Google: 'Your $1000 phone needs our permission to install apps now'". Android users are screwed - Louis Rossmann
-
I'll go to iphone if it's not able to be disabled. And I hate iphone.
Doesn't iPhone already have pretty much the exact restrictions that are coming to Android?
-
Does this work with any app or just second party ones? Can you re-enable it?
Yes it modifies the phone not the app and you can re-enable it anytime with 1 instead of -1
-
I know why you included both, but saying "1 adb command" and then posting two is funny to me.
One gets the current value to verify it and another actually sets a new value. It's the way these commands are usually shared.
-
Doesn't iPhone already have pretty much the exact restrictions that are coming to Android?
I don't have an iPhone to test, but google is showing mixed results so I can't confirm.
However, Ive been on android for about 20 years, never owned an iPhone, always android. I'd ditch it just for blocking it as a point.
-
At this point, I just need a community device. And I’ll gladly pay monthly for an OS that has the basics with a web browser and full privacy.
If Reddit Old would play nice with said device, and doesn't have a native app, I probably will settle on that when my ReVanced 3rd-party-Boost finally dies. (I also use the same developer's Boost for Lemmy app).
I already use Amazon in one browser instead of its app, and Facebook in a whole separate browser on my device, even.
But there are apps on in daily, like my brokerage account and my budget/financial app (Monarch Money is worth the subscription, for me).
I would absolutely pay for access to
-
This is the risk of "trusted computing" architectures. Who is governing the "trusted" part of that.
These cryptographic signatures are not as much of a death knell for Android as some would have you believe. The trick is to get a common code signing cert into your device, that is then used to sign any third party APK you want to run. You can avoid the Google tax this way. I assume that's how most sideloading sites and apps are going to handle this.
The question is, how do you add that certificate? Is it easy and straight forward (with plenty of scary warnings), as a user? Or is it going to be a developer options deal? Or will I need root to add the cert?
I'm not sure what that answer is right now.
I just want to finish this post with a few words about trusted computing models. Plainly: Apple has been doing this for years ... That's why you download basically everything from an app store with Apple. Whether on your Mac OS device, your iPhone, iPad or whatever iDevice.... Whether the devs need to sign it, or the app gets signed when it lands on the store, there's a signature to ensure that the app hasn't been tampered with and that Apple has given the app it's security blessings, that it is safe to run. Microsoft and Google have both been climbing towards the same forever. Apple embedded their root of trust in their own proprietary TPM which has been included with every Mac, and iDevice for a long ass time. Google also has a TPM, the Titan security module, I believe that was introduced around pixel 3? Or 4?... Microsoft made huge waves requiring it for Windows 11, and we all know what that discussion looks like. Apple requires a TPM (which they supply, so nobody noticed), Google has been adding a TPM and TPM functionality to their phones for years, and now Windows is the same. None of this is a bad thing. Trusted computing can eliminate much of the need for antivirus software, among other things. I digress. We've been going this way for a long time. Google is just more or less, doing what Apple has already done, and what Microsoft will very likely do very soon, making it a requirement. Battlefield 6 I think, was one of the first to require trusted computing on Windows and it will, for damned sure, not be the last that does. The only real hurdle here is managing what is trusted. So far, each vendor has kept the keys to their own kingdoms, but this is contrary to computing concepts. Like the Internet, it should be able to be done without needing trust from a specific provider. That's how SSL works, that's how the Internet works, that's how trusted computing should work. The only thing that should be secret is the private signing keys. What Google, Apple, and Microsoft should be doing, is issuing intermediary keys that can sign code signing certs. So trusted institutions that create apps, like... Idk, valve as an example, can create a signature key for steam and sign Steam with it, so the trust goes from MS root to intermediary key for valve, to steam code signing key, and suddenly you have an app that's trusted. Valve can then use their key to sign software on their store that may not have a coffee signing key of it's own. This is just one example based on Windows. And above all of this, the user should be able to import a trusted code signing cert, or an intermediary cert signing cert, to their service as trusted.
Anyways, thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Thanks for sharing all of that. I got to think a little bit about stuff that normally I would take for granted.
-
What even is the reason for this? All this is going to accomplish is less Android market share.
Control.
Where else are we going to go?
-
I don't have an iPhone to test, but google is showing mixed results so I can't confirm.
