Live data from Hacker News

Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

arstechnica.com

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#512

> In addition to the advanced flow we’re building free, limited distribution accounts for students and hobbyists. This allows you to share apps with a small group (up to 20 devices) without needing to provide a government-issued ID or pay a registration fee. I don't quite understand how those installs would be tracked. If I create a "hobbyist" account and share the apk, are the devices that install that app all repor…

With this change, Android will not just send every app install to Google, but even require approval from Google before allowing app installs.

Which I also don't like, but at least that can be done offline. The signature could be verified on device without sending everything to Google. If they have to track the 20 seats for the hobbyist accounts then they have to be tracking every single install

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#513

Although I'm slightly relieved there is a way out of Googles verification system, it's still pretty wild if you compare this to installing software on a Windows pc. I'm sure Microsoft is heading in the same direction with Windows, but today its still "only" a few confirmations to install anything. This will sadly still put a major damper on adoption of open source apps, while giving a false sense of security that app…

Apple has been doing it for years not allowing "unsigned" software to be installed using the same "for the safety of the user" even against the user's wishes.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#514
post #87

At this point I'm convinced that there's something deeply wrong with how our society treats technology. Ruining Android for everyone to try to maybe help some rather technologically-hopeless groups of people is the wrong solution. It's unsustainable in the long run. Also, the last thing this world needs right now is even more centralization of power. Especially around yet another US company. People who are unwilling…

I “get” technology so I understand how you got here. But this is the wrong take. I expect to go to a restaurant and not die from the food… and I want nothing to do with the inner workings of the kitchen. I just want to know any restaurant I go into will be safe. Society has made restaurants safe, either because of government pressure or it’s good for business. How is that not a fair ask for technology, too? We all ha…

And I expect to be able to open a restauraunt without surrendering my identity and private information to a huge monopolistic company.

And I expect to buy food without that food being sanctioned by a huge, monopolistic company. Especially if said company has shown itself to be completely subservient to an overbearing, increasingly fascist government.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#515
That's not entirely unreasonable. As long as there is a way to enable this in perpetuity for my device(s) and it works for all Android devices it's a compromise I could live with.

Again, can we, please, stop call it side-loading. I'm not sliding in anything "from the side" on the sly, I am simply installing an app of my choice on my damn phone.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#516

It'd be nice if they put a little sticker on the box or a flashing warning when you go to buy the phone noting that you'll be unable to use it as you desire for 24 hours if you are not willing to bend over to your corporate overlord. Alternatives like GrapheneOS and Lineage are the way to go for right now, but I worry as things get more and more locked down that those options won't work with a lot of apps.

> I worry as things get more and more locked down that those options won't work with a lot of apps I am increasingly interested in a dual-prong approach of building a parallel world of OSS apps, platforms, etc, plus an adversarial inter-op project for duping and wrapping apps/services from the commercial/normie world. We have some solid bases with Android/Graphene, Linux more broadly, wine, and Android VMs like Waydr…

Yeah, I do hope that an "inter-op" idea can be possible, otherwise anyone who doesn't want to join the duopoly fully will slowly be unable to interact with more and more aspects of commerce, government, etc. I guess the GrapheneOS method of integrating Play Services but keeping the user in control (e.g., being able to block Play apps' internet connections) is something like that, but ultimately it's controlled by Google and there are problems with Play Integrity, meaning some things just don't work.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#517
post #387

The part in the flow where you select between allowing app installs for 7 days or forever is a glimpse into the future. That toggle shows the thought process that's going on at Google. I can bet that a few versions down the line, the "Not recommended" option of allowing installs indefinitely will become so not recommended that they'll remove it outright. Then shrink the 7 day window to 3 days or less. Or only give us…

what's your solution to combat scammers?

But this has nothing to do with combating scammers in the first place, have you never used the play store before? It's overwhelmingly scam apps with the most intrusive ad/tracking shit imaginable. There are scammers openly buying sponsored search results for names of popular apps so their malicious app with similar name appears as the first result.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#518

Although I'm slightly relieved there is a way out of Googles verification system, it's still pretty wild if you compare this to installing software on a Windows pc. I'm sure Microsoft is heading in the same direction with Windows, but today its still "only" a few confirmations to install anything. This will sadly still put a major damper on adoption of open source apps, while giving a false sense of security that app…

There's an interesting subset of Windows machines out there running in "S" mode [1]. This mode restricts the customer to only using applications from the Windows Store.

We get occasional support tickets about the popups that come when trying to run a regular installer while in this mode. Luckily, people can disable "S" mode, but there's no way to re-enable "S" mode without a fresh install.

1: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/switching-out-of...

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is just as bad, you should have switched to Graphene and retained the good aspects of Android without the parts that suck (Google).

I love and use graphene regularly on my pixel devices

Soon Motorola too!

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. If it did then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a developer setting. The fact that some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website is not a good reason to take away everyone's freedom. Consolidation of power is all t…

There is immense pressure to stop online scams which are draining old people of their life savings. The whole flow from the article seems entirely based around letting power users install what they want while being able to break the flow of a scammer guiding a clueless person in to installing malware. It is promising that Google has avoided just turning off sideloading but still put measures in place to protect peopl…

>There is immense pressure to stop online scams which are draining old people of their life savings.

From who? I'd rather have this done by a regulated service like a bank than a private corporation with a perverse incentive. Frauds and scams are already illegal.

That't the similar narrative to "think of the children". They want to act as this middleman and secure their place, all while having unfettered access to people's data.

Post reply on HN