3 ms·

The idea of allowing users to control what individual permissions they have is good in theory, very hard in practice. It faces two main challenges that I can th

The idea of allowing users to control what individual permissions they have is good in theory, very hard in practice. It faces two main challenges that I can think of: 1) There are UI issues that have been raised elsewhere in this thread - mainly, that users get confused when shown a set of complex options. Having watched usability studies where users are given a lot of relatively complex options, I'd suspect that a model where users have to pick among the permissions to give an app is going to fail massively (ie, user turns on everything without actually understanding anything, turns off everything by default or just cancels out of the app install altogether.) A model where apps request permissions right when it's needed will be annoying users with all the dialogs needed. 2) Some apps don't work if they don't get all the permissions they need (imagine an address book app for an email program - if you don't get email address it just doesn't work.) Adding a lot of conditionals to change how your app works based on what permissions they get can be expensive and adds a lot of unnecessary test cases. In my opinion, Facebook's decision give more granular permissions, but to make it an all or nothing proposition allows them to protect their users by removing spammy/malicious apps, and simplifies the applications built on their platform . This puts responsibility on them to actively remove malicious applications, and on developers to pick only the permissions they need. Given that users tend to make bad decisions given a set of complex options that they don't understand, it seems like they made a rational choice. AppStores on the various phone platforms have a similar decision to make as to how to best protect users from apps, and there isn't consensus as to the best model in that arena either. They do need to step up their activity to remove malicious apps in light of giving regular applications this option.

nhangen 16y ago
Just because it is difficult in practice does not make it any less important. That sounds like a Facebook problem more than a user problem.
gergles 16y ago
"Remove malicious apps" doesn't undo the damage they caused. A reactionary approach only works until the first gigantic breach occurs, at which point people will finally start to ask "why do I have to give ShittyGame every permission under the sun?" It's the same on Android. Why do I have to give any app that wants to display ads in my face permission to read my phone number and device serial number? Hell, on some carriers that's all you need to clone the phone and steal service from it. What possible reason could there be for that? It's poor design, and there's no reason I need to give "Bob's Fun Game" my telephone number just so it can have a unique ID to datamine later. Generate one on startup and use that. The problems are similar and the solutions are similar - line-item veto for permissions, period. If your app can't handle it, crash - I'd rather have a broken app than risk my privacy for it.

nhangen 16y ago

Just because it is difficult in practice does not make it any less important. That sounds like a Facebook problem more than a user problem.

gergles 16y ago

"Remove malicious apps" doesn't undo the damage they caused. A reactionary approach only works until the first gigantic breach occurs, at which point people will finally start to ask "why do I have to give ShittyGame every permission under the sun?" It's the same on Android. Why do I have to give any app that wants to display ads in my face permission to read my phone number and device serial number? Hell, on some carriers that's all you need to clone the phone and steal service from it. What possible reason could there be for that? It's poor design, and there's no reason I need to give "Bob's Fun Game" my telephone number just so it can have a unique ID to datamine later. Generate one on startup and use that. The problems are similar and the solutions are similar - line-item veto for permissions, period. If your app can't handle it, crash - I'd rather have a broken app than risk my privacy for it.