However, Ive been on android for about 20 years, never owned an iPhone, always android. I'd ditch it just for blocking it as a point.
If side loading is actually allowed on iOS it's exclusively because the past few years of lawsuits forced them to, and they keep trying to block it in new ways. Android can only be equally bad as Apple at worst, because Apple is as bad as they are legally allowed to in a given jurisdiction. So picking iOS over Android over that specific issue seems odd. They get brownie points for having blocked it from the start?
-
So yeah we'll do a decentralized Linux phone of sorts, if Google is going full 3rd Reich with Android we'll move to a Linux based OS phone.
Simple as that.
Dude. On what hardware?
My 1 years old AND 4 years old Samsung phones now lock their bootloader.Random, fly by night China phones won't have enough documentation or enough consistency in hardware to be a viable rally point for firmware devs, will they?
Don't get me wrong. I will buy exactly that Linux Phone for my next device if it gives me three browsers and enough untracked fundamental functionality like calculators and contact lists.
But I'm genuinely worried there won't be a hardware vendor in the game in my market (the land of Y'allQaeda) to sell me a compatible device that plays nice with the three mobile providers that still exist here.
-
You forgot your /s
Expecting sarcasm to be understood in text is dumb. Too many dipshits exist to assume people arnt serious
-
Is Linux viable as a mobile os yet?
-
How does this affect "second-party" apps (i.e. apps you have created yourself)? Are you still allowed to go to Android studio, make an APK, transfer it to your own phone, and install that app? If no, this spells the death of experimental indie developers on Android.
They might copy from apple. 3 apps with a self signed cert that needs to be renewed every week...
-
Yeah, but that doesn't help if you can't make apps that support the hosted services. Google is trying to have complete ownership of what runs on your phone.
Gotta buy a different phone then
-
Doesn't upset me, why? Because it's not about controlling what app I install, but who wrote the app I might install. If my understanding is not correct of this change , I'm happy to be shown I'm wrong.
I think that other guy's comment about the ICE tracker app really highlights the most important problem: If only signed apps can run, governments can pressure companies to remove access to certain apps. Even if Google allowed posting the app, the author would have to de-anonymize himself, and Google would have to comply with the law if they were subpoenaed. They would definitely give up the author's name. It is an issue of freedom, freedom of speech, freedom to do with your device what you choose to do with it. You might not have a use for it (right now) but it's not necessarily something you'd want to give up.
And, honestly, I would personally be affected by this, eventually. I use an app called NewPipe to watch youtube. It already isn't available on the app store (violates google's ToS), and I doubt they'd let people install this even if the author properly identified themselves, because I use it to avoid watching adds and to be able to "subscribe" to channels without an account. I could just borrow my husband's premium subscription, I guess, but I really only use NewPipe to watch certain things, and it lacks the algorithmically driven feed (which I am actively avoiding, Google tends to suggest things that make you angry for clicks).
-
Is Linux viable as a mobile os yet?
Linux isn't an OS.
-
Linux isn't an OS.
What do you mean ? There is ubuntu touch working in some phone.
I saw that there is some improvements, for the fair phone 5 it seems that it is working but no dual Sim possible and LTE phone calls.
You can check it out for your model on this site :
https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ -
You forgot your /s
Expecting sarcasm to be understood in text is dumb. Too many dipshits exist to assume people arnt serious
I wouldn't call it dumb but maybe expecting too much from people now that convenience and hand holding is expected at all times.
*Canned laughter that fades into awkward reflective silence.*
-
I'll go to iphone if it's not able to be disabled. And I hate iphone.
- Android will require apps to be signed with real name signatures. You can install apps from anywhere.
- iPhone doesn't allow any apps to be installed except when downloaded from Apple through iTunes.
-
If Google is going to lock down my device to the point where I can't install apps without their permission, I might as well dump Android and go straight to Apple. I sacrificed my phone being good for the openness of the platform, but if Google loses that openness, why shouldn't I go with Apple?
This change requires you to attach your real name when publishing software. That's all. You can still publish to and install packages from anywhere. This doesn't come close to Apple's complete control.
Google already scans packages you're installing for malware and alerts you and allows you to install them anyway. This gives that scanner one more tool to identify bad actors.
-
Linux isn't an OS.
30+ years later and people just can’t let that go….
