A Deceitful 'Doctor' in the Mac App Store
Comments on “A Deceitful 'Doctor' in the Mac App Store”
Claim-checked. Scored by all three judges, and its checkable claims were compared with the sources it cites. How far stories are checked
Objective-See's Patrick Wardle, building on findings from @privacyis1st, reports that Adware Doctor, a $4.99 Mac App Store utility, zips Safari, Chrome, Firefox and App Store history plus process and app lists into a password-protected archive and uploads it to adscan.yelabapp.com. The password, "webtool", is visible on the command line. The app uses a user-approved home-directory grant and Apple's own sample code to list processes inside the sandbox. The app was later removed. Most claims here rest on the author's own analysis; the store-ranking figures weren't verified.
Why it ranked
No. 13 of 93 with a score of 0.66. The panel rated it highest on new information (0.94) and technical depth (0.93), lowest on audience breadth (0.59). The judges disagreed most on reader interest (spread 0.50), so the story is marked contested.
Every answer behind this is in the table under Score.
Score
0.66total under rubric v2.2Contestedjudges differ by 0.50 on reader interest
- Significance0.64
- Reader interest0.76
- Audience breadth0.59
- Practical relevance0.64
- Substantiated0.91
- Technical depth0.93
- New information0.94
- Counts against: Promotional0.05
- Counts against: Overclaim0.35
Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).
| Question | Judge 1 | Judge 2 | Judge 3 | Mean | Spread | Weight | Contribution (weight times mean) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significance | 0.55 | 0.60 | 0.78 | 0.64 | 0.23 | +0.24 | +0.154 |
| Reader interest | 0.44 | 0.90 | 0.94 | 0.76 | 0.50 , above the contested threshold | +0.26 | +0.198 |
| Audience breadth | 0.49 | 0.67 | 0.62 | 0.59 | 0.18 | +0.13 | +0.077 |
| Practical relevance | 0.63 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.64 | 0.10 | +0.22 | +0.141 |
| Substantiated | 0.94 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.91 | 0.06 | +0.05 | +0.045 |
| Technical depth | 0.99 | 0.90 | 0.91 | 0.93 | 0.09 | +0.05 | +0.047 |
| New information | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.08 | +0.05 | +0.047 |
| Promotional | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 | −0.19 | −0.010 |
| Overclaim | 0.50 | 0.20 | 0.34 | 0.35 | 0.30 | −0.11 | −0.038 |
| Sum of contributions | +0.661 | ||||||
| Claim-check penalty | 0.000 | ||||||
| Total, as published | 0.661 | ||||||
Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.
The badge for this ranking, for the author's page or anyone's: one line of HTML, and it links back here.
<a href="https://rubric.hrih.si/editions/2026-10-25/13/"><img src="https://rubric.hrih.si/badge/2026-10-25/13.svg" alt="Ranked #13 on Rubric, 25 Oct 2026" width="245" height="28"></a>Claim check
Claim check: 1 matches source · 4 no source given · 3 couldn’t check. Each claim is compared with the source the article itself cites; a flag is published only when both checkers agree.
Couldn’t checkFirst, only or fastest
Adware Doctor is the #4 top grossing application in the Mac App Store overall and the #1 top grossing app in the paid utilities category.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “It is a top grossing application sitting at spot #4”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: itunes.apple.com/us/app/adware-doctor-anti-malware-ad/id1068833647
No source givenCausal conclusion
Adware Doctor collects Safari, Chrome, Firefox and App Store browsing history, zips it into a password-protected history.zip, and uploads it to adscan.yelabapp.com.
The article gives no link or citation for it.
The article says “the Adware Doctor is indeed surreptitiously stealing your browser history”
The source says No source to compare with.
No source givenDate
The researchers reported their findings to Apple a month before publication, and Apple acknowledged the report and promised to investigate, but the app remained in the store.
The article gives no link or citation for it.
The article says “A full month ago, we reported our findings to Apple, which they acknowledged, and promised to investigate”
The source says No source to compare with.
Couldn’t checkQuote
The vulnerability was originally uncovered by @privacyis1st, who tweeted on August 20, 2018 that Adware Doctor was stealing users' privacy.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “Adware Doctor is stealing your privacy”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: twitter.com/privacyis1st/status/1031428304543395840
No source givenCausal conclusion
Adware Doctor bypasses the sandbox's process-enumeration restriction by using code copied from Apple's GetBSDProcessList sample (Technical Q&A QA1123).
The article gives no link or citation for it.
The article says “It's (likely) just a copy and paste of Apple's GetBSDProcessList code”
The source says No source to compare with.
No source givenQuote
Apple states that the Mac App Store is the safest place to download Mac apps, that it reviews each app, and that it can quickly remove problem apps.
The article gives no link or citation for it.
The article says “The safest place to download apps for your Mac is the Mac App Store”
The source says No source to compare with.
Couldn’t checkDate
In 2016 Adware Doctor was shown to abuse AppleScript to perform elevated actions, in violation of Apple's App Store Guidelines.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “In 2016 it was shown that the application was (ab)using AppleScript in an apparent attempt to perform elevated actions”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: youtu.be/IdDE9IPPGJA
Matches sourceQuote
Apple's App Store guidelines require apps that collect user data to obtain consent and say developers who surreptitiously discover private data will be removed from the Developer Program.
The cited source says the same thing.
The article says “Apps that collect user or usage data must secure user consent for the collection”
The source says “Apps that collect user or usage data must secure user consent for the collection, even if such data is considered to be anonymous at the time of or immediately following…”
Source cited by the article: developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines
Also covered by
No other coverage was clustered with this story.
Elsewhere
Elsewhere: HN —
Recorded for context only, checked 25 Oct 2026, 05:46 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.