4 ms·

Android's permissions model doesn't work at all. Every app asks for a ton of permissions at install time. You can't install the app without saying yes, and ever

Android's permissions model doesn't work at all. Every app asks for a ton of permissions at install time. You can't install the app without saying yes, and every app asks for far more than it needs. In theory, it is good, but in practice, it's broken. The iOS way installs the app, but denies access to the resource.

bentlegen 15y ago
Funny – if I see an Android app requesting a permission that I'm not comfortable with, I just don't install it. How do you expect this to work otherwise?
- falling 15y ago
  On iOS if you want to use Facebook but don’t want to grant it permission to access your location, you can still install and use the app and just deny it when the permission is requested.
  - reddit_clone 15y ago
    It didn't do jack for addressbook stealing apps though. You are representing it as though Apple asks for user's permission for every sensitive resource.
- biafra 15y ago
  I am with you in not installing apps asking for too many permissions. But since you're asking: I expect the permissions to be more granular. And I would like to be able to revoke some of them if the developer allows it.
- wvenable 15y ago
  iOS does this much better -- I decide on a whim whether or not I'm going to let application X know my location today.
baconner 15y ago
That's a bit hyperbolic. My android apps don't ask for permissions they don't need nor do many others. I think the android permission system is sane and reasonably functional. It's the users responsibility to read the requested permissions at install time and make a call. There could be improvements here of course. I'd like to see a two tiered approach where developers could mark which permissions are optional and users could decide which to grant the on the first or each time these permissions are used in addition to the current method. I'd also like to see a requirement for devs to provide an explination of what each requested permission is needed for that could display on the market. Hopefully these types of controls will continue to evolve on all platforms.
- SomeCallMeTim 15y ago
  > I'd like to see a two tiered approach where developers could mark which permissions are optional and users could decide which to grant the on the first or each time these permissions are used in addition to the current method. This would be SO useful! I have an app that I want to be able to collect crash reports for. This means I need the "READ_LOG" permission. Thing is, the log CAN have other potentially private information in it, so there's a scary warning for that permission. If I could ask for READ_LOG permission at run-time, and Android would pop up a box saying "This app is requesting access to the log to: 'create a complete crash report and send it to the developer'" or some such, then only the very few people who are actually sending me a crash report would ever have to "reveal" their log data to my app.
  - baconner 15y ago
    Funny that's one of the cases where I'd envisioned using such a feature. I wrote a private logging mechanism into my apps to capture the data I write to log seperatly so my support request option can include some just-for-this-app logs without a scary permission req but I'd much rather do it the way you suggest. Another situation I've got is I'd like to use the the permission to act as your Google account to optionally grab some user detail from <some Google service>, but I don't want to scare off users with this permission. The other feature on my permission wish list is some permission specific options like internet access to [urlmask1,urlmask2,...] or log read access to logs from my app only, errors and warnings.
baconner 15y ago
Side question about ios I wonder about. If you buy an app and install it, but then find it needs to use some permission you're not comfortable with can you get your money back or are you just out of.luck?
- ceejayoz 15y ago
  Apple tends to err on the side of the user for refund requests, so most likely. You might have a hard time arguing that you didn't understand that the app would need those permissions, though, as any app that requires either location or address book permissions is likely to be fairly obvious.

bentlegen 15y ago

Funny – if I see an Android app requesting a permission that I'm not comfortable with, I just don't install it. How do you expect this to work otherwise?

falling 15y ago
On iOS if you want to use Facebook but don’t want to grant it permission to access your location, you can still install and use the app and just deny it when the permission is requested.
- reddit_clone 15y ago
  It didn't do jack for addressbook stealing apps though. You are representing it as though Apple asks for user's permission for every sensitive resource.
biafra 15y ago
I am with you in not installing apps asking for too many permissions. But since you're asking: I expect the permissions to be more granular. And I would like to be able to revoke some of them if the developer allows it.
wvenable 15y ago
iOS does this much better -- I decide on a whim whether or not I'm going to let application X know my location today.

baconner 15y ago

That's a bit hyperbolic. My android apps don't ask for permissions they don't need nor do many others. I think the android permission system is sane and reasonably functional. It's the users responsibility to read the requested permissions at install time and make a call. There could be improvements here of course. I'd like to see a two tiered approach where developers could mark which permissions are optional and users could decide which to grant the on the first or each time these permissions are used in addition to the current method. I'd also like to see a requirement for devs to provide an explination of what each requested permission is needed for that could display on the market. Hopefully these types of controls will continue to evolve on all platforms.

SomeCallMeTim 15y ago
> I'd like to see a two tiered approach where developers could mark which permissions are optional and users could decide which to grant the on the first or each time these permissions are used in addition to the current method. This would be SO useful! I have an app that I want to be able to collect crash reports for. This means I need the "READ_LOG" permission. Thing is, the log CAN have other potentially private information in it, so there's a scary warning for that permission. If I could ask for READ_LOG permission at run-time, and Android would pop up a box saying "This app is requesting access to the log to: 'create a complete crash report and send it to the developer'" or some such, then only the very few people who are actually sending me a crash report would ever have to "reveal" their log data to my app.
- baconner 15y ago
  Funny that's one of the cases where I'd envisioned using such a feature. I wrote a private logging mechanism into my apps to capture the data I write to log seperatly so my support request option can include some just-for-this-app logs without a scary permission req but I'd much rather do it the way you suggest. Another situation I've got is I'd like to use the the permission to act as your Google account to optionally grab some user detail from <some Google service>, but I don't want to scare off users with this permission. The other feature on my permission wish list is some permission specific options like internet access to [urlmask1,urlmask2,...] or log read access to logs from my app only, errors and warnings.

baconner 15y ago

Side question about ios I wonder about. If you buy an app and install it, but then find it needs to use some permission you're not comfortable with can you get your money back or are you just out of.luck?

ceejayoz 15y ago
Apple tends to err on the side of the user for refund requests, so most likely. You might have a hard time arguing that you didn't understand that the app would need those permissions, though, as any app that requires either location or address book permissions is likely to be fairly obvious.