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

A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

enaix.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 185 posts

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#121

Post by wqaatwt »

Certhas wrote: post #106
jmnicolas wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we're gonna get access to Von Der Layen Pfizer sms right? Were you offered to vote for Von Der Layen by the way?

The EU is a parliamentary democracy. Von Der Leyen was proposed by the democratically elected heads of the member states. She was approved by the democratically elected parliament. The chancellor in Germany is also not directly elected by majority vote but by parliament. Its a reasonable criticism that the EU structures make democratic legitimisation very indirect, but that is at least partly a result of the EU being…

> The EU is a parliamentary democracy

Except the are a couple degrees of separation between the democracy part and in the running the EU institutions.

The EU parliament is also a very superficial imitation of a real parliament in a democratic state. It has very limited say in forming the “government” or decision making.

> result of the EU being a club of sovereign democracies

So either revert to it just being a trade union or implement fully democratic federal institutions. The in between isn’t really working that well.

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#122

Post by wqaatwt »

StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #105
jmnicolas wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we're gonna get access to Von Der Layen Pfizer sms right? Were you offered to vote for Von Der Layen by the way?

For all the disdain I have for her, Von Der Layen is the candidate put forward by the PPE, the majoritarian party in the EU parliament. So, yes, people were indeed allowed to vote.

She was primarily nominated by the EU council.

The parliament would have picked Weber, but nobody cared since its just there to rubber stamp predetermined decisions.

He was the leader of the party which won the plurality in the elections and had its support. EU had a real chance to move towards becoming a real parliamentary democracy if it went that way.

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#123

Post by saubeidl »

wqaatwt wrote: post #121
Certhas wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU is a parliamentary democracy. Von Der Leyen was proposed by the democratically elected heads of the member states. She was approved by the democratically elected parliament. The chancellor in Germany is also not directly elected by majority vote but by parliament. Its a reasonable criticism that the EU structures make democratic legitimisation very indirect, but that is at least partly a result of the EU being…

> The EU is a parliamentary democracy Except the are a couple degrees of separation between the democracy part and in the running the EU institutions. The EU parliament is also a very superficial imitation of a real parliament in a democratic state. It has very limited say in forming the “government” or decision making. > result of the EU being a club of sovereign democracies So either revert to it just being a trade…

> Except the are a couple degrees of separation between the democracy part and in the running the EU institutions.

That's what parliamentary democracy means, yes.

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#124

Post by huem0n »

VladStanimir wrote: post #103

I am not a app developer however from what I read on the android developer site you just need to provide some form of id, the singing key and the app id. You don't have to distribute via the app store, you dont have to get Googles permission to publish the app or have them sign it. This looks like purely app validation, we only run apps we can prove originate from the author.

Under that logic, even if the app is "malicious" it would still be possible to install it. And thats not true, if somthing is deemed malicious, its blocked. Is app that hurts Google's dominance "malicious"? Who is it that decides what is malicious?

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#125

Post by ForHackernews »

igor_akhmetov wrote: post #107
rf15 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same EU of which parts are trying to make chat control work and are once again abandoning it. Politician get this particular fancy idea every other year in all kinds of countries, not just EU. Overreach out of desperation for a problem that cannot simply be solved is wrong but understandable.

Desperation for what exactly? More control?

They are trying to stop crime, including sex/drug trafficking and child exploitation. If you want to have an intellectually honest debate, you need to be clear that private communication apps do make it more difficult for police to conduct legitimate investigations. You do yourself no favours painting all politicians as power-hungry caricatures.

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#126

Post by wqaatwt »

saubeidl wrote: post #123
wqaatwt wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The EU is a parliamentary democracy Except the are a couple degrees of separation between the democracy part and in the running the EU institutions. The EU parliament is also a very superficial imitation of a real parliament in a democratic state. It has very limited say in forming the “government” or decision making. > result of the EU being a club of sovereign democracies So either revert to it just being a trade…

> Except the are a couple degrees of separation between the democracy part and in the running the EU institutions. That's what parliamentary democracy means, yes.

No, of course not...

In parliamentary democracies the parliament is elected directly and is generally sovereign (optionally constrained by a constitution or some set of basic laws and powers delegated to regional governments and such).

In no way does that describe the EU. It has no equivalent body. Its imitation “parliament” is extremely weak and barely has a say in who forms the closest EU has to a “government”.

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#128

Post by numpad0 »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #39
asimops wrote: post #3

While it is technically feasible, it is not a good idea to try and find a technical solution to a people/organisation problem. Do not accept the premise of assholes. I hope we can get the EU to fund a truly open Android Fork. Maybe under some organisation similar to NL Labs. --- edit --- Furthermore, the need for a trustworthy binary to be auditable to a certain hash or something would make banning this a simple task…

What's wrong with lineage?

Active installs of LineageOS[1] as reported on official tracker is 4.3m instances right now. An MAU of 5m is like, less than Bluesky, Switch 2 shipped so far, most F2P phones games you've heard of, etc. The leverages it has is that of a game.

1: https://stats.lineageos.org/

Re: A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

#129

Post by poisonborz »

charcircuit wrote: post #78
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought Brent Simmons did a great job laying out why PWAs don't work: https://inessential.com/2025/10/04/why-netnewswire-is-not-we... The tl;dr is that a PWA implies an app which is based in the cloud. So suddenly you need a server, and you need to store user data, which means costs and dealing with privacy and security.

Practically you are going to have a server distribute a native application anyways.

Not the developer. This is all additional complexity and less privacy for the user.
Post reply on HN