Android’s new sideload settings will carry over to new devices (androidauthority.com)

by croemer 240 comments 150 points
Read article View on HN

240 comments

[−] Zak 48d ago
It's a very small concession. The high initial friction still means when someone comes to me with a problem and I tell them the solution is in F-Droid, they have to wait a day. Most give up and pick a different, less trustworthy solution from Google Play.
[−] malicka 48d ago
Incredibly small concession that doesn’t warrant this article’s absolutely insane framing: “Even less of a problem than we thought,” “very, very good news,” “already sounded perfectly manageable.”

The author is so giddy to defend this monopolistic restriction on Google’s part. Hackers can use F-Droid without annoyance, but this really does kill any chance at normies using it. They absolutely will use the worst spyware on Google Play instead, and the author seemingly loves it.

[−] matheusmoreira 48d ago
I've given up on getting normies to care. So long as we can use these things on our own terms, it's fine.
[−] rolandog 48d ago
"On our own terms", as long as it's approved by Google,.. for now. Surely we bear no resemblance to frogs in warming water, and we do not find ourselves praying that the deal is not further altered.
[−] andrewaylett 48d ago
Given the Epic settlement means Google is allowing alternate app stores, and also the delay only applies for unregistered developers, I'm not certain it won't actually get easier to get folk set up on F-Droid.

It still remains to be seen what the actual requirements are, and even if F-Droid could become "approved" that doesn't mean they want to. Time will tell.

[−] singpolyma3 48d ago
"only applies for unregistered developers" but remember the whole point is to allow Google to pull your "registered developer" status on a whim. Something they've shown over and over again they cannot be trusted with
[−] gzread 47d ago
But if there's a court order saying Epic and F-Droid have to be registered developers, they can go to jail for doing that.
[−] singpolyma3 47d ago
Sure. But there isn't.
[−] rockskon 48d ago
Why the hell should we "mother may I" with Google for running apps on our own phones if it isn't sourced from the Play Store?

The "security" rationale is horseshit given just how much malware is readily download able on the Play Store. Google never cleans its own house before going after others.

[−] Onavo 48d ago
It's not just the US, story through the grapevine is that Google is under a lot of pressure Asian governments over "online scams".

(Allegedly the main actor behind this push is Singapore)

[−] Zak 47d ago
Singapore is not big enough to dictate terms to Google. If Singapore wanted this change and Google didn't, Singapore's most extreme option would be to ban the import of standard Android phones to a market of a few million people.
[−] rockskon 47d ago
They're free to make changes to Asian country phones and not let the political pressure of Asian countries impact non-Asian countries.
[−] tosti 48d ago
Poor, poor Google
[−] hparadiz 48d ago
Don't you know? If one elderly person gets scammed we all deserve to be infantilized.
[−] RedComet 48d ago
Wouldn't it be something if, given all the surveillance already in place, law enforcement punished the scammers instead of the innocent?
[−] miki123211 48d ago
The scammers are often in a very different country than the victim. Finding the scammer is only 50% of the work, the other 50% is diplomacy and hoping the other side is willing to extradite. This is not made easier if the police force in the scammer's country is extremely corrupt.

This is why those scams so often rely on gift cards (or sometimes on cash which a local mule converts to crypto).

[−] cute_boi 48d ago
Many banking scams involve fake checks and deposits into other accounts, but I don’t see the government or banks taking active steps to stop them.
[−] gzread 47d ago
Maybe they can just sanction that person? Block them from making phone calls to the country and publishing apps?
[−] Ms-J 48d ago
But then how would they police what you install?

Maybe you have the criminal idea of installing an adblocker, for example.

That is not allowed since corporations need to make money.

The government and ad networks need to track you for your benefit.

Ads are needed before listening to each minute of a song.

You must submit to crpyto miners running in the background from the ads, increasing your electricity bill and pollution.

Only USA sanctioned and approved ads are allowed, also. We wouldn't want you seeing an ad from a competing entity, right?

If you install an ablocker, you are a terrorist and broke 324582 American laws.

[−] benoau 48d ago
(nevermind that the scams are extraordinarily likely to come through Meta, Google, Apple, Amazon)
[−] tosti 48d ago
They don't want users to find out who's the real scammer.
[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
The scams are likely to some from outside Play. In the US, these scams don't run because iPhone is the dominant platform and side loading in iOS is not possible. In the rest of world they are widespread.
[−] soraminazuki 48d ago
"Likely"? Do you mean that based on actual data, or are you using it as a weasel word so you can present whatever convenient "facts" that benefit Google as truth?

