Comment on Google's plan to restrict sideloading on Android has a potential escape hatch for users

• Feyd@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Taking Google at their word for a moment

  And why should we do that?

  source
• Zak@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  I’m inclined to think that’s not the job of an OS vendor to prevent. Sure, put a warning label on it, but it’s the user’s device; once they say they know what they’re doing, that should be that.

  source

  • dust_accelerator@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    The implication here is, if they implement this, is that they volunteer to assume liability, should e.g., your bank account be drained despite undergoing their forced strict lockdown on paid and owned devices.

    Fat chance, because laws are meaningless to crime syndicates

    source

    • Zak@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      It might be a reasonable trade for users to make if Google assumed liability. In fact, that would be an interesting way to implement laws to discourage practices like these.

      source
• Ulrich@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  If someone can be socially engineered into disabling security mechanisms, then that should just be their fate. There’s no sense in fucking everyone else in order to protect them.

  source
• cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  but they could make it be google play or samsung store only as the default as a compromise

  source