7 ms·
Obtainium: Get Android App Updates Directly from the Source
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago[flagged]
- mj-j 2y agoIt is if the crowdsourced sources are bad. Outside of that happening, you are just going directly to the project instead of through a curator.
- g-b-r 2y agoWith F-Droid you have at least a guarantee that the app builds, and at least during the initial review nothing bad was found You can argue you're adding F-Droid to the entities you trust (unless it's a reproducible build), but at the same time you're relying a lot less on a random's developer honesty (and security)
- ruiseal 2y agoYou're removing the middleman (Play or F-Droid) so I don't see how.
- pjmlp 2y agoUsually the middleman validates what the stuff does, before we do it ourselves, yes even though malicious apps get through the cracks, still makes a difference.
- ramon156 2y agoSo if obtanium does checks, the issue is resolved?
- fwn 2y agoThe safety-argument functions as an apologetic narrative to justify the gatekeeping. Strangely, almost everything the Play Store pushes at me (Temu, TikTok, millions of communication apps with dubious reputation) is crap. I would never install an app without checking the permissions it asks for, researching the owner of the app as well as the the tracking it includes - yet the store never makes those things transparent, quite the opposite. Google even takes money to show you bad apps through PlayStore app ads designed to look like an organic app listing. This is apparently a mechanism to profit directly from deceiving users. (Right now, for example, it shows a gambling app, some "beautifying" shovelware, and "Tango live streaming," which the author probably believes by heart is not made for porn.) So either Google is trying to protect its users and just isn't very good at it, or it's a fake argument to hide corporate power. But it's impossible to know for sure, isn't it?
- fluidcruft 2y agoThe safety argument with F-Droid is that F-Droid builds from source and the builds can be verified by anyone https://f-droid.org/docs/Reproducible_Builds/ https://f-droid.org/docs/Reproducible_Builds/
- cubefox 2y agoUnfortunately F-Droid sometimes distributes outdated software with security vulnerabilities. This happened with Fennec (Firefox variant), not sure what the reason was. I switched back to Firefox + Google Play after that.
- fluidcruft 2y agoYes F-Droid is too slow unfortunately. The reason I added obtanium to my mix was because F-Droid version of RedReader was so old it didn't work with Reddit anymore. And I couldn't figure out why or if there was an ETA or what and someone mentioned obtanium.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
- fwn 2y agoIt really depends. Many apps currently cannot be distributed through the stores or the maintainers have to endure a lot of bullying to stay in the stores. (Think NewPipe et al) In these cases, the middlemen like Google are the hostile party. Essentially the threat actor. It is natural: big tech is big tech, because they are very good at limiting user choice. For these applications, Obtainium is brilliant. It also shows that the store model that everyone is working to enshrine in digital policy is not the necessity that Big Tech would have everyone believe.
- pjmlp 2y agoMostly because certain apps refuse to adopt Android APIs, or insist NDK is a full blown GNU/Linux userspace, contrary to Android team official position on the matter.
- rpdillon 2y agoThe fact that the Android team's official position on API usage determines what software I get to install is exactly my problem with this gatekeeping. The latest victim of this travesty is the removal of syncthing from the play store and the subsequent discontinuation of the app. This was ostensibly due to syncthing's failure to leverage the storage access framework to access files on Android devices. In reality, developers were benchmarking the storage access framework as somewhere around 50 times slower than direct system access, and that made it infeasible for usage in apps like Syncthing. That bug has been open for years, and the Android team has done nothing other than claim it's fixed when benchmarks show otherwise. So I'm not sold at all on the value of these gatekeeping stores that have black box approval processes with changing rules. It is a system that is set up to be evil because it can reject and accept on a whim with no accountability. We should not so easily give up on installing the software of our choosing on the devices we purchase.
- __jonas 2y agoHow does that apply to F-Droid though? I don't think they are bullying any of the app maintainers, NewPipe seems to be on there?
- realusername 2y ago> Usually the middleman validates what the stuff does That's what they say for their defense yeah but personally I don't buy it. I've published an app myself and I've also seen the countless app scams which are allowed to advertise on YouTube. The value we get from the store is dubious.
- InsideOutSanta 2y agoThey're excellent at inconveniencing legitimate devs for "mistakes" like links to external payment options, but oddly bad at spotting actual scams. I think that tells you something about the actual goal of app review.
