Top
Best
New

Posted by LorenDB 18 hours ago

Keep Android Open(keepandroidopen.org)
912 points | 243 commentspage 2
giamma 13 hours ago|
While I understand the reasons behind this campaign, I have mixed feelings about it.

As an iPhone user, I find it frustrating that deploying my own app on my own device requires either reinstalling it every 7 days or paying $100 annually. Android doesn't have this limitation, which makes it simpler and more convenient for personal use.

However, when it comes to publishing apps to the store, I take a different view. In my opinion, stricter oversight is beneficial. To draw an analogy: NPM registry has experienced several supply chain attacks because anyone can easily publish a library. The Maven Central registry for Java libraries, by contrast, requires developers to own the DNS domain used as a namespace for their library. This additional requirement, along with a few extra security checks, has been largely effective in preventing—or at least significantly reducing—the supply chain attacks seen in the NPM ecosystem.

Given the growing threat of such attacks, we need to find ways to mitigate them. I hope that Google's new approach is motivated by security concerns rather than purely economic reasons.

stratts 13 hours ago||
Android already has this strict oversight, in theory, in the form of the Play Store. And yet.

Personally I feel much more safe and secure downloading a random app from F-Droid, than I do from Google, whose supposed watchful eyes have allowed genuine malware to be distributed unimpeded.

marcos100 12 hours ago||
Exaclty. Play Store takes a cut from what it is selling, so they should be more strict what can be sold, not lock the whole platform.
BeFlatXIII 6 hours ago|||
> Maven Central registry for Java libraries, by contrast, requires developers to own the DNS domain used as a namespace

What are the requirements around domain renewal?

Yokolos 13 hours ago|||
I don't understand how you can have mixed feelings about this.

> However, when it comes to publishing apps to the store,

This isn't about publishing apps to the Play Store. If that's all this was about, we wouldn't give a shit. The problem is that this applies to all stores, including third party stores like F-Droid, and any app that is installed independently of a store (as an apk file).

> Given the growing threat of such attacks, we need to find ways to mitigate them.

How about the growing threat of right-wing authoritarian control? How do we mitigate that when the only "free" platform is deciding the only way anybody can install any app on their phone is if that app's developer is officially and explicitly allowed by Google?

Hell, how long until those anti-porn groups turn their gaze from video games and Steam onto apps, then pressure MasterCard/Visa and in turn Google to revoke privileges from developers who make any app/game that's too "obscene" (according to completely arbitrary standards)?

There's such a massive tail of consequences that will follow and people are just "well, it's fine if it's about security". No. It's not. This is about arbitrary groups with whatever arbitrary bullshit ideology they might have being able to determine what apps are allowed to be made and installed on your phone. It's not fucking okay.

giamma 6 hours ago||
My elderly father unknowingly installed an application on Android after seeing a deceptive ad. An advertising message disguised as an operating system pop-up convinced him that his Android phone's storage was almost full. When he tapped the pop-up, and followed instructions he installed a fake cleaner app from the Play Store. While the app caused no actual harm, it displayed notifications every other day urging him to clean his phone using the same app. When he opened it, the app — which did nothing except display a fake graph simulating almost full storage — pressured him to purchase the PRO version to perform a deeper cleanup.

In reality, the phone had 24 GB of free space out of 64 GB total. I simply uninstalled the fake cleaner and the annoying notifications disappeared.

How such an app could reach the Play Store is beyond me. I can only imagine how many people that app must have deceived and how much money its creators likely made. I'm fairly certain the advertisement targets older people specifically—those most likely to be tricked.

For better or worse, I'm pretty sure that such an app would never land into the Apple App Store.

gumby271 6 hours ago|||
So you're saying Google is doing fuck all to protect customers on their already locked down store, right? This doesn't sound like it will be addressed by Google extending developer registration outside of their store at all if they can't even address obvious scam apps that they're already promoting. And to your point, yes, Apple probably does do a better job of maintaining their app store, that way they can prevent some of the push back on iOS being so locked down. An iPhone sounds like the right device for your father.
avra 4 hours ago|||
from the Play Store

This is not about the Play Store. This is about the whole Android platform. It's about running what you want on your own machine.

beeflet 7 hours ago|||
The threat of such attacks is not growing
user34283 13 hours ago||
If the manufacturer wants to offer verification of developers, this should be an optional feature allowing the user to continue the installation of applications distributed by unverified developers in a convenient way.

