260
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by jksalcedo@lemmy.ml to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

Does anyone here actually support Google's Developer Verification?

I don’t. I’ve put a warning about it in my repo because I’m against policies like sideloading restrictions, forced ID verification.

Curious what other devs here think. Is Play Store still worth the hassle?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 110 points 2 days ago

I think if Google (or Apple for that matter) wants to play this game, then everyone from the reviewer to the CEO should be held legally responsible when malware ends up not only verified but distributed by them. And by legally I mean also as accessory to the crime.

[-] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 89 points 2 days ago

Continue publishing app freely, do not verify yourself

Fuck google

[-] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I have getgoogleoff.me email domain 👍🏼

edit: from disroot

[-] erictile@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Why would you want to pleasure them?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] inari@piefed.zip 14 points 2 days ago

If I were a mobile dev I'd make GTK apps for Linux phones and use Pixiewood to create Android builds:

https://github.com/sp1ritCS/gtk-android-builder

[-] artyom@piefed.social 33 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Is Android Studio forcing you to register?

Does anyone here actually support Google's Developer Verification?

At best some are indifferent but I've never heard of anyone who actively supports this.

Is Play Store still worth the hassle i?

Never has been 🔫

[-] forbiddencherry@lemmy.today 34 points 2 days ago

I paid the fee for a dev account near the beginning of Android. Haven't had any apps published in over a decade, but from what I understand my account is grandfathered in so I don't have to jump through as many hoops to get something published if I chose to, compared to newer accounts. Anyhow, since I have an account I suppose I'm unaffected by this decision. Still, it goes against the original spirit of Android as a free and developer-centric platform and I condemn it.

[-] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago

I think you still need to register/verify since it will require a valid ID and app IDs (package names).

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Is there any way to build Android apps for Linux if you have the source code? I know Waydroid is a thing but that's basically just a VM of Android. I was told Jetpack compose is supposed to be cross platform so there should be a way migrate it right?

[-] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

Yes. Jetpack Compose is multiplatform. If you have the source code of an android app, you can port it to your preferred platform, but you have to adjust most of the code depending on the functionality since APIs are platform-specific unless it's JVM only.

[-] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago

Does that mean this app won't be available on app store, but can be installed from other places? I know there are on going changes regarding this topic, but I'm not fully informed. And researching will bring probably ton of Ai generated articles I'm not willing to look into. Could F-Droid still be used on a "regular" Android?

[-] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 31 points 2 days ago

What it means can be read, for example, in Detail here: https://keepandroidopen.org/en/

[-] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Holy mother of duck! This is worse than I thought. I assume custom firmware like LineageOS or e/OS don't have these restrictions. But most people have stock Android off course.

[-] MrRandom@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Few Android phones have stock Android, some get close to stock, most have branded Android, with bloat.

[-] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This rules are part of and enforced by the google play framework, so I would assume that as soon as Google Play and/or Google Play Services are installed on Lineage or other custom roms that then the same limitations come in effect. This is only an assuption by me, based on how I understand it, so I may be, and I hope that I am, very wrong.

[-] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 days ago

There is an alternative service called microG, an Open Source alternative to Google libraries to replace Google Play Services in example. This makes it possible to use the Play Store without Googles proprietary stuff. However I don't know how compatible it is, but it is big part of alternative custom roms to replace Google as much as possible. I don't use the Play Store, so cannot say first hand how good it works. More info on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroG .

Maybe this new policy and stuff could affect this alternative implementation of Google Services?

[-] Einskjaldi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

They've been continually removing things from that and making actual Google stuff more required. To be fair, they had a good reason because it let them get around the carriers never updating anything.

[-] lime@feddit.nu 17 points 2 days ago

they're going to make it more difficult too. you basically need to enable dev mode a second time, then for every application that can install ap, you need to re-approve then wait 24 hours.

[-] Phantaloons@piefed.zip 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Fuck that, I'll stay unverified/nogapps. They can keep their malware.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 6 points 2 days ago

No it means you won't be allowed to install the app on any certified devices at all. Regardless of where it's obtained.

[-] loutr@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

@thingsiplay@lemmy.ml is right, it just means Google will refuse to publish it on the Play Store. It can still be installed by going through a convoluted process to enable sideloading.

[-] vapeloki@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yes I am.

I spend a long time of my career in IT Sec.

80% of android users will freely install whatever APK from wherever.

Info stealer infected fake apps are a massive risk to a huge part of the user base.

Yes, it will get a little bit more complicated to sideload. But nobody is prevented from it.

