Live data from Hacker News

Android: I don't need your permission

blog.danlew.net

141–150 of 190 posts

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#141
This is why I love xprivacy. It gives me a popup when an app tries to access something, and I can whitelist or blacklist it, either on a temporary or permanent basis. Unlike google's halfarsed attempt at a privacy layer, it also doesn't give an exception when an app tries to access restricted data as that can cause apps to crash; it just sends back fake data (device ID is DEFACE, contacts are empty, location is christmas island, etc.). It also covers just about every permission you can think of, unlike app ops/privacy guard that are just a few.

Although really, what needs to change isn't just in android itself; it's also developer behaviour. Stop trying to do intrusive things like prefilling forms, as it doesn't benefit the user in any real way.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#142
post #77
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is totally nuts. Whoever thought to bundle all of that stuff up in one huge permission...

The same people that would prefer if you give all permissions. I still see no reason why Google doesn't implement more granular permissions models. Has the latest Android given you the ability to restrict an apps permissions after install without resorting to trusting 3rd party tools like xPrivacy or uninstalling the app?

Google will never do that themselves, because it interferes with their own datamining business. XPrivacy will always be required to control your own data.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#143
post #41

I wish it was that easy in all cases. For VLC on Android, we need the READ_PHONE_STATE permission, in order to stop the music when a phone call is coming in. We just use it to make pause on incoming call. (VLC on Android is also an audio player, with a background audio service). The catch is, this is not an Intent you can send or request easily. We tried so many other ways, but none work. But on the play store it's w…

Sometimes, I've seen apps on the play store with a section explaining what each permission request is for with details of what it uses and why. Did you consider adding a section like that for VLC?

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#144
post #41

I wish it was that easy in all cases. For VLC on Android, we need the READ_PHONE_STATE permission, in order to stop the music when a phone call is coming in. We just use it to make pause on incoming call. (VLC on Android is also an audio player, with a background audio service). The catch is, this is not an Intent you can send or request easily. We tried so many other ways, but none work. But on the play store it's w…

Sometimes, I've seen apps on the play store with a section explaining what each permission request is for with details of what it uses and why. Did you consider adding a section like that for VLC?

We _already_ do that in the play store description, of course.

That does not prevent the emails.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#145
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So without asking my permission // You give your permission when you install it with auto-update enabled. I always disable auto-update.

Yes, but this relies on the program being friendly enough to give you a choice. The OS is not blocking it, it voluntarily refrains. Some are not so polite. For instance, Google Chrome auto-updates without asking permission, and the only way to stop it on Windows is to edit some registry setting. It will update even when it is not running, which annoys me since I have Chrome installed and don't use it, and every so of…

If you disable the google updater service, it stops chrome from intrusively background updating. Be careful though, as it often gets reenabled when you open chrome.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#146

> Case in point: android.permission.CALL_PHONE. You need it to initiate phone calls from your app, right? This kind of thing is why I can't see myself switching to Android as my primary mobile OS any time soon. If anything, I can see a bright future for Microsoft. In spite of the fact Windows Phone exists, Android is very much the Windows of the mobile ecosystem. Permissions on Android are horrendous for developers.…

I' an Android (Cyanogenmod) user and agree with your point, this could--and should--be done a lot better.

I am not familiar with iOS and iPhones at all. You state iOS apps only rarely need to be granted permissions, how do they make that work? I can see only three ways that could happen:

Either the app can do most things without asking permissions (bad for the user--there'd be malware). Or the app simply can't ask for permission to do a lot of things (bad for the developer, and ultimately the user--because less functionality). Or it's a combination of the first combined with the iOS App Store's walled-garden quality check approach (bad for everybody, and the biggest reason I got an Android instead of iOS device).

I could be wrong but I'm guessing it's the third option?

I'm going to try to be objective here, crazy how I can just feel that seed of fanboiism in my head, let me just leave it at me being idealistically opposed to the walled garden approach for reasons that have been rehashed on HN for ages now :)

That said, there's also a few practical things the iOS walled-garden App Store could improve upon. First one being the $99 developer fee. I teach kids computerstuff and one time a particularly clever 11-year old needed some help setting up Eclipse, I didn't have a smartphone myself back then, I wasn't sure what he was trying to do, so I just helped him navigate the English menus, install the proper Java things and let him at it. Sure enough, an hour later he proudly showed me his Android phone. "Hello World", it said.

