An accurate title would read something like: Google wants to make side loading apps more difficult by adding extra steps under the guise of security in order to maintain market dominance and continue spying on the user.
Yay, Google adding another hurdle for alternative app stores and their developers...
F-Droid store/repo is safer than Google Play Store. Google's own store has many shady apps, including spyware and occasionnal malware.
I don't get the argument that Play Store is safer than others.
Google play services is spyware
I know my sideloaded apps are safe. I have far less confidence with the apps Google allows in their App Store.
Ridiculous, mother of bullshit! Switching to Linux appears to be the only option left for a personal computing device.
I really hope phones get better Linux support soon... it really isn't daily driver material for most phones at the moment.
Wait until you find out what Android is under the UI.
While its true Android runs on the Linux kernel, its not Linux. There are many differences and restrictions.
rips off mask
It is a vendor kernel!
In this time and age, do you still doubt that Linux might be outlawed for consumers? To prevent criminal activity, of course /s.
They already consider you a criminal if you use grapheneOS on a pixel. It's not a joke.
Just turn off Google Play Protect and it'll let you sideload whatever you want.
You can't seriously actually trust that turning it off in the Google owned app they control or update will be meaningful. I'm really sick of people claiming it is, and I hope this will get them to realize that.
If you want to crush it fully, disable google play store as a whole, and make sure to tell your friends too because if that solution doesn't get more popular there might not be third party apps to install since the devs will just quit.
I dunno, you're the one claiming stuff that isn't necessarily true (yet). This is a proposed update to Google Play Protect. You don't have to have Google Play Protect enabled, and disabling it doesn't really impact anything unless you're the type of person to just download an apk from unverified sources.
Where did you hear this? I've seen a couple of articles on this now but none of them have mentioned its specifically play protect or that it can be turned off
I keep play protect enabled in case I download anything unsafe.
Not really necessary if you limit your APK sources to trusted sources like apkmirror or github.
Github is not a trusted source. Anyone can dump apk files over there.
Honestly we need a community OS like Android/Chome OS
I like Linux but it would be really cool to have a OS that was less modular and more purpose built. I feel like there is enough people interested that we could raise some money to hire some developers. On think Chome OS and Android get right is the hassle free unified experience.
There's GrapheneOS that I think would try to address this problem — secure, proper architecture, compatible with some major app stack (e.g. Android apps). It's AOSP-based, but they're already thinking ahead up to a point where they would be forced to fork it and even work with OEMs to create their own phone hardware for it. There are a couple of threads on their Mastodon.
I don't know how much they would be able to achieve, but I would pay for such system.
Graphene doesn't play nice with others
Yes, unfortunately. It's their con, but also their pro at the same time. It's bad because they end up isolated from everyone else playing nice with each other, and then no one wants to deal with them, but they also don't agree on compromises that might hinder security or the stability and development of their project. And I respect that. That is partly a reason why they created probably the most secure and private AOSP distrubution nowadays.
they don't compromises that might hinder security or the stability
I call BS on that one. It feels more to me like they are seeking power and control. They could seriously benefit from working with other projects but they don't.
Sure, to make it safer in the same way Microsoft made you safer by making it harder to install Linux with UEFI.
Isn't it actually easier with UEFI since you can have multiple bootloaders and updating windows doesn't overwrite any other bootloaders? I think the issue arises from secureboot
The person you replied to is probably talking about this: https://wiki.debian.org/UEFI#Force_grub-efi_installation_to_the_removable_media_path
At some point that stops being sideloading.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
In the meantime, we're already verifying signatures for sideloaded apps. Can't say the same about play store apps.
Year of the Linux phone in 2026?
Glad i run only LineageOS with no gapps.
I wonder if this will do the same thing that happened to Windows when Windows 11 wouldn't support older devices and people switched on mass to Linux.
Either way, you're gonna have a bifurcated Android. One Android for the plebs where Google controls everything, and one Android for those who know where Google controls nothing.
Sounds like this is going to stop things like me telling my friend to install new pipe from afteroid because they can skip YouTube ads.
Great, Apple style app notarization is just about the last thing I want on my damn phone.
Every year that goes by mobile computing gets less and less interesting.
Might as well just buy the cheapest one that will do the job and call it done. So sense in spending top dollar very often when it is just a severely limited black box, like a video game console.
Lmao "safer" FOH monopolistic pieces of shit.
Oh I see someone already made a post. I can't see how this is enforceable except for highly modifying the OS. It would have to be enforced at the device level correct,?
It'll be part of Google Play "Protect", part of "gapps" not AOSP. Manufacturers have to ship all of gapps or none. Its not clear if this will block installs/updates, add a nag screen occasionally or fully block running these apps/disable them.
This is the equivalent of Apples Notarization which they just used to block apps after the EU told them to allow users to install apps.
Can this be bypassed by using adb to sideload, I wonder?
Probably not, but I imagine that disabling or uninstalling the play store will bypass it since it'll likely use the Play Protect Dialogue injection in Package Installer to bounce inauthentic installations.
can they not just develop a method like they do for verifying websites with an .android folder or something? requiring everyone into a centralised place is garbage.
They can, but it's not their goal. Their goal is to have control over 99% of Android phones produced and not let their users install adblock or NewPipe, or torrent app or whatever.
The new home of /r/Android on Lemmy and the Fediverse!
Android news, reviews, tips, and discussions about rooting, tutorials, and apps.
🔗Universal Link: !android@lemdro.id
💡Content Philosophy:
Content which benefits the community (news, rumours, and discussions) is generally allowed and is valued over content which benefits only the individual (technical questions, help buying/selling, rants, self-promotion, etc.) which will be removed if it's in violation of the rules.
Support, technical, or app related questions belong in: !askandroid@lemdro.id
For fresh communities, lemmy apps, and instance updates: !lemdroid@lemdro.id
📰Our communities below
Stay on topic: All posts should be related to the Android OS or ecosystem.
No support questions, recommendation requests, rants, or bug reports: Posts must benefit the community rather than the individual. Please post to !askandroid@lemdro.id.
Describe images/videos, no memes: Please include a text description when sharing images or videos. Post memes to !androidmemes@lemdro.id.
No self-promotion spam: Active community members can post their apps if they answer any questions in the comments. Please do not post links to your own website, YouTube, blog content, or communities.
No reposts or rehosted content: Share only the original source of an article, unless it's not available in English or requires logging in (like Twitter). Avoid reposting the same topic from other sources.
No editorializing titles: You can add the author or website's name if helpful, but keep article titles unchanged.
No piracy or unverified APKs: Do not share links or direct people to pirated content or unverified APKs, which may contain malicious code.
No unauthorized polls, bots, or giveaways: Do not create polls, use bots, or organize giveaways without first contacting mods for approval.
No offensive or low-effort content: Don't post offensive or unhelpful content. Keep it civil and friendly!
No affiliate links: Posting affiliate links is not allowed.
Our Communities
Lemmy App List
Chat and More