all 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 89 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google warns of security risks

lol. if they actually kept all the bad shit out of the play store, they might have a valid argument.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 160 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Seems that google's announced plans to restrict sideloading on Android are now in direct conflict with the Supreme Court's order to open the Play Store to alternative app stores and reduce its control over app distribution.

    How will this play out in the end... 🤔

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Not at all, they can still require apps to be signed, so long as you're free to allow app installations. They'll weasel out by saying the signing is for safety/security reasons, to avoid malware and shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Nope. No apk you can get a hold of will be installable without googles over the internet check. At current it looks like you'll be able to force an install using adb shell commands, but that will effectively gut almost anyone from installing an unsigned apk. Also, Google would be able to remove even that option if they so choose.

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

    The OS will probably check the signature of any app you're trying to install regardless of if it's from F-Droid or the Play Store

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

    No, as it stands this is the end of F-Droid. Each developer registration must include the manifest IDs of all apps they publish. No way F-droid can include all the apps they publish in their registration.

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

    Google's announced plans aren't actually about restricting "sideloading" (aka installing). They're about restricting actually running the code, and developing/distributing the code.

    Content distributed through these "other app stores" and elsewhere will remain installable, but your phone will refuse to run the software if that content isn't signed with the special Google's Favorite Boy token that the developer got by providing personally identifiable information to Google. Get that "certification"? Your app can be run on Android no matter how you distribute it, including "side loading" (download APK file, install app).

    Don't have the Official Nintendo Seal of Quality Verified Developer token to sign your app with? The only way a user can run your code is by connecting to a PC and installing your app with adb (a development tool).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Fuck Google. It is turning Android into dumb platform, which is tightly controlled by them piece by piece. From restricting different APIs (accessibility for example) to Play Integrity checks and recently developer identification even for stupid APKs. Fuck Google, I hope they keep being put in place.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    I hope an alternative open platform emerges and google android goes poof. It would serve as a warning to others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago* (6 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the main hurdles from my understanding are processor/chip specs. They are generally super locked down in terms of who they run with/allow usage. From what I understand the liberux project ran into that issue because their goal was a fully open sourced Linux phone, and they had to make compromises and are still fighting issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    my guess it's hardware support; drivers and firmware for existing hardware and smartphone components for linux are probably close to nonexistent. The apk support is the smallest issue.

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

    Honestly, that is quite unrealistic, is it?

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

    Not really, given there are already multiple flavours of android in the Chinese market, that are Google free. Samsung has kept up pace on their alternative to keep Google at bay. Linux phone and other alternatives like e/os exist. The main problem seems to be adoption and Google apps. It just seems crazy to me that the hardware makers want to lock themselves in to one supplier that could turn on them in an instant. Open sourcing their drivers would give free community improvements and make tech enthusiasts favour them. The public often follows enthusiasts, provided it's easy to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Does this undermine Googles plans to block side loading?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Well, if i can download a F-droid app via Playstore... then i'm basically not "sideloading" anything. This could be interesting!

    But the whole (paid) 'verification' thing still is troubling tho. And we know Google; they are good at breaking things one way or another.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    If I understand well, even if you were able to install F-droid through the store (which you can't because Google doesn't like it), you won't be able to install apps with F-droid anyway if they implement this.

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

    Google has to allow other app stores in Google Play Store in 2026, if Google likes it or not is not relevant.

    And yes, the question remains if you can download from F-droid after installing through PlayStore, i agree with you there (because of the verification thing). It depents on what the court thinks 'sideloading' is, since we already know what Google think it means...

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

    A lot of apk devs of nice little unique and often free apks are made by people who aren't going to want to hand over there identification and private info to Google in order to be verified.

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

    What does this mean for Apple then? Will someone open a case against Apple arguing unlawful practices? Man I hope so.

  • source