Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

commonsware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 311 posts

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#61

Post by pmontra »

cuu508 wrote: post #40
whs wrote: post #14

I used to run Shizuku for my phone to run Hail (an app suspension tool). Now that my credit card bank start checking for USB Debugging I stopped using the app (and now my 3DS OTP has to be over SMS). I believe there's only two banks left in Thailand that do not check for one and it is just a matter of time, because any time these banks could have hired any of those "security" people who will ask why don't we block th…

Perhaps using the bank's website is an option? I don't have a banking app installed on my phone. When I need to make a bank transfer I sit down at the computer.

Not the parent poster but my bank uses its own mobile app for 2FA. No app, no website.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#62

Post by cenamus »

cuu508 wrote: post #40
whs wrote: post #14

I used to run Shizuku for my phone to run Hail (an app suspension tool). Now that my credit card bank start checking for USB Debugging I stopped using the app (and now my 3DS OTP has to be over SMS). I believe there's only two banks left in Thailand that do not check for one and it is just a matter of time, because any time these banks could have hired any of those "security" people who will ask why don't we block th…

Perhaps using the bank's website is an option? I don't have a banking app installed on my phone. When I need to make a bank transfer I sit down at the computer.

Don't know if it's the same there, but where live (and I guess all of the EU) most banks allow you to use the website, but require the phone to authorize logins and transactions (as 2FA basically)

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#64

Post by johnnyfaehell »

beardyw wrote: post #60

I know I risk being down voted remorselessly but I have to put this in context. Where in the real world is anonymity considered ok? If I only put a flyer through someone's letterbox here in the UK, I have to identify myself. If I sell a physical product I not only have to identify myself but take on serious legal liability. An author can take on a pseudonym but only via an identified publisher. In fact that latter ex…

The thing is that so many people are used to doing whatever they want from behind the safety of their screen and are now able to do a lot of things they don’t want anyone to know about. Now the law and common sense is catching up and we’re starting to see things we take for granted in the physical world are coming to the digital world. And I think a lot of people are scared of not being able to do what they used to or being found out for doing it.

Plus, and doing what you suggest but in a country where board directors don’t need to be public really solves it.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#65

Post by mzajc »

sdex wrote: post #27
pastage wrote: post #3

So no F-Droid?

Fdroid signs builds with own key, so it shouldn't be a problem if they pass this verification.

As far as I understand, verification is tied to the package name (or at least the prefix). Since F-Droid packages thousands of applications from different developers, I don't see how they could reasonably get verified.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#66

Post by positron26 »

teekert wrote: post #19
userbinator wrote: post #5

This shouldn't just be "questions"; this should be a full-on opposition. Do not give them even an inch, or they'll take a mile. "debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers." - Richard Stallman, The Right to Read , 1997

Why is it so complex to have a foss mobile OS. I only have Linux PCs (laptops) and servers, 100% of my work and personal stuff is done there (though for work I do need to hop into MS365, Google Workspace, Zoom, etc, hooray for browsers, my final firewall between me and the walled gardens, though we can have a whole discussion on that). For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch. I really must try living in…

Mobile OSs are very consumer focused. I have criticized the FSF for, in there lengthily argued ways, abandoning the consumer.

You have to commercialize openness if you want the muscle of the consumer to be able to produce it.

Short presentation of the basic concept: https://youtu.be/SO46oEdlkY8

Some things with massive value in excess of the cost of production cannot be pursued by capital nor bought by the individual. Your choices are government, non-profit, or something in between all three. PrizeForge aims to be between all three and to completely change how we do consumer open source, incidentally bringing billions of dollars into making it.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#67

Post by enriquto »

sschueller wrote: post #2

The requirement of verification to side-load any app is fascist control. It is clear as night and day. Shame on Google and Apple, it was always clear this was the end goal and next up is also your PC. Right after will come the removal off apps they don't like and there is nothing you can do about it. Stallman was right

> The requirement of verification to side-load any app is fascist control.

Even the language we are using to describe the situation is problematic. Why do we say "side-load an app"? It should be just "run a program"!

An OS that doesn't let you run programs of your choice is laughable.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#68

Post by ajb »

teekert wrote: post #36
Almondsetat wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux is 30 years old, and still it has a laughable percentage of desktop usage. Plus, the only reason it's even usable is because of the relentless work by thankless developers for reverse engineering device drivers. On smartphones this is orders of magnitude more difficult. How do you properly profile and debug a random modem in a phone? What about the cameras? So, how can anyone expect FOSS mobile OSs to ever exis…

Because of hardware standardization Linux has become a pre-competitive layer, a commodity we have decided not to compete on. And it turns out that such a commodity by definition is private, because we don't want any one party to reap all the benefits of a commodity project (we'd rip it out before using it anyway), in the same sense that we don't want want 1 company sitting on all our water consumption data for exampl…

The Android stack, right back to the pre-aquisition "Danger" stack, ripped out everything GPL'd above the kernel, and Google has been investing in their "fuschia" project to make a non-GPL'dv kernel as well. Gradually making more and more of it proprietary was the plan.

Google is a big company and there may have been some factions pushing to make android an open ecosystem, but I don't see that that was ever the companies intent overall.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#69

Post by cyberax »

userbinator wrote: post #5

This shouldn't just be "questions"; this should be a full-on opposition. Do not give them even an inch, or they'll take a mile. "debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers." - Richard Stallman, The Right to Read , 1997

You can buy a completely open RISC-V chip and debug to your heart's content. x86 is also completely open, with only special outliers like XBox/PS5 even half-heartedly trying to disable third-party access.

So the "Right to read" is still bonkers.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#70

Post by pjmlp »

charcircuit wrote: post #38
dns_snek wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android is not FOSS in any sense of the word and doesn't produce any user benefits that FOSS is meant to produce.

Most of AOSP is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license and GPLv2 for the Linux kernel. These are FOSS licenses recognized by the FSF. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2 https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLv2

AOSP is only a subset of what makes Android, an actual mobile phone OS.
Post reply on HN