This is exactly why I use Android over iOS, for software freedom. If Google forces ADV and locks out F-Droid, they remove the single biggest differentiator between the two platforms. Making Play Protect into a forced gatekeeper instead of an opt-in security scanner is a massive bait-and-switch for users who care about digital sovereignty.
Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
171–180 of 793 posts
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Doesn't GrapheneOS supports only Google Pixel smartphones now? For good reasons. Most other devices arent secure enough to guarantee privacy. Especially not if loaded with a custom operating system (most devices don't allow to verify the boot chain with a custom OS) > And if we're talking about common people (especially not in US), it's not even everyone who can afford that. You can get a new Pixel 9a here in europ…
> Google phones are surprisingly open and work well. Google takes a pro-user stance here that is extremely rare in the ecosystem, so why not support this product? Because they will pull the rug here one day too. Why on earth should we trust them to keep this approach to their hardware?
Don’t defeat yourself in a one person battle.
After all, it might rain tomorrow - but you should still go outside today.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shame isn’t an applicable concept for a corporation.
Maybe we need an economic system where it is. Shame should come packaged with legal personhood.
Better to pass state bills modifying all of that state’s articles of incorporation to compel adherence to B-corp standards.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#174We finally live in an age when I can tell a clanker that I want an app that does something that I need, connect the phone with adb and in half an hour have a working solution for my tiny problem while knowing little about android development. This is something google should embrace, not kneecap.
What's their interest in you building side-loaded apps instead of using their data hungry services?
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, I submitted an EU DMA complaint (Art 27 report) against Alphabet for unfair gatekeeping against third-party distributions like GrapheneOS via Play Integrity. More info: https://github.com/AlexAltea/blog/blob/master/posts/2026-06-... Convincing developers, especially bank and gov apps, is near impossible and won't scale well. Going after Alphabet for not meeting DMA obligations seems the easier path. Might not g…
Is there something we can do to support your efforts?
Only two things come to mind:
1. Provide or find pro bono legal resources deeply familiar with EU DMA and similar antitrust regulations, willing to proof-check and improve this report, and perhaps advise on better channels to submit it.
2. Locate more affected end-users, including applicable members of the GrapheneOS Foundation and developers behind other distributions, make them aware of these efforts so that hopefully we submit a joint complaint. (Might get more traction, though AFAICT reporting is limited to EU citizens).
Happy to fork this into its own repository if it helps with collaboration.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#176I'm still a little bit confused why the EU does not take action in this. This is definitely a monopolist overreach which has to be shutdown from the beginning
But they did. EU formally allows all these measures by Google in the name of "security" as described in Digital Markets Act Art. 6 (4) fourth paragraph. https://www.eu-digital-markets-act.com/Digital_Markets_Act_A...
They're allowed to do it "to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate ... provided that such measures are duly justified".
It remains to be seen whether the EU decides that this measure is strictly necessary, proportionate and duly justified. They sometimes do the right thing but I'm not getting my hopes up.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
>this malevolent process has exactly one goal: to block you from running software by developers who haven’t been approved centrally by Google. This claim is made by FDroid with no evidence. They make this scary claim which goes against everything Google has claimed so far. They are a biased party, and I can't trust their opinion. I would appreciate if they shared a more in depth investigation or a way to verify there…
Google wrote their plans as blog posts.
But the plan doesn't include blocking developers who are not verified. You can still sideload such apps once you enable sideloading for them.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We need to resist this! I agree. What do you suggest? How can we contribute to the resistance?
This started with phishing, poor people being tricked to install apps that then drained their bank accounts. So to resist, maybe focus on that evil? Better international cooperation, better prosecution?
or how about don't allow government and banks and telcos to use abusive apps to provide essential services?
those people fall for this because for everything poor people do, they need an app that is provided by sleazy vendors and that require tons of permission, and face scan and what not. they were primed so those business could save in operating costs.
that's the problem. won't solve it with slightly less sleazy vendors.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#179I just launched an app in the Google Play Store. I did find it a bit weird that I had to provide my physical home address to get my app listed. Not sure what I would do if someone turned up to complain. Make them a cup of tea?
well they can swat you, order pizza, send you packages (who knows with what inside), spread false info about you if you've given out more info etc... all it takes is one guy who gets too mad for some reason and it's gonna be a lot more costly for you to do anything about it vs. that guy who gets to be completely anonymous about it
Not sure how well swatting works in the UK, and pizza deliveries are all pre-paid.
But yeah, you could have a loony turn up.
Re: Android Developer Verification: Threat masquerading as protection
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
This started with phishing, poor people being tricked to install apps that then drained their bank accounts. So to resist, maybe focus on that evil? Better international cooperation, better prosecution?
> This started with phishing It didn't. Phishing is just a pretext. Google didn't care about Phishing for the first 20 years of Android. Why do they now? Because it serves as argument to close their platform a little more (which is a trend that has been going on for years).
I do think it's about Google trying to squeeze profits out of Android, but is there more direct evidence of this? Cause I always have to wonder if it's something else like KYC.