Making this verification mandatory is an absolute non-starter, ridiculous overreach, and a spit in the face of regulators who are trying to break Google and Apple's monopoly on mobile app distribution.

celsoazevedo 16 hours ago||
A direct link to the UK's Competition and Markets Authority, in case you don't want to go via a blog post:

https://contact-the-cma.service.gov.uk/wizard/classify

It's very simple to submit a complaint.

wosined 13 hours ago||
> please big corpo overlord do not do what is most profitable for you, pretty pretty please please
wasabinator 16 hours ago||
Between this and a growing number of oems not permitting bootloader unlocking (latest being Samsung with OneUI 8) Android's "open" future is pretty bleak.
microtonal 14 hours ago|
IMO the bigger recent issue is that Google stopped pushing AOSP updates timely. As far as I know the QPR1 source is still missing in action after almost two months (!).
IamDaedalus 14 hours ago||
I've only been interested in Android phones particularly Pixels because I can just flash another OS and do whatever but if Google goes through with this I might consider iphones this time
bfkwlfkjf 15 hours ago||
Stallman was right.
clcaev 2 hours ago||
> Stallman was right.

Stallman did not find an economic model that works within our business/legal environment.

bfkwlfkjf 47 minutes ago|||
Non sequitor. He was right about what companies would do if allowed, and that's the most important thing to keep in mind.
nicce 1 hour ago|||
Current big tech is based on Stallman-inspired people using their free time to make software. But they are putting MIT lisence because ”someone” had convinced them that GPL is not really free and not socially acceptable!
hnarn 13 hours ago|||
He usually is, given time.
thinkingemote 13 hours ago||
I wonder, what thing does HN think Stallman is wrong about today (and which in the future we will be proven wrong and Stallman was right).
bfkwlfkjf 11 hours ago|||
I haven't seen him say anything I disagree with. But we would have to discuss specifics for me to have confidence.
334f905d22bc19 11 hours ago|||
Well, the things that got him canceled were and are wrong obviously. But anything (i know of) software related was right
bfkwlfkjf 11 hours ago||
The "things that got him cancelled" were things he said (as opposed to things he did) and those that I've read were correct (though I'm aware I havent read everything he said on the subject).
spacechild1 9 hours ago||
He has written some very questionable things about pedophilia (from which he has since distanced himself): https://stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%20...

To be clear: this does not diminish his contributions in the field of software! His ideas about Free Software have been visionary and are as important as ever. One can be brilliant in one field and a fool in another. This is actually very common among technical people ("engineer's disease"). We cannot expect someone to be right 100% of the time.

pmdr 11 hours ago||
Google is evil. Every single one on here arguing "but muh security improves" is against freedom of computing, plain and simple. There's no middle ground.

Google & others have slowly turned down the freedom dial over the years and we let it happen. People working for Google let it happen. I'm not aware of any inside movement protesting this like they protested against various social issues.

Security that you can't turn off is basically a prison.

joak 13 hours ago||
If you leave under a dictatorship you definitely don't want to reveal your identity to develop and distribute an app that fights the government.
Artoooooor 13 hours ago||
Does it also mean that developers in "bad" countries will not be able to create installable Android apps?
DrSiemer 13 hours ago|
A year ago I built a React Native Android app for my wife called "Pimp daddy", which she uses to track her earnings as an independent contractor.

The whole concept is meant to poke fun at the idea of me "checking up on her" (I file her tax returns) and the entire theme is 80s pimp styled.

Every time she submits something, she'll get a random pimp remark, like "Go get that money for me, girl!". She just rolls her eyes and ignores it, but it's what made it fun for me to work on it.

Edgy stuff like that could jeopardize my account in the near future. It might just be security now, but an automated "naughty words detector" will be an obvious next step.

I doubt I will invest any more time in hobby app development if I have to deal with some humorless overbearing watchdog telling me what I can and cannot install on my own device. Very sad to see Android following Microsofts anti power user direction.

More comments...