• Google will soon verify the identities of developers who distribute Android apps outside the Play Store.
  • Developers must submit their information to a new Android Developer Console, increasing their accountability for their apps.
  • Rolling out in phases from September 2026, these new verification requirements are aimed at protecting users from malware by making it harder for malicious developers to remain anonymous.

all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 18 points 1 year ago

Blatant shill article

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    This will make it more difficult and dangerous to make and publish the apps needed by people who work against oppressive regimes and cynical businesses. Bad megacorp, Google

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    If they really cared they'd just have some big warning if the all is from an "unverified" developer. It's all about control.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago*

    Google gets no say outside their monopoly store. That's the whole goddamn point of "sideloading." It's people treating their pocket computer like they own it.

    Fuck entirely off.

  • source
  • 32 comments in c/android@lemdro.id view that post
    [–] 58 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Why do we even call it "sideloading"? I can install whatever I want on desktop, even whatever OS, so why not my phone? It is my phone, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm not really understanding. I buy a phone. Peter codes and app with foss tools and emails it to me. No copyright or anything bad like a to do app. I want to use said app on my purchased phone. Now Peter will have to show his license and stuff? I guess developers are criminals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Classic corporate move: come in attractive (open, rootable, etc) and once the competition is gone slowly make it more profitable on the customers expense.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It can be disabled, right? Right?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    How is this going to be enforced if you are just downloading apks? It states they will enforce verification across sources outside of the play store. This doesn’t sound possible unless they just make stock android unable to side load

    apks will have to be cryptographically signed through Google's developer console, and this signature will be checked by the operating system at install time regardless of where you got the apk from. It's like how windows has signed applications for smartscreen, except in this case all applications must be signed through Google, and in order to sign it, you have to let Google know where you live, and unsigned applications will simply be denied instead of just being presented with a warning.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Makes sense. Is Google play store just apk files as well? I thought there was some other special sauce with it as well besides just running spyware in the background. This all sounds like a good way to get full names for YouTube add less app makers...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You are likely thinking of google play protect, which does the same verification on their platform's end (to try to remove bad actor developer accounts as soon as possible), and the local device end as well (to remove said developers apps if they are already installed on your device). But yes, at the base level, what arrives on your phone from the play store are just signed apk files. That's why mirror sites like apkmirror or apkpure can do what they do, by extracting said apks after they have been released onto the play store.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    That's not quite all of it. It can also do diff updates (so you don't have to download the whole apk), staged rollouts and different builds for different devices. And of course it provides APIs for license management, in app purchases, update notifications, etc. All of this could be achieved by using other services (like F-Droid) or custom build websites, but the convenience for the everyday user isn't quite the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    i do not like this, will third party ROMs be the only options going forward?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Doesn't this clearly breach the DMA?

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Tldr: if the device has google play services it will prevent u installing any app that doesn't have a developer who has handed their real identity over to google.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Would it be possible to adb force remove them and then no longer have a "certified" device?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Most Roms these days allow disabling the google play store, you don't even need root to do it. Since enforcement will likely use the same tech as Play Protect (but without consent settings) disabling Play Store, and possibly GMS too will kill it outright.

    They might implent changes in future Android versions to make this more difficult if not impossible though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Maybe time to think of Huawei and remove Google from the mix at least there I can side-load.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Except that they are so hostile to open source and custom roms.

    I always check if they are an option since the phone is guaranteed to be free from google garbage on boot and I'm always disappointed.

    They could be the go to for everyone who hates google but they just shot themselves in the food instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    they want to identify them, and issue cease and desist, or buy them out, thats the real reason, and to acquire thier OS to lock down android even harder

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    They can't go to far down this line, they'll have antitrust issues. They're a mature company doing what mature companies do and letting the middle (marketing) managers who couldn't run a bath, run the company by focusing on cost reduction not earnings growth, and bury it.

    We saw this with HP. Remember how we all used to buy HP printers for Linux? I still have my 1990s - please god - LaserJet and can still get toner.

  • source