- realusername 2y agoThat's spot on, there's two main goals of the app review: - Make sure that they get their cut - Shift the blame of the privacy issues to the app developers since the duopoly is very often targeted in the media on this subject. Anything else has a lower priority.
- maccard 2y agoThe way you phrase mistakes is interesting, it’s been abundantly clear that’s not allowed for a long time. It’s not a “mistake” if you link to an external payment method . I’m an iOS user but one of the reasons I like iOS is because I know that I’ll be able to Sign in with Apple, and pay via the App Store. I recently signed up to a service which charged me for a free trial and I opened a support ticket. They refunded me, and charged me again immediately. I trust apple and google (rightly or wrongly) to have my back in that situation, but this dev clearly didn’t. It resolved itself fairly quickly when I got my bank involved, but it took a month from start to finish. I have never, not once, had that issue with App Store managed purchases.
- g-b-r 2y agoOne of the reasons I don't like either iOS or the Play Store is that I don't want to make an account with them (which can link all the flood of data sent by your phone to your real name, and force you to agree to their terms)
- gchamonlive 2y agoThis is the case if the app store is done right, that is, if it has the end user's interests in mind. But as with all things Google, the end product always boils down to how much profit it can extract from its services in ad revenues, so there isn't really that much incentive in Google to keep the Play Store tidy. This or some variation of the idea. The result is the same, what should protect the user becomes a vector to help spread malicious apps.
- oguz-ismail 2y agoYeah. I only update my bank app and Chrome and wouldn't trust a random app with that
- smeej 2y agoDo you just not install other apps? Or do you have some kind of preference for unpatched, insecure old software?
- oguz-ismail 2y agoI have M&W Dictionary, PlantNet, SoundCloud, and Stellarium+ installed. I don't plan to update any of them as long as they keep working/until I buy a new phone.
- ch1kkenm4ss4 2y agoCurious and thoughtful observation.
- CuriousCosmic 2y agoObtanium exists for a very specific use case. 1. You have an app you want to use. 2. That app isn't on the google app store or you don't want to/can't use google services. 3. The app is not open source so it can only be built and packaged by the first party. 4. You don't want to manually update the app by downloading a new APK every time. 5. You don't want to give a black-box closed-source app you downloaded from the internet permissions to install new apps (and therefore grant them certain new permissions as well). My example of this is WhatsApp. I hate the app. I think it's scummy as shit. However if I want the version of WhatsApp that doesn't package google services, I either have to download a 3rd party app store, update the app from their web page manually, or grant the app permission to update itself. I obviously don't want to install a (often closed source) 3rd party app store just to install this app without granting it keys to the castle. So instead as I already use F-Droid, I can install the FOSS build of Obtanium and pin my trust on F-Droid. Then I use Obtanium to manage my WhatsApp updates. Technically this also extends to open source apps where you trust the first party enough to use the app but not enough to let it update itself and where you want to be able to just download updates from github releases.
- maccard 2y agoWhy do you trust it to run code and to install updates from their website but not to execute that update? What’s the threat model there?
- g-b-r 2y agoI sure don't use dubious WhatsApp mods, but in general, the advantage of updating through a website rather than through an internal update, is that you're much less likely to receive "customized" updates; it's more likely (though of course not guaranteed) that what's distributed through a website stays always the same, for everyone
- Brian_K_White 2y agoYou don't see the difference between allowing whatsapp to run, vs allowing whatsapp to install apps? You don't see the difference between allowing a dedicated app installer app written by an author with no other goal and no other source of reputation to install apps, vs allowing a random app to install apps just to hopefully only use that power to keep itself updated and do so in a way that only serves your interests and not those of the apps author? (ie it will never be a Facebook and one day decide that it wants you to use Messenger, and that's the nicest example let alone something hidden) The thing that you give permission to install apps must be a seperate thing written by a seperate author who has no incentive to install or remove any other apps.
- dan-0 2y agoIn the same way as walking. Stick to well trafficed places you know and your risk drops significantly.
- greenglob 2y agoLove this app, makes it really easy to keep non-store apps up to date by linking directly to the apps GitHub repo for example. Obviously you have to be careful what you install, just as with any app not found in Play Store, but if you're getting your apps elsewhere anyway this is really convenient.
