It's not about stopping malware; it's about being able to act on malware.

Making a new account with a new phone number and new credit card is a minor barrier to entry.

That said, it's a cool story, but I think they're looking to stop vanced style patching.

The vast majority of malware isn't delivered via play store because of the existing measures and protections they have. Same reason you see very little app-store-based malware on iOS. DISCLAIMER: YES MALWARE EXISTS ON APPLE HARDWARE PLEASE DON'T SHOUT AT ME. Talking specifically about anything installed via first party stores on both platforms.

Their main issue is this: dumb people install apks from spurious website and infect their phones. The least controllable and most pervasive factor here is the intelligence and knowledge of the user which cannot be controlled for by Google. So by eliminating the ability to exploit this entirely, it will eliminate that specific vector.

It's a sledgehammer solution that naturally comes with many downsides like disrupting intelligent and knowledgeable users that just want to hack around with FOSS and such.

Google is relying on It being too expensive for malware creators to have to guide each individual user through adb installation and usage process just to get access to their phone. Most scammers only do that level of interaction to extract actual cash/gift cards from the target.

I am personally and directly affected by their decision in many negative ways, but I'm not so dense as to not understand why they're doing it.

/corpodronespeak

EDIT: bots help Xitter maintain inflated usage figures which justify people's jobs, share prices, etc. Bots are a feature, not a bug.

Corporate needs to have somebody to sue in case of a policy violation. Very especially those debloated apps that float around the web - they need to ensure they have a physical person to pin the blame to in court.

I presume they are implying that the play store review process will catch compromised apps? Not likely considering how many dodgy apps have been found on play store. It's just another controlling act.

Google is doing this to comply with EU regulations supposed to increase security. Now imagine that Google was pushing back against this instead of complying. As per usual, Lemmy would be up in arms against Google for failing to protect people's data and not complying with our laws and culture. You'd be downvoted to oblivion for asked that question and called a corporate bootlicker.

I think these rules come from German legal culture, which traditionally has a strong need to control information exchange and processing.