Live data from Hacker News

Android developer verification: Early access starts

android-developers.googleblog.com

21–30 of 694 posts

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#21
post #9

I have to admit I couldn't even understand this problem, because for me the "stock OS" is already unbearable and I'd simply never be able to use it - I've never used it for more than a hour..

Ask yourself how relevant and interesting you'd find this comment if someone else had posted it.

I'd agree because I'd feel the same :)

As to relevance to the article - I'm not cheering that much because if Google made "stock OS" even worse then maybe more users would flock to LineageOS/GrapheneOS which would be a great thing and make it harder to push Play Integrity.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#22
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google have their own reasons too. They would love to kill off YouTube ReVanced and other haxx0red clients that give features for free which Google would rather sell you on subscription. Just look at everything they've done to break yt-dlp over and over again. In fact their newest countermeasure is a frontpage story right beside this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45898407

You would still be able to adb installs them. They wouldn't die.

how many people ll do this though? i would expect sub 1% conversion from existing users if they had to do that

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#24
post #3

> Keeping users safe on Android is our top priority. I highly doubt this is your "top" priority. Or if it is then you're gotten there by completely ignoring Google account security. > intercepts the victim's notifications And who controls these notifications and forces application developers to use a specific service? > bad actors can spin up new harmful apps instantly. Like banking applications that use push or SMS…

Their top priority is making money.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#25

The key question for me is whether this "advanced flow" will allow the practical use of entirely separate app stores (like F-Droid) or if they're going to throw up tons of barriers for every individual app install.

If F-Droid is no longer part of the android community, then neither will I.

I'm not too worried. My employer should be, though.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#26
post #9

I have to admit I couldn't even understand this problem, because for me the "stock OS" is already unbearable and I'd simply never be able to use it - I've never used it for more than a hour..

The issue is that of network effects. Making it harder to sideload for example f-droid makes the already small market for it even smaller, leading to less apps. It also forces people developing Apps that they don't want to reveal to be developing for completly valid reasons (Imagine developing a porn app in saudi arabia or an abortion support app in the USA) to validate against google aka the US Government.

I'm just presenting my exotic point of view - since that developer verification would only be needed to run apps on the "stock OS" (which I consider bad), then deliberately excluding it could promote using LineageOS/GrapheneOS which would be a good thing.

But of course I'm talking about non-commercial apps, but commercial app developers would already be on Google Play.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#27

The key question for me is whether this "advanced flow" will allow the practical use of entirely separate app stores (like F-Droid) or if they're going to throw up tons of barriers for every individual app install.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the EU digital markets act mandate this?

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#28
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google have their own reasons too. They would love to kill off YouTube ReVanced and other haxx0red clients that give features for free which Google would rather sell you on subscription. Just look at everything they've done to break yt-dlp over and over again. In fact their newest countermeasure is a frontpage story right beside this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45898407

You would still be able to adb installs them. They wouldn't die.

Somehow I think having to use ADB instead of something like F-Droid with automatic updates would put a damper on things.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#29
If adb is unrestricted and can work with the Linux command shell (something I seem to remember I had read about before; you will need to enable the developer mode to use it), which is aparently a separate system but runs on the same device, although if it has the ability to communicate with the main Android system using adb (which it might be reasonable to require that to be explicitly enabled with another setting, for additional security in case you do not use adb), then this would help since you do not require another computer that would be compatible with adb in order to do it.

However, I think there are other things they should do as well (in addition to the other things) if they want to improve the safety, such as looking at the apps in Google Play to check that they are not malware (since apparently some are; however, it says they do have some safeguards, so hopefully that would help), and to make the permission system to work better (e.g. to make it clear that it can intercept notificatinos; there are legitimate reasons to do this but it should require an explicit permission setting to make this clear).

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#30
post #4

Edit: be sure to read geoffschmidt's reply below /edit The buried lede: > a dedicated account type for students and hobbyists. This will allow you to distribute your creations to a limited number of devices without going through the full verification So a natural limit on how big a hobby project can get. The example they give, where verification would require scammers to burn an identity to build another app instead…

But see also the next section ("empowering experienced users"): > We are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified

Let me guess, a warning box that requires me to give permission to the app to install from third-party sources? Is that not clear enough confirmation that I know what I'm doing? /s
Post reply on HN