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

Keep Android Open

f-droid.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 764 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#711

Post by idle_zealot »

TexanFeller wrote: post #706
dhayabaran wrote: post #639

[flagged]

App stores may reduce many of my freedoms, but they also provide me with some other freedoms by limiting the power of big tech companies over me, and the tradeoffs are different for my phone compared to a PC. For example Apple uses their big stick to ensure that apps can't simply refuse to work if you enable privacy setting that limit them. If Facebook refuses to work until you give it full access to your photos and…

> For example Apple uses their big stick to ensure that apps can't simply refuse to work if you enable privacy setting that limit them. If Facebook refuses to work until you give it full access to your photos and exact location even when the app isn't running the realistic outcome will be that everyone will just give them what they want rather than not using the service

Apple also stops you from installing third-party apps for the service that circumvent those and other limitations. In an open system you can intercept the app's requests and feed it fake responses, spoof your photo album, GPS, whatever. They can try to detect spoofing, but at the cost of making their services flaky for normal users. This is a cat-and-mouse game that the mice (that's you) win. Except you can't play it on an iPhone, because it breaks the service's (probably illegal) Terms of Service, and Apple will use their Big Stick to ensure nobody can commit acts that risk their partners' business models.

Re: Keep Android Open

#713

Post by heavyset_go »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #632
necovek wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many services that was solved even earlier: that's why things like Docker, podman and VMs are so popular. The hard bit is the desktop experience which is not fully there yet, but the technology is.

Docker style containerization technically works, but for desktop use I think is a rather heavy kludge and not really a solution. It would be much more nice if e.g. daemons could have their privileges pared down to only exactly what they need to function and nothing more with a config file somewhere. This can somewhat be achieved with the user system, but that really doesn’t scale well and doesn’t suit the purpose all…

You're describing what already exists in systemd

Re: Keep Android Open

#714

Post by RealStickman_ »

tadfisher wrote: post #183
vsviridov wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of open stuff that was migrated into the Play Services closed source blob over the years just keeps growing.

I still can't comprehend why they implemented FIDO/WebAuthn support in Play Services. Passkeys are extremely difficult to support in apps that don't depend on Play Services client libraries.

Because they don't want you using Google-free Android

Re: Keep Android Open

#715

Post by tschumacher »

dhayabaran wrote: post #639

[flagged]

Google has been clear that installing apps through sideloading and from other app stores will continue to work as long as the developer went through the verification process to get their app signed.

Source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...

Re: Keep Android Open

#716

Post by realusername »

TexanFeller wrote: post #706
dhayabaran wrote: post #639

[flagged]

App stores may reduce many of my freedoms, but they also provide me with some other freedoms by limiting the power of big tech companies over me, and the tradeoffs are different for my phone compared to a PC. For example Apple uses their big stick to ensure that apps can't simply refuse to work if you enable privacy setting that limit them. If Facebook refuses to work until you give it full access to your photos and…

You probably picked the worst example as Apple gave Facebook a pass a few times as Facebook is too big to fail.

Re: Keep Android Open

#717

Post by palata »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #697
palata wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be biased, but I have never seen anyone who would want to tamper with the software on their own system and would not be capable of installing an alternative OS, given that their device allows it (e.g. allowing unlocking the bootloader, etc). For "normies", it feels like the existing security model is actually not that bad. I can't imagine what would happen if everybody was running something without any sandboxi…

You have to install a different OS in advance though. Even when the bootloader can be unlocked doing so wipes all the data (as it should). It's no help if you start with a stock phone and then later discover that a particular app you've been using doesn't support data export (for example). > I can't imagine what would happen if everybody was running something without any sandboxing. I don't think anyone implied that?…

I guess my point is that it is a bit of a gradient. You say you want Stock Android to allow you to get root access, others will say that Stock Android should not allow a normie to be tricked into getting root access and shooting themselves in the foot. Truth is, none of those is a "right": there is a product (Android) that tries to do well for the vast majority of its users. It seems totally reasonable to me that Google doesn't want to invest a lot of resources into making an extremely small minority happy. I am pretty sure that the number of people who want root on their smartphone is a rounding error.

Second thing is: if you have root and change something on the system, you break the secure boot. So you fundamentally cannot have full access, can you?

That's why my opinion is that it's not Google's role to make everyone happy. They should just not be allowed to prevent alternatives. So that the rounding error minority can install the system they want and be happy with it.

Re: Keep Android Open

#718

Post by miggol »

tschumacher wrote: post #715
dhayabaran wrote: post #639

[flagged]

Google has been clear that installing apps through sideloading and from other app stores will continue to work as long as the developer went through the verification process to get their app signed. Source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...

Yes, the entire point is that requiring Google's permission to sideload anything is very bad.

The linked post by F-droid additionally points out that even that very bad case is not certain. We shouldn't trust that Google will even allow sideloading at all based on their words on their own blog.

Media has a responsibility to report that there is no evidence that Google will even allow anyone to sideload at this point.

Re: Keep Android Open

#720

Post by TeMPOraL »

int0x29 wrote: post #669
microtonal wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By default their app cannot though because Android uses proper sandboxing and gated API access. So you actually have to give the app location access, access to your messages and access to your photos. Well, unless you use one of the many crappy Android devices that never get security updates, are running old kernels, old vendor security patch levels, miss all Android security patches, except applying the backported s…

The tricky bit with that is it would get a monopoly lawsuit from manufacturers with a lot more money to throw around quickly. The biggest problem in improving android security posture is getting manufacturers to have robust security and release updates without getting monopoly lawsuits. It also doesn't help that mobile carriers can delay updates for months. Thanks T-Mobile.

It also doesn't help that "robust security" often is the problem in the first place.

People forget to ask the most important question: security for whom, and from what.

Post reply on HN