And everybody that is against user protection (and yes, this is fucking user protection, just not for you) is invited next Christmas to de-worm the android devices of my family without wiping them.

EDIT for all those that only read the memes. Sideloading will NOT be disabled. You have to jump though extra hoops.

Yes, the way they do this is not even testable yet and we can argue over details.

I support the principal idea, as someone who had to live with the fallout of people who installed "it support apps" because someone told them to

[-] ItsAlwaysDNS@sh.itjust.works 49 points 2 days ago

Most scam apps are in the Google Play Store btw

[-] flyingSock@feddit.org 8 points 2 days ago

maybe because it was to easy to upload to the googleplay store. Maybe there should be some kind of verification of the person uploading. How could this be accomplished?

Joking aside I don't think side loading should be encoumbered like this, but for the official app store it makes sense.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 days ago

Spoken like a true Microsoft and Google agent.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 days ago
  1. Google being a private american company that claims the authority of what is okay and not okay on most devices over the world is problematic, especially in the context of ICE tracking apps, VPN apps, private messaging apps etc. They take this power but don't take responsibility and would not be put into court if this measure would be proven useless if not harmful. I still remember how they complied with deleting Navalny's app from russian app store and nothing stops them from revoking said IDs as well if they don't like what dev does for a reason they'd not care to explain.
  2. The side-benefit of that is a manifest v3-style hunt for those who still use their computing devices without watching ads. Alternative apps for social networks and google's own resources is probably the only category I know half-savvy people still intentionally install, sometimes going out of their way for that. While this seems small, adblocking was too, and piracy was never anyone's problem, but by totally crumbling it once again some CEO can get a bonus.
  3. We are talking about Google's Android, they had around 15 years to fix the swiss cheese their OS is, to clean obvious garbage from their app store, with modern phones you need to jump through the hoops to enable apk installation and even more hoops to root it, and it still isn't perceived as safe, but does feel like a closed garden iPhone without benefits of having an iPhone - quality basic apps, curated store and need of israeli hack tools to reliably break in. Small scammers still get their bread and butter by sending links to infected files, big scammers vacuum everything you ever have with no explicit user's agreement, and I don't see how that would change with ID requerement they are no bank or government to ask for, but they'd, soon.

I think you should invite people to join you on not one, but two Christmasses to compare before and after. I'm sure they won't magically fix things this time, at best it would be a little setback not changing much in the end. What it would do is directly giving Google even more power while hurting open source community, alternative appstores and OSes.

[-] lime@feddit.nu 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

so the real-world id requirement is also user protection? play store is basically an info stealer at this point.

[-] hneerqe@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

80% of android users will freely install whatever APK from wherever.

I should care because? Do they care about me not wanting google shoved in every aspect of my life?

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Cassa 17 points 2 days ago

so your family's devices get their apps from outside the play store?

people are effectivly prevented from sideloading. not "just a little more complicated"

[-] iByteABit@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 days ago

of course nana uses adb exclusively to install apps on her smartphone, after all this is a totally real story about user protection right?

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

80% of android users will freely install whatever APK from wherever.

A ridiculous and absurd lie. 90% have zero clue what one is, let alone go into the developer settings (there are one, maybe two settings you have to enable) to change the settings to even make that possible. Why are you lying about this? It's weird.

load more comments (22 replies)
[-] skyline2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago

Alternate stores like Accrescent and FDroid are blocked by this policy, and Google refuses to implement any mechanism for authorising at the store level either. Store level authorization is an obvious alternative to verification of each individual app.

Both Accescent and FDroid have some oversight processes in place, and do not contain "random" APKs. Googles actions show the real motive, which is control... not security.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

for all those that only read the memes.

For someone who possibly considers themselves better informed than others, you're seem to be missing the fact that Google's plan had no option for sideloading unverified apps until a sizeable outcry from us (a lot of professional developers and users). Unverified app installation was only allowed (via new hoops) after this action. For now. The fact that Google's plan did not have an option for installing unverified apps shows us what they really want. Therefore it won't be surprising if they make it increasingly difficult or impossible in the future.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Pollo_Jack@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

At least make it a toggle, like you need to request access for your account for your phone.

Kneecapping everyone because idiots exist is idiotic.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 5 points 2 days ago

So with your career in ITSec, you're aware of the massive amount of malware found in the play store? That it has historically been the main distribution vector for malware?

You have to jump though extra hoops.

You are downplaying the hoops here by a lot. To install software on my own phone.

Stop calling installing software "side loading". Its nonsense.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
260 points (100.0% liked)

Open Source

47914 readers
226 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS