This is huge, Android getting locked down to such levels should be sounding alarm bells. They are slowly removing everything that makes Android good.
Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
121–130 of 535 posts
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#122I am worried that this might happen to websites soon. If you want your website to be openable on Apple devices, you would have to pay Apple a fee each month. If you want your website to be openable on Android devices, you would have to pay Google a fee ecah month, etc.
I am worried that this might happen to websites soon.
You mean the new recaptcha that requires remote attestation?
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/07/googles-new-remote-att...
Obviously, it doesn't have the fee part. But Google can decide soon for a substantial number of websites which devices can visit them and which not.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends how you define a CVE. If owning and controlling your device is a CVE/bug then sure you need a tight box with anti tempering as well.
"An app can bypass OS security system with certain setting enabled" absolutely fits into CVEs. There's no "depends: on it. I love how quickly you all forget about security and privacy when it gives a chance to angrily rant.
Sounds like the Settings panel is a CVE, we should immediately get rid of it. And don't forget the Play Store!
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Told by whom though? If it's through proxyware, then there are three parties who mostly don't know each other: - the app embedding the proxyware SDK for money - the proxy operators - the attackers/botnets using the proxy to access ADB. The botnet has no access to the app, so it can't show any messages. The app can show messages, but probably has no connection to the botnet. (I hope) The proxy operators could show a m…
It isn't being done behind-the-back of proxy operators. It's one more revenue stream to be able to remote control real android phones to pass device attestation checks etc. It's marketed to users with phrases like "earn money from your phone whilst you sleep".
Ok, that makes more sense. Hooray for stuff getting even worse...
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#125We need Linux on phones. Bank apps not needed as long as I can use browser. But do need some things like wireless cards, popular apps like Sonos and Spotify working.
Unfortunately many banks in the UK no longer offer a web portal or physical branches. I'd love to see legislation that mandated a functioning web experience for critical services like this (banking, utilities, etc) - otherwise it will continue to further entrench the current duopoly. (I suppose this is also an instance where I should do a better job of voting with my feet and supporting services that do offer this)
Good news for EU citizens though, PSD3 will require that authentication methods without a smartphone are provided:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/fr/qanda_...
Require payment services providers to ensure that all users can benefit from methods to perform SCA which are adapted to their needs and situations and, in particular, that those methods do not depend on one single technology, device or mechanism, for instance on the possession of a smartphone.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#126There's only one reason for anyone, or for me, at least, to choose Android, and it's the only reason I've consistently chosen Android from the very first Google Developer Phone: It's more open.
So, they don't want me to even have that one reason to keep choosing Android, I guess.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#127These are not accidents. Google declared total war against open source.
You only need to remember how it declared war against ublock origin. In
the long run this will also fail, but until then Google causes a lot of
damage. Legislation needs to control this tyrant but unfortunately the
oligarchs run the country of the mad orange king right now.
Louis Rossman will have a field day with Google here. I think it is time to end Evil - that is, to end Google. This company serves no more useful purpose on this planet anymore.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#128Limiting ADB is the obvious next step. Even if this one specific feature request does not come to pass, Google has cornered everyone into relying on a developer interface for any normal personal computing tasks, whether running on-device or through USB/wireless. It's quite clear at some point in the future you will either be required to surrender your identity to them and pay a yearly fee or be severely limited to continue using it in any meaningful capacity, because Google does not want you to develop applications on Android outside their controlled channels -- and it's a developer bridge, the battle was already lost when they did not back down from the changes forbidding normal, legitimate ̶s̶i̶d̶e̶l̶o̶a̶d̶i̶n̶g̶ installation.
>Don’t even get me started on OEMs that force an audio warning such as “This call is being recorded,” when it’s in places where it’s not legally required.
This is also Google's fault. Their dialer--that OEMs increasingly pick over their own, despite their always being much better, see old MIUI one for example--just blanket applies the rule almost everywhere. Especially annoying on all MediaTek SoCs that do not support the feature on an hardware level at all through proper, reliable third-party applications. As if you didn't need any more proof you don't own "your" devices. But maybe in a couple years Gemini will be able to listen to the calls and summarize them for you, just need to go through the approved surveillance channel.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't being done behind-the-back of proxy operators. It's one more revenue stream to be able to remote control real android phones to pass device attestation checks etc. It's marketed to users with phrases like "earn money from your phone whilst you sleep".
Ok, that makes more sense. Hooray for stuff getting even worse...
Remote attestation itself being a questionable idea at best, so it's bad things creating a market for even worse workarounds.
Re: Android may soon restrict on-device ADB
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but what about allowing me to run adb commands on my phone with my consent , and especially delegating that privilege to "strangers", again, with my ( one-time ) consent - by which I mean authorizing apps to run with elevated privileges and/or reestablish the debugging bridge once it invariably disconnects (for other more or less legitimate security reasons)? It's not like those threats silently turn on ADB on p…
They're 3 separate issues. There's a genuine vulnerability (CVE) which has been fixed, there's a follow-up proposal to allow the user to choose which interfaces to bind to, and there's another proposal to disallow ADB over loopback which would cut you off from using ADB on-device. Your problem is with the last one which has nothing to do with the CVE itself.
Correct.
That, and security maximalism displayed in 3. and some comments in the HN thread.