3 ms·

I mean, nothing? Which means the fact that they specifically carved out an exception for all app repos implies that at least someone at Google is making a good

I mean, nothing? Which means the fact that they specifically carved out an exception for all app repos implies that at least someone at Google is making a good faith effort here. It's still a pointless overreach there should at least be an easy setting for of course, but it seems as though they're trying to strike a balance between protecting the masses and giving power users power.

MishaalRahman 4y ago
Right, in fact, when I was researching for this article, I thought that the fact that the restriction didn't apply when installing apps via the session-based installation API was a loophole/because it wasn't fully implemented in DP2. I surmised that this loophole was intentional so as to not hamper third-party app stores from providing users with apps that use the AccessibilityService API, but I was only able to confirm my suspicion after contacting Google PR.
kllrnohj 4y ago
> It's still a pointless overreach there should at least be an easy setting for of course That seems like a stretch. Why should it be easy to give any app full permission of your device? This is an extremely dangerous permission to give, well, anything. It should be possible (and it seems like it is), but why should it be easy? And calling it a "pointless overreach" is some real sticking your head in the sand stuff. This isn't a fake threat. This abuse isn't theoretical, it's deployed in the wild. The article even provides multiple examples.