Which means I can make an app for this “Sideloading” by shizuku…
Google's plan to restrict sideloading on Android has a potential escape hatch for users
Submitted 6 months ago by ardi60@reddthat.com to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.androidauthority.com/how-android-sideloading-restrictions-may-work-3595355/
Comments
covert_czar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
I heard of shizuku before how does it work? Does it need root?
drmoose@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This is actually worse than integration in Play Protect which can be disabled very easily. Now you can only install unsigned apps via ADB which means just developers can do it.
COASTER1921@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Leaving ADB open to unverified apps is more than I was expecting. ADB is reasonably straightforward to use even without actually being an Android developer.
There was never any way they’d integrate it to play protect and still allow play protect to be disabled. I prefer this to being required to use play protect personally, though the services do seem somewhat redundant. Presumably the whole point of doing this is to create an Apple style walled garden (which is of course very profitable). Google likely doesn’t want to fully lock it down and risk legal trouble, they just need to make it difficult enough that the masses don’t bother installing unapproved apps that may not act in Google’s interests.
I still hope the EU takes legal action against this anyway.
drmoose@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I don’t think this adds anything tbh as peoppe with adb would always be able to bypass this. The issue is that this kills distribution and thats exactly what Google wants - have full competitive control. Once they don’t like your app they’ll block your account and what do you do with your customer base? Give them adb install instructions? That’s basically a death sentence for any app.
SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
Or anyone with a computer who installs ADB. You don’t have to be a developer.
drmoose@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Nah you can’t realistically distribute your app with adb requirement. No one will bother to go through such friction.
arararagi@ani.social 6 months ago
And very annoying too since some government apps don’t like it when you have developer mode on.
Zanshi@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Not only government. I can’t see my daughter’s insulin pump status if I don’t disable developer mode.
QuestionMark@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Since Google’s goal is to improve security
This is an obvious lie.
Eggyhead@lemmings.world 6 months ago
They never specified who’s security…
espentan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Their revenue probably felt very threatened.
SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
Whose*
Who’s = who + is
Whose = an indication of possession
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 6 months ago
they want to improve thier AI and datamining capabilities.
nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 6 months ago
What am I not seeing? How does this improve datamining capabilities?
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I honestly think that this is just not going to happen. It’s already a giant pain in the ass to install apps from anywhere else than Play Store. With Shizuku it got much, much better.
GreenShimada@lemmy.world 6 months ago
You may want to re-evaluate how you’re installing non-Play apps. I use F-droid all the time and never had anything even approach “inconvenient.”
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Like I said, Samsung does this crap in certain regions, specifically South Korea. I’m using Shizuku now and couldn’t be happier.
viking@infosec.pub 6 months ago
Huh? Downloading an apk and clicking open with -> package installer is nothing but straightforward.
Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
This simply doesn’t work anymore for all apps on my Pixel 8.
Many I installed manually just redirect to the Play store with the message it could harm your device and you should download from Play.
napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
It nags me a lot, sometimes downright blocks me from installing without adb shit. Samsung.
gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 6 months ago
I’m not sure why google is over engineering this, proper mainline distros have this solved since forever. Let the community setup trusted repos with gpg keys, then let me trust the repos. If Fdroid trusts the package and I trust Fdroid, who should care?
olsonexi@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Because it was never actually about security to begin with. That’s obviously BS. Google just wants control.
Lemminary@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Probably because they want to target software that cracks theirs to avoid ads, like ReVanced.
Xatolos@reddthat.com 6 months ago
Then why aren’t they already doing that by blocking DuckDuckGo?
The DuckDuckGo app blocks all apps from sending to Google (and other advertisers) tracking/ad data on a system level. And it’s freely available on the Play Store (has been for years.
play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.duckduc…
If they wanted to prevent apps from blocking their ad abilities, this app would never have been allowed on the Play Store.
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 6 months ago
Ding ding ding ding ding. It’s so obvious, it’s because Google wants to be in control and block apps it would rather not exist. Newpipe, FreeTube, Revanced and the like.
Zak@lemmy.world 6 months ago
If Google wanted to add developer verification without being evil, it could use SSL certificates connected to domain names. I think the whole concept is ill-conceived, though I’ll admit to a modest bias against protecting people from themselves.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 6 months ago
The problem with that is that certificates expire before someone would want to keep using the app.
xthexder@l.sw0.com 6 months ago
Code signing certificates work a little differently than SSL certificates. A timestamp is included in the signature so the certificate only needs to be valid at the time of signing. The executable will remain valid forever, even if the certificate later expires. (This is how it works on Windows)
tauonite@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They couldn’t. Domains and SSL certificates can be obtained very easily anonymously and thus wouldn’t let Google identify the developers of malicious apps, which is the goal of this
Zak@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It provides a way to open an investigation into a malicious developer without giving Google the ability to ban anyone it doesn’t like.
Squiddork@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yeah I mean some form of asymmetric encryption/validation would work but it stops the real reason why Google wants to implement this.
coolmojo@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The trouble is Google’s definition of malicious apps. Are adblockers malicious? How about alternative apps for YouTube? Based on the recent history, I don’t think you will be able to install those apps on the phone you purchased.
