I am struggling with Security Platform.
I found information that to me look controversial. Which one is the truth, according to your understanding? A or B?
A] Document: "Testing And Signing With Symbian Platform Security - Version 1.3, March 20, 2006, FN"
Statement in ch 2.3:
"S60 3rd Edition introduces mandatory signing of applications. This means that the application will not install if it has not been signed."
B] Book: "Symbian OS Platform security", ch 9.1.1, page 187:
"With this security policy, the capabilities that user can grant are LocalServices and UserEnvironment. Any application requiring other capabilities will, therefore, need to be signed".
Let's take an example of developing a Bluetooth application for "personal use".
If document is right then I have to sign it, maybe better (=cheaper) with Symbian Developer Certificate. In case of my personal use, it will be totally free (since not VeriSign certificate is needed).
If the book is right that means that I can avoid signing it. And I could even deploy that application to my friends and it will work as far as every user will grant LocalServices capabilities at installing time.
Which one is the truth?
I hope someone could clarify.