Another thing, this iOS App Store review process, it's done by humans yes? Does it scale? From what I've heard, even though I mostly heard it in the form of complaints, you get rejected by actual humans, yes? That's obviously never going to happen to Google's Play Store. But then again, the Google Play Store isn't quite as deeply engrained into Android as the iOS App Store, you don't need to use it, you can even completely step out of Google's ecosystem and still use Android (though it's hard, a bit like using Linux 15 years ago). Does the iOS App Store also use scanners and automated tests for new applications? I bet they do, do we know what kinds? Like it could test for certain kinds of API calls so the human reviewers know what sort of thing to look for.

One funny thing is, I used to have to explain people what "repositories" are in Linux, what they do, what they're used for and why they're so much cooler than (Windows) having to download .exe installers from all sorts of websites to get your software. Nowadays I can just tell people "it's pretty much like an app store", and they know all they need to know. That Ubuntu Software Centre even looks like an app store, with all the stars and ratings (blegh).

However, the repositories in Linux, are not quite like either the Google Play Store or iOS App Store. They obviously do not have the walled-garden approach, it's entirely open. Linux software from the repositories doesn't need to ask for permission for anything (except sudo). Still, there is no malware in the repositories, at all. I admit I am a little bit vague on how this works too, perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but how do they do that?

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#147
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ringer doesn't request audio focus. I would think that this is a bug in the ringer and not an overall limitation of the Android permission system.

Which doesn't really help the users stuck on Android versions that never get any update or bugfixes. In which case apps have to take the pragmatic route and just work around the issue. Even if that requires a scary permission. No user would point to Google and say »VLC doesn't pause when the phone rings, fix the ringer, please.«. Rather they point to VLC and say »VLC doesn't pause when the phone rings, fix VLC please…

Would be nice if you could request "you're using an older version of Android so we need more scary permissions".

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#148
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It almost seems like they do it intentionally to improve tracking and desensitize users. Only a terrible engineer would think needing to know if the phone is ringing needs a permission, let alone one that provides unique IDs plus the phone numbers on phone calls. It's one more reason I've gone from loving Google to actively avoiding them. (Also, they've very aggressive in getting people to turn on location info and h…

It should need a permission in my opinion. Why should a calculator (for example) know if there is incoming call? But this case should be handled by a permission in dialer (or whatever handles incoming calls) - something like "allow to broadcast mute to all other applications".

> Why should a calculator (for example) know if there is incoming call?

Because it's running on a phone.

Remember those cool requestAnimationFrame side-channel timing attacks. I think it'd be pretty hard to hide at least certain things like these from an app if it really wanted to know. In this case I think it's pretty fair to just give it an API call for it.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#149
post #140
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything, I can see a bright future for Microsoft. I have both Android and Windows Phones. The Windows Phone is actually quite good and from developer point of view, a pleasure compared with Android tooling and APIs. Just the way Microsoft behaved with the customers has made many look elsewhere.

Could you explain what you're referring to in the last sentence please? (An example of how the Windows phone permissions and intents systems work in practice would be nice too)

Could be the fact that Microsoft updates their iOS and Android apps before the same app on Windows Phone. I've seen that complaint from some of the WP community.

Re: Android: I don't need your permission

#150
Crazy theory but stick with me please -

Why aren't we as users allowed to fine grain the data on our device that we want the app to have access to?

A benign example would be a camera app; it wants access to my camera and mic, perhaps the local storage. It may have further features to store images in it's cloud service, assign the image to a contact and so forth.

But as a user I only want the app for it's picture taking ability - the app requests at the point of installation the permissions it requires, and I only grant it access to the camera.

It's then down to the app / developer to handle the exceptions and offer a message saying "You have taken a picture, but the app doesn't have permission to save it to storage. Please allow access by clicking here, otherwise this feature will not work/be unavailable".

A bit more of effort on the developers part, no question - but a user than has complete control over what an app can access.

I'm not an app developer, but skimming over how intents work and chiming along with this article - I don't think it would be a significant change to the underlying structure of android to hand back specific permission controls to a user.

Post reply on HN