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

Android developer verification: Early access starts

android-developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 694 posts

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#341

Post by omnifischer »

thisislife2 wrote: post #88
svat wrote: post #7

From the very first announcement of this, Google has hinted that they were doing this under pressure from the governments in a few countries. (I don't remember the URL of the first announcement, but https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-... is from 2025-August-25 and mentions “These requirements go into effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand”.) The “Why verification is important” s…

I don't buy this argument at all that this specific implementation is under pressure from the government - if the problem is indeed malware getting access to personal data, then the very obvious solution is to ensure that such personal data is not accessible by apps in the first place! Why should apps have access to a user's SMS / RCS? (Yeah, I know it makes onboarding / verification easy and all, if an app can acces…

Playstore is the one that contains majority of the malware and people get it only that way. I rarely know of people side-loading that have issues.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ars+technica+playstore+malwa...

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#342

Post by rom1v »

I want to be able to install apps from alternative app stores like F-Droid and receive automatic updates, without requiring Google's authorization for app publication.

Manually installing an app via adb must, of course, be permitted. But that is not sufficient.

> Keeping users safe on Android is our top priority.

Google's mandatory verification is not about security, but about control (they want to forbid apps like ReVanced that could reduce their advertising revenue).

When SimpleMobileTools was sold to a shady company (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38505229), the new owner was able to push any user-hostile changes they wanted to all users who had installed the original app through Google Play (that's the very reason why the initial app could be sold in the first place, to exploit a large, preexisting user base that had the initial version installed).

That was not the case on F-Droid, which blocked the new user-hostile version and recommended the open source fork (Fossify Apps). (see also this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45410805)

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#343

Post by WhoCaresAboutIt »

It's not "sideloading". It is "installing". Just installing the software you want, on the device you own. I am not "sideloading" applications on Windows, either. I download and install them. And before the internet, you got your software on CDs or floppies and ... installed them. This is nothing new. The term "sideloading" somehow implies you are circumventing or side stepping some mechanisms or protections in a non-sanctioned / nefarious manner. I am not. I just install software on my phone.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#344

Post by curtisnewton »

notepad0x90 wrote: post #268
lern_too_spel wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google can then require highlighting things like number of downloads and developer reputation by 3rd party appstores F-droid doesn't want to track number of installs because that is an invasion of privacy. > require developer verification, but also allow third party appstores like f-droid that don't require verification Now you've moved the problem from Google gatekeeping apps to Google gatekeeping app stores. We d…

Then i guess you can't publish apps? One of those issues where i should be "writing to my congressman" or whatever I guess. the problem is real and people like you are being obtuse, unwilling to find a solution or a compromise. Something as simple as number of installs is an invasion of privacy? how? it's a number, you increment a counter when someone hits download, that's it. Yeah, if google gets to have rules over…

> Then i guess you can't publish apps?

I want to distribute apps (someone might also want to simply sell them), not publish them

I don't need a publisher, internet is a publishing media already

> you don't have the right to publish to the android platform

then let me install an alternative OS on the HW i legally bought and own or pay me back.

> the harms caused by malware and malicious actors

life is full of people doing harms and malicious actors, but we don't let Google or any other company gatekeep our lives

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#345

Post by curtisnewton »

Yokolos wrote: post #327
notepad0x90 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then i guess you can't publish apps? One of those issues where i should be "writing to my congressman" or whatever I guess. the problem is real and people like you are being obtuse, unwilling to find a solution or a compromise. Something as simple as number of installs is an invasion of privacy? how? it's a number, you increment a counter when someone hits download, that's it. Yeah, if google gets to have rules over…

How about the harms of fascist authoritarian governments that will use this functionality to ban any apps they don't like? Why do you people only care about malware and not essential fundamental freedoms that affect us every fucking day?

I guess it's because propaganda and scare tactics work.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#346

Post by m4rtink »

jacquesm wrote: post #53
svat wrote: post #7

From the very first announcement of this, Google has hinted that they were doing this under pressure from the governments in a few countries. (I don't remember the URL of the first announcement, but https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-... is from 2025-August-25 and mentions “These requirements go into effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand”.) The “Why verification is important” s…

That's a disingenuous argument though: they are in that position because they chose to make themselves the only way that a 'normal' user is able to install software on these devices. If not for that these governments wouldn't have a point to apply pressure on in the first place.

BTW, Stallman and FSF have been saying this the whole time - if you become the only gatekeeper, don't be surprised when government people show up and force you to ban apps or users from your platform.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#347

Post by gear54rus »

etatoby wrote: post #332
ashleyn wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yt-dlp's days are fairly numbered as Google has a trump card they can eventually deploy: all content is gated behind DRM. IIRC the only reason YouTube content is not yet served exclusively through DRM is to maintain compatibility with older hardware like smart TVs.

Something I've never understood about DRM is, if the content is ultimately played on my device, what stops me from reverse engineering their code to make an alternative client or downloader? Is it just making it harder to do so? Or is there a theoretical limit to reverse engineering that I'm not getting? Do they have hardware decryption keys in every monitor, inside the LCD controller chip?

in short and simple terms, those parasites colluded with hardware manufacturers and put a special chip in your computer and monitor that runs enslavement software

without opening it up physically there is no way to make it stop or get the raw stream before it's displayed

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#348

Post by AnthonyMouse »

hanikesn wrote: post #337
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead of that, why not make it so that an app can access SMS / RCS only when that option is allowed when you have a special Google Account? Because then you still need a special Google Account to install your app when it needs to access SMS / RCS. How about solving this problem in a way that doesn't involve Google rather than the owner of the device making decisions about what they can do with it? Like don't let…

>instead require the user to manually go into settings to turn them on, but if they do then it's still possible They clearly addressed this option in the post, under sufficient social engineering pressure these settings will easily be circumvented. You'd need at least a 24h timeout or similar to mitigate the social pressure.

> They clearly addressed this option in the post, under sufficient social engineering pressure these settings will easily be circumvented. You'd need at least a 24h timeout or similar to mitigate the social pressure.

"Under sufficient social engineering pressure" is the thing that proves too much. A 24h timeout can't withstand that either. Nor can the ability for the user to use their phone to send money, or access their car or home, or read their private documents, or post to their social media account. What if someone convinces them to do any of those things? The only way to stop it is for the phone to never let them do it.

By the time you're done the phone is a brick that can't do anything useful. At some point you have to admit that adults are responsible for the choices they make.

Re: Android developer verification: Early access starts

#349

Post by mid-kid »

> Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.

I don't agree that this is something that should be restricted to "advanced" users, even. One of the basic freedoms that protects users from the unilateral control of the developers, is other developers (like me) being able to patch apps and distribute them to friends and family, without making a public fork or meeting play store requirements. Take for example, youtube revanced. If I want to help my friends by making a private f-droid or obtainium repository, to save them the trouble of going through the (legal!) process of patching and updating the app themselves, right now I can do this. If this requires going through a lengthy process instead, that may or may not be detectable by apps that will then choose to cease to function (this has happened with rooting), my ability to help friends and family as someone with the know-how and experience gets reduced significantly. There's many things that don't fly on the play store, such as the completely legal NewPipe, AdAway, and Termux applications, and while I can sign up for the developer verification, it's not clear to me under what circumstances the verification can be terminated.

Post reply on HN