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
why can google not just code something like this into android:
allow apps from:
( ) All sources
( ) Just Google Play
( ) Apps which have been verified by Google Developer Programstevedice@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I can see it already:
() Just Google Play (safe)
() Verified apps (not recommended)
click on Advanced settings
() All sources (Unsafe. Will probably kill your cat and burn down your house)
tick the box
Are you sure?
click yes
ARE YOU SURE?
click yes again
ONE HUNDRED PERCENT SURE?
wait for the 30 seconds timer to count down
click yes
( ) I do not love my cat and want him to die.
tick the box
( ) I accept the very real risk of my house burning down
tick the box
Please wait 24 hours for the change to apply. You can reverse it at any time from this menu.
get spammed every hour for the next 24 hours with notifications asking me to fix my security settings
get a bigass ⚠️ every time I turn on the phone
every once in a while the change just straight up reverses and I have to do it all over again
littleguy@lemmy.cif.su 6 months ago
That would give users choice, and corporations want as many people as possible to be incapable of making decisions for themselves.
mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 6 months ago
Because it’s Google
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
bing! thy turkey's done
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
Because they want to stop people from using ad blockers.
SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 6 months ago
Taking Google at their word for a moment, it’s far too easy to scam the clueless masses into selecting the first one.
Ulrich@feddit.org 6 months 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.
Zak@lemmy.world 6 months 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.
Feyd@programming.dev 6 months ago
Taking Google at their word for a moment
And why should we do that?
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
but they could make it be google play or samsung store only as the default as a compromise
palordrolap@fedia.io 6 months ago
Option 1 is a potential cause of "lost" revenue.
Late stage capitalism absolutely forbids anything that could cause that, even if the cost of implementation outweighs any potential gain.
goatinspace@feddit.org 6 months ago
ideonek@piefed.social 6 months ago
G3NI5Y5@piefed.social 6 months ago
Like "Jaywalking", suddenly, walking is no longer the norm, but the car is preferred. The victims are seen as perpetrators.
joshchandra@midwest.social 6 months ago
preferred*requiredFTFY, at least here in a certain country…
ideonek@piefed.social 6 months ago
And "littering" is the "real" culprit why we all drawn in uneccesey plastic. We should blame consumers not the polluters.
Corporations do it all the time.
Ulrich@feddit.org 6 months ago
What would you call it?
Wrrzag@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
“installing” as in “installing software”
JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 6 months ago
It’s the technical term that defines the process of transferring files not from an external networked device - downloading - or to an external networked device - uploading - but between two local devices - sideloading.
It’s over two decades old, you downloaded an mp3 from napster, and then sideloaded it to your player.
ideonek@piefed.social 6 months ago
And companies ofted do it. Thay recoined jaywalking to put the blaim of the accidents to pedestrians and take away the road from them. They change what littering means in attrmpt to delute the responsibility for polution... We are better than that this time, right?
yardratianSoma@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Don’t forget “side effects”, when really, medications only have “effects”. Whether the effects are intended or not doesn’t change the fact that they happen.
jjlinux@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
Wait, so now I have to talk to a doctor before installing from F-Droid? Well, shit.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 6 months ago
you shouldnt be taking medication not for his intended purpose, it has many warnings.
knitwitt@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Cough medicine can induce drowsiness, but you probably shouldn’t be taking it as a sleep aid. The distinction between intended vs unintended effects is an important distinction to make, in my opinion, to prevent drugs from being unintentionally misused.
mastod0n@lemmy.world 6 months ago
We should embrace oldschool SciFy and go for (DIY) Cyberdecks.
SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 6 months ago
Thankfully, for those of us without the time for all that there are Linux phones such as this one I’m considering.
balder1991@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’d love to play around with something like this, as a programmer myself, but unfortunately the cost is prohibitive in my country.
6nk06@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
We hope that Google keeps its word and preserves ADB installation
lol, adb is the first loophole that will be closed.
balder1991@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I don’t know, even people here are already considering it a loss of the only way is through ADB, because it’s not practical for everyday usage. But it’s better than nothing.
AbidanYre@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Since Google’s goal is to improve security
Is it though? Really?
scarabic@lemmy.world 6 months ago
What ulterior motive do they have for blocking sideloading?
Ulrich@feddit.org 6 months ago
This publication is always repeating Google’s nonsense.
Sxan@piefed.zip 6 months ago
No.
radix@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The security of their bank balance.
Ulrich@feddit.org 6 months ago
tl;dr you can still “sideload” via adb.
This is so incredibly inconvenient as to be meaningless.
Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Perhaps someone could write an ‘adb loopback’ app – get that into the official app store, and said app would then squirt other .apk files through adb on the phone to itself, thus sideloading it.
cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
We already have to do that to install older apps. It’s inconvenient, but not as bad as having to boot up an ancient phone every time you need to use the app.
dukatos@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
good luck updating all your apps that way…
hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 6 months ago
So a lot of speculation and we don't know much except 2 paragraphs in the FAQ... I'd like to mention though, they've recently stripped the Pixel devices if their status as developer devices and now push for their emulator for development. Once they follow that kind of logic, there isn't really a reason to keep ADB working as is on real devices.