3 ms·

CM's privacy guard doesn't deny access to the contacts, it returns a valid address book listing... just an empty one instead of your real contacts. Privacy Gua

CM's privacy guard doesn't deny access to the contacts, it returns a valid address book listing... just an empty one instead of your real contacts. Privacy Guard was implemented well before the idea of individual permissions being denied made its way into the Android base, so most apps were not implemented with this expectation and would explode completely if the call to fetch the address book entries failed. Which is just to say that that's not really a valid comparison.

simoncion 11y ago
> CM's privacy guard doesn't deny access to the contacts, it returns a valid address book listing... just an empty one instead of your real contacts. ... Which is just to say that that's not really a valid comparison. Wot? It's totally a valid comparison. The problem is transmission of contact information from your phone to a third party. Telling Signal that you have an empty contact list solves that problem, and it solves it far better than just throwing a permissions error or whatever when the software goes to request a contacts list.
- nucleardog 11y ago
  > Oddly, the Android version seems to work just fine if it doesn't have access to your contacts. You're specifically calling out CM's Privacy Guard where the app is unaware that it doesn't have access to your contacts. the difference in behaviour between "Android" and iOS is not "odd" because it's not a 1:1 comparison, and the CM way of doing it specifically mitigates the issue that arises. A consistent comparison would be seeing what the app does when permission is denied via the runtime permissions in Android 6, because that - like iOS - informs the app that you've denied permission. There is no obvious incongruity between the apps here.
  - simoncion 11y ago
    > A consistent comparison would be... Ah! I see what you're saying (and the source of your objection) now. Thanks for clarifying!

simoncion 11y ago

> CM's privacy guard doesn't deny access to the contacts, it returns a valid address book listing... just an empty one instead of your real contacts. ... Which is just to say that that's not really a valid comparison. Wot? It's totally a valid comparison. The problem is transmission of contact information from your phone to a third party. Telling Signal that you have an empty contact list solves that problem, and it solves it far better than just throwing a permissions error or whatever when the software goes to request a contacts list.

nucleardog 11y ago
> Oddly, the Android version seems to work just fine if it doesn't have access to your contacts. You're specifically calling out CM's Privacy Guard where the app is unaware that it doesn't have access to your contacts. the difference in behaviour between "Android" and iOS is not "odd" because it's not a 1:1 comparison, and the CM way of doing it specifically mitigates the issue that arises. A consistent comparison would be seeing what the app does when permission is denied via the runtime permissions in Android 6, because that - like iOS - informs the app that you've denied permission. There is no obvious incongruity between the apps here.
- simoncion 11y ago
  > A consistent comparison would be... Ah! I see what you're saying (and the source of your objection) now. Thanks for clarifying!