I’m betting on the latter. No Kitboga video mentions custom Android apps. What actually appears on almost all videos are online ads/spam or fake celebrity accounts messaging random people on Facebook.

It's funny how you aggressively push solutions that ignore the most common scam vectors investigators encounter. Could it be a coincidence that your proposal conveniently places every aspect of people’s lives at the mercy of big businesses? Or that the scam vector you downplay, ads and social media, just happens to be cash cows for some of the richest companies in history?

We already have plenty of paid lobbyists cheering the transfer of wealth from the poorest to the richest. There's no need to do that dirty work for free. Weaponizing the elderly being scammed of their life savings while protecting those that benefit from it is beyond messed up.

[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
My proposal? Who exactly do you think I am? lol
[−] benoau 48d ago
Outside Play, on YouTube or via Google Ads for many of them. Likewise for Meta ads.
[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
The scams that are happening in the rest of world are calls posing as bank support about urgent security issues and telling people to install apps to protect their accounts.
[−] happymellon 48d ago
All the scams are for apps that are already in the Play and App store.
[−] goku12 48d ago
Absolutely! Never had one problem with apps on FDroid. Not even when tbe Simple Mobile Tools suite was sold to a shady company without a heads up to its users. And that safety isn't an accident.
[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
I don't disagree about that.
[−] direwolf20 48d ago
In the USA they tell you to install AnyDesk and remote access your computer. Or they just ask for your password. Or forge a check.
[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
Does not sound like an Android problem. Maybe ask Microsoft or Apple about that.
[−] LocalH 48d ago
Sideloading is very possible on iOS and there's an entire subculture surrounding it.
[−] fluidcruft 48d ago
Not widespread enough to be a viable grift target.
[−] expedition32 48d ago
Ha if we follow that to it's logical conclusion we should ban smartphones.
[−] packetlost 48d ago
Ok, but the vast majority of people do need their hand held because they're incompetent, naive, or both. IMO this is pro consumer move
[−] otabdeveloper4 48d ago
It's not about malware. It's about Google complying with USA's geopolitical adventures.

Basically, Google needs an answer when men in suits ask them why they have technology that enables users to install sanctioned Iranian banking apps.

[−] jojobas 48d ago
Somehow if you replace Google with Apple in the same sentence you'll get cursed to hell. Go figure.
[−] thoiweurewrwe 48d ago
The rationale behind this move makes no sense either - most of the scams happen via some instruction to install Anydesk or some such remote-support software, not some shady apkg downloaded from some third party website.

Seems like a move to get around the Epic Games ruling (and assorted rumbles from countries like India).

[−] Sophira 47d ago
Not to mention that the "concession", such that it is, will presumably only work if you sign into a Google account. Presumably, this will require that you have Google Play Services installed.

Of course, many people who want to de-Google their phones won't want to do either. This is an attack on people who want to keep their lives separate from Google.

[−] toast0 48d ago
Do you have to wait a day, or do you have to set your clock forward a day?
[−] danpalmer 48d ago
I'm biased, but I don't think less trustworthy is a fair assessment. I think you can suggest that open source software provides a different trust model than closed source and distributed by Play, but to conclude it's less trustworthy is a real stretch.
[−] sunaookami 48d ago
You can bypass the wait time with adb install at least.
[−] tasuki 48d ago

> have to wait a day

The horrors!

[−] Havoc 48d ago
We hereby grant you a conditional right to install software on the device you "own", subject to conditions, and terms, but only under certain circumstances and only so long as it pleases us.

Modern handheld computing is such a shitshow...

[−] AlBugdy 48d ago
What's the phone OS landscape now? What can someone who values their agency and wants FOSS choose?

* iOS - walled garden, so no

* Android:

* * with a Google account and Play Services - a bit less of a walled garden, but still no

* * Android without Google:

* * * GrapheneOS - root or adb not supported, so no

* * * LineageOS - (edit: root or adb not supported, so no - just learned) seems like a viable option although it seems like it depends on Google's development of Android and keeping it FOSS. How's the situation with security updates? Which phones would you recommend? I don't count Samsung or whatever crap as they're generally quite user-hostile.

* Linux - IIRC only PMOS supported FDE. Is that still the case? Are there are good Linux phones? I tried PinePhone a few years ago, but it was crappy. The OS also lacked basic features like new windows showing up inside the screen.

* anything else?

[−] Taterr 48d ago
None of the comments here seem to discuss or even mention how this situation looks from googles perspective? I feel like HN readers are not aware of the scale of the problem they face or their motivation behind these changes.

If you look at the rate of growth of the call/text scam industry I think it's entirely possible that android owners are getting scammed out of more money than google themselves makes on the android platform as a whole. It's at least not that far off. Which doesn't even account for the humanitarian issues which they probably feel partially responsible for.

[−] sgbeal 48d ago
When typos are inadvertently funny:

> Google’s been working hard to relive everyone’s fears...

[−] goku12 48d ago
Two steps forwards and one step backwards in the never-ending march to dytopia and you celebrate it as a show of your generosity and benevolence! I don't know who you're trying to fool. But I'm certainly interested in finding out, because that person must be both naïve and incredibly powerful if you think that it's worthwhile to pull off a public charade like this.
[−] throwaway81523 48d ago
I thought that even after the 24h wait, you will have to go through some annoying dialog to install (or maybe even update) anything not from the play store. So installing from F-droid will become an obnoxious process. Even worse if updates also become obnoxious. F-droid often wants to update several apps at once, so I click "update all". If that becomes multiple dialogs, that sucks.
[−] tsoukase 48d ago
The first thing I do with any new phone is to enable developer mode. If it is weekend, I will use adb to sideload, if not, I will do it in next weekend as I don't have much time at workdays. In any case the sideloading will be done on the same day as now. Problem solved.
[−] bedrizzled 48d ago
Key point from the article:

> ADB would be unaffected, and any power users who needed to install an app straight away could always connect their Android device to a computer and use ADB commands to manually install - no delay at all.

So in practice this won't be an issue for anyone tech-savvy who uses their Android device with apps outside of the Play Store, as they can simply install through the ADB mechanism via a separate device. It can even be done using WebUSB.

However, the many, many people worldwide who lack such technical knowledge, and are more susceptible to being scammed via malicious app installs because of it, are still protected by this new process Google are introducing.

[−] andyjohnson0 48d ago
One thing I've never been able to understand about this new sideload "flow" is whether it will be applied to older devices, or just from some (future or recent) version of Android. Does anyone know?
[−] metalman 48d ago
Guggle et all, are starting to panick, as the whole adversurvielance scam is unraveling, there is NO concievable end game. The surviving frogs, having been cooked en mass are getting ready to spontainiously evolve, AI is destroying vulnerable peoples ability to make descisions and the knock on effects as basic infrastucture erodes while costs spiral and actual knowledge is lost, but AI will be cheering them on by telling them walking and chewing gum are seperate activities that should be scheduled sequentialy after rest periods.
[−] phendrenad2 48d ago
Google is going to keep tweaking this because they have two conflicting goals. They want to cut off alternative app stores where they don't get their 30% cut, and they absolutely do not want to push people to other operating systems like graphene etc. They need it to be very high friction to accomplish the former, but if they make it too high-friction they'll trigger the latter. It's a catch-22, and they're going to dither in an infinite loop.
[−] branon 48d ago
How will the transfer occur? I'm assuming via Google account?

So this is vendor lock-in to an online account being sold as a way to "win" against a problem _created_ by said vendor? I would prefer a per-device wait time and I sincerely hope a Google account will not be a hard requirement. I didn't consider this initially.

Google is in the process of stealing the shirts from our backs and selling them back to us. Whoever wrote this article is drinking the kool-aid. This should NOT be presented as a positive thing. Some of us use Android without a Google account and would still like to sideload.

[−] codethief 48d ago
How is that setting supposed to carry over if I don't even have a Google account on my phone?

And even if I disregard that for a moment, what's up with the author being a mouthpiece for Google?

> Google's latest concession makes the sideloading controversy a big nothingburger

> Opting out is going to be even less of a problem than we thought

> This afternoon, Google’s Matthew Forsythe shares some answers to questions he’s gotten about the minutiae of how this process all works — and he’s got some very, *very* good news for us.

(emphasis theirs)

> Doing that once with every new phone already sounded perfectly manageable. But now Google clarifies that even that won’t be necessary, with the opt-out able to be transferred as we upgrade phones. That is maybe just the best news we could have gotten here, and hopefully it’s enough to calm everyone down about the sideloading-sky falling.

[−] hagbard_c 48d ago
You still seem to need a Google account to be able to use the hardware you just paid for. I don't have one, don't want one either. I've been using Android without Google for about 15 years now but will hold off on getting a new device until I'm sure I can continue using it without getting a Google account.
[−] croemer 48d ago
Google clarifies that this status can carry over to new devices, so you only ever have to go through it once.
[−] em-bee 48d ago
this is awesome! because i get a new phone every week, this will save me so much time.

WAT? how is that even better than the ability to skip the wait time?

you are right, i am not seriously bothered by the wait time, i'd just activate it on a new phone, wait a day and be done with it. i have had to wait two weeks to unlock a xiaomi phone, so this is not that of a big deal. (besides i am not going to be affected anyways because i use a custom rom, but that's besides the point. let's assume i will be affected)

who changes their phone so often that being able to carry over the setting to skip the wait is a win?

i am embarrassed that i fell for this article, believing that there would actually be a genuine improvement to sideloading.

[−] wisplike 48d ago
Maybe Im a conspiracist but it seems there is a recent concerted effort to lock OS platforms down. Just last week apple added an age verification system to uk iPhones. No legal req. as far as I can tell
[−] underlipton 48d ago
They're tightening the noose. Fight, or lose computing sovereignty forever.
[−] 46493168 48d ago
I’m only marginally aware of how these systems work, can someone more knowledgeable tell me the difference between Google’s implementation of this restriction and the restrictions already present on GrapheneOS? Is it correct to say that both are implemented for security reasons?
[−] inxode 48d ago
Bring back keypad based phones with J2ME, they were way too fun.
[−] deaux 47d ago

> Google's latest concession makes the sideloading controversy a big nothingburger

Ah yes, having to now send in a government ID to publish apps on the Play Store is a "big nothingburger". Kindly piss off, megacorp bootlicker Stephen Schenck.

[−] Pooge 48d ago
There is no win. They are winning 50-0 and they just scored an own-goal; so what?!
[−] nabogh 48d ago

> Google's latest concession makes the sideloading controversy a big nothingburger.

It's really not. Try to realise that it's not meant to be Google's phone and they shouldn't be "letting" me do things

[−] ottah 45d ago
This is still unacceptable.
[−] Razengan 48d ago
"Government gives citizens a win by allowing them to breathe air."
[−] yesbut 48d ago
can't wait until this is just completely bypassed and we can ignore Google again.
[−] animuchan 48d ago
I despise how this incredibly user-hostile move is spun in the title: "Google just gave Android power users a huge sideloading win", as if it was a good thing that Google did for some portion of its users. That's such a blatant, incredibly damaging lie, on all levels, that it's probably called journalism at this point.
[−] akimbostrawman 46d ago
"Just log into our online account" is not a concession at all. This sideloading drama is laughable anyways since the bigger issue should be there rootkit access and appstore monopoly.
[−] scuff3d 48d ago
[flagged]
[−] bitwize 48d ago
Very, very good news everyone! Google has agreed to only gently fuck us in the ass! They were even kind enough to offer to use lube!
[−] catlikesshrimp 48d ago
WTF win? Sounds like I will need a tracking google account because it can "carry over" when I "upgrade my phone" "Google giving a concession" is no win.

WTF Concession? Why are we asking google for permission to use the devices we bought as they see fit?

Ok, google is doing what is best for them, abusing users. But the manufacturers are really to blame here because the devices are by default locked to what google and them decide. There is no Market Choice here.

[−] xt00 48d ago
How long before there is a "we've detected your account has been used multiple times to re-setup a phone.. we've re-enabled the Google Nanny Safety mode.. also we've locked your google account just in case.. " I mean other than hackers, who has needed to factory reset their phone more than once in a year you must be doing something shady... right right?
[−] NooneAtAll3 48d ago
step 1: make situation very bad

step 2: make situation tiiiny amount better

step 3: proclaim this as "a win"

...really?

[−] Ms-J 48d ago
Play store is the largest distributor of spyware and viruses for Android.

Not even a small fraction of a percentage of scams come from installing software normally, but only from Google Play store.

[−] Ms-J 48d ago
What is this steaming pile of shit? Android and Google are bending their customers over a table and ramming it into their asses.

If a device doesn't allow the user full control, then it isn't your device.

You are renting it from a duopoly that will bend over backwards to give all your data to the government! Also selling it to other corporations.

It is no excuse that an extremely small amount of ancient people over 85 who have never used technology in their life got scammed by some foreigner who worked them over for a full day or two.

That will happen regardless of whatever immoral restrictions are placed on our devices.

If you aren't smart enough to use the tech, don't use it.