaeological layer of outdated comments such as "# temporary, TODO remove" that date back three years or more. The author recently reviewed their own 580-line configuration file that had been assembled from multiple sources. Primary reference was the Kubernetes Threat Matrix, which explains why many rules are designed to detect security-relevant actions rather than simply reduce log noise. Examples include targeted monitoring of RBAC modifications and deletion of events. The article emphasizes the need for periodic full reviews instead of incremental patching to maintain effective detection coverage.