101–110 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a good rule of thumb, apps are malicious. If they are not, the libraries they include are. If, somehow, even the libraries aren’t malicious, the attackers who compromise the app or its backend are definitely malicious.
I have almost no apps installed on my smart phone ... I just go to the mobile website. Way easier, way more I can control. I'm literally missing nothing.
[YES] [Maybe later]
This feels like treating one particularly visible symptom of the problem instead of fixing the actual problem. What Google should do instead is prevent apps from refusing to work or disabling unrelated functionality just because some permissions are denied (e.g., if you deny your banking app permission to access your camera, everything but mobile check deposit should still have to work). They should use a two-pronged…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Additionally there should be a sandbox mode. While you give the app access to Photos and Contacts, it's an actual sandbox not containing any photo nor any contact. So the app gets what it asks for (the permission) while the user can still control the data.
This is how photos access on iOS works. An app can ask for access to photos and you can choose 3 options: - no photos - only specific photos (the system picker will appear to select them) - all photos
I never understood why Program permissions is such a big deal on Android and IOS, but not on Desktop Windows/Linux, where any application can to everything .
Didn't google flat out ban pay-day loan businesses from buying ads on Google search? Why would they even let them in the app store.
The top google three hits for: pay day loan mountain view are labeled “sponsored” and look sketchy to me.
This feels like treating one particularly visible symptom of the problem instead of fixing the actual problem. What Google should do instead is prevent apps from refusing to work or disabling unrelated functionality just because some permissions are denied (e.g., if you deny your banking app permission to access your camera, everything but mobile check deposit should still have to work). They should use a two-pronged…
The actual problem is that travesties of this scale are allowed to happen on Google’s watch for so long, despite the Orwellian grip it has on deciding what apps are allowed to be listed. A good example of why that system needs to be reformed. This particular issue didn’t get addressed until at least 8 months after TechCrunch exposed the practice. Where was Google? Control of the App Store and Play Stores should be ca…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how photos access on iOS works. An app can ask for access to photos and you can choose 3 options: - no photos - only specific photos (the system picker will appear to select them) - all photos
Regretfully, it seems on iOS apps can tell they’ve been given access to only specific photos. Googles Photo app refuses to work unless it gets access to all photos.
I never understood why Program permissions is such a big deal on Android and IOS, but not on Desktop Windows/Linux, where any application can to everything .
Sandboxing has existed for ages and recently a lot of effort is being invested into making it mainstream on desktop Linux.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apps do not require updating to launch and they autoupdate in the background. If an app is forcing you to manually upgrade either they have poor backwards support oh your computer for some reason isn't downloading the updates.
What if i don’t want it automatically downloading updates?