> Google will begin to verify the identities of developers distributing their apps on Android devices, not just those who distribute via the Play Store This is absolutely unacceptable. That's like you having to submit your personal details to Microsoft in order to just run a program on Windows. Absolutely nuts and it will not go as they think it will.
>Absolutely nuts and it will not go as they think it will.
Apple will disagree and the first company doing worst than this, and is the world's first trillion dollars company.
Could someone explain why the personal privacy of software developers is more important than the cybersecurity of consumers and nations please and thank you
DO NOT UPLOAD YOUR ID/INFO TO GOOGLE. I put my game on their app store some years ago, and they doxxed me right on the app store. Google posted my name and home address right on the game page. Not great when I was already receiving death threats! Later on, had a rando show up at 3AM one night and had to call the cops out. I moved after that. Google is absolutely not to be trusted to keep this data confidential. If Go…
If you are having random people try to attack you while you are at your home, you need to be prepared. Strengthen your door jambs with nine inch screws to replace the screws your door is mounted to and use metal plates to strengthen the locks (there are kits available at home improvement stores), install adherent plastic frosting on your windows that will slow down break ins by making the window much more annoying to break through, and install surveillence cameras outdoors. On the offensive front, you can consider OC/CS grenades you can throw down the hallway to avoid exposing yourself and handheld pepper spray for non-lethal deterrence at moderate range. Finally, if all else fails, keep a loaded handgun in a easy to use but hard for kids to unlock gun box under your drawer next to your bed. An under barrel flash light severely blinds invaders and makes them think twice about charging you, maximizing the chances that you nobody will get hurt. The door jamb upgrade is the most important one. I have returned home to a severely beaten door with my shattered iron door knocker on the ground laying in front of the door in pieces but the house was impenetrable to the burglar(s) who weren't willing to break through the glass. It also doesn't hurt to install fake $5 security dome cameras around the property.
Anyone even remotely privacy or security conscious needs to vote with their wallet in protest and stop buying Android phones, otherwise it's only a matter of time 'til Google bans side-loading and it becomes impossible to buy a phone that can run any kind of anonymous or end-to-end encrypted communication software.
Utterly pointless.
Banking apps, messaging apps, streaming apps, even video games all want locked down devices. They will use hardware cryptography to discriminate against us and refuse service if they can't cryprographically prove we're using a corporate owned device.
Naughty user. Looks like you've been tampering with your device, installing unauthorized software and whatnot. Only money laundering drug trafficking child molesting terrorists do that. I'm gonna have to deny your request to log you into your bank account.
(Responding to https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/25/google-will-require-develo... ) > Starting next year, Google will begin to verify the identities of developers distributing their apps on Android devices, not just those who distribute via the Play Store. Odd little phrase, "distributing their apps on Android devices". I think "distributing" in this context is in the sense of product distribution, not in the sense of d…
"Distribute on" sounds odd because it's incorrect. APKs are not distributed by putting them on phones and carrying the phones from one place to another. "Distribute to" would be more correct; better yet, "develop for".
If this is enforced via Play Protect, then the whole mechanism can likely be disabled with: adb shell settings put global package_verifier_user_consent -1 This does not require root access and prevents Android from invoking Play Protect in the first place. (This is what AOSP's own test suite does, along with other test suites in eg. Unreal Engine, etc.) I personally won't be doing this verification for my open-source…
This is how macOS works, without a signature they will tell you they can't guarantee it doesn't have malware and you need to go to settings and choose to run anyway (and most people don't even know about it). Microsoft would love to do that too, but it just has too much of legacy software to introduce such a major hurdle.
Microsoft does the same exact thing with SmartScreen, except that it has a whitelist for popular binaries.