- idle_zealot 2y ago> just as with any app not found in Play Store I would recommend caution with apps from the store too. Not only are many predatory practices not disallowed, outright malware can and does slip through review. The advice is the same as ever when it comes to computers: don't run programs you don't trust, and set your bar of trust high.
- aucisson_masque 2y agoAgree, the play store isn't secure one bit. We hear enough story how Google removes legit app without reason, using automated process, to know that there is at least as much malicious app that goes through being undetected.
- Quiark 2y agowhile your app gets rejected when there is a button that does nothing :D
- nox101 2y agoit's worse than that imo. People claim the web is dangerous because it runs untrusted code but apps do the same with auto updates from stores and that the majority of apps are just webviews running code from the net but without the same level of sandboxing as a browser
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- furyofantares 2y ago
- msephton 2y agoI use this to update Koreader on the Android tablet I use only for reading ebooks.
- tedchs 2y agoWow, what a great name!
- sigmonsays 2y agoi've been using this app and i honestly prefer it this way. Lets not forget that certificates are created and checked for github.com, so unlikely for a middleman to get in. I trust github much more than google right now. Especially since the object being fetched is generic as opposed to a appstore. Google's app store has only shown to hinder publishing. Take syncthing for instance. The only thing I wish was better was the .apk selection process. It would be nice if a database existed with filename formats or a little extra metadata to match the correct asset.
- g-b-r 2y ago> Lets not forget that certificates are created and checked for github.com, so unlikely for a middleman to get in. What? Don't assume that the APKs are generated by GitHub's CI, anyhow, anything can be uploaded as a release
- rcMgD2BwE72F 2y agoGithub should provide a certificate when binaries are built from source with their tools.
- g-b-r 2y agoThey added something to verify if the binary came out of their CI only a few months ago; I haven't checked now, but it seemed extremely convoluted In any case, there's for sure no GitHub certificate added to the APKs
- porridgeraisin 2y agoNPM has support for github CI provenance. So you can verify that the package on npm was built on the github actions of the repo mentioned in npm.
- g-b-r 2y agoI saw, nice It seems to not check it automatically, though?
- CommanderData 2y agoWould prefer everything is hosted on GitHub to reduce the attack surface. But this is cool!
- theage 2y agoGithub reserve the right to stop serving those release downloads at any time. They usually just kick you off entirely if your project gets unwanted attention. I don't see them allowing revanced (modded popular social apps) forever so we still need a better way to trust outside that touch and go easy relationship.
- CommanderData 2y agoYour app is a massive target, if your domain or web server is taken over, what implications would this have on the end users using your app (if any)?
- theage 2y agoIf it's a social app users should worry about account take over making you look bad/illegal or tricking you to enter your password to other OAUTH accounts. Privacy implications etc. Similar to if the app owner changed hands to someone trying to milk it. As always you be suspicious of any permission asks to limit damage in these cases.
- mikae1 2y ago1. F-Droid 2. FFUpdater 3. Obtanium 4. Aurora Store
- theage 2y agoFinally, a no nonsense Auto-App-Updater App! if only sites would include a version number somewhere on the download page so obtainium could find it. Looking at you https://grayjay.app https://grayjay.app (it doesn't seem to work for partial file hash either so I had to turn auto updates off for this one) We sorely need 1:1 replacement of app store trust and discovery mechanisms too without any kafka-esque approval hoops. Obtainium app config sharing and perhaps a standard for APK release webpages would be a great first step towards that.
- ReadEvalPost 2y agoI work for FUTO, does it just need to be somewhere in the Download section? I'll see if I can get this added if so.
- laurentlbm 2y agoNo need. Obtainium already supports downloading from third-party F-Droid, so users can add Grayjay this way: 1. Enter the URL "https://app.futo.org/fdroid/repo/ https://app.futo.org/fdroid/repo/" 2. In "Override Source", select "F-Droid Third-Party Repo" 3. For "App ID or Name", enter "grayjay" 4. Press "Add" 5. Done Reference images: - Add app: https://ibb.co/dL1Hqw6 https://ibb.co/dL1Hqw6 - Result: https://ibb.co/whmL3PY https://ibb.co/whmL3PY
- sesm 2y agoWhat's the point? If you install from source, the idea is to build on your own machine and review/test the code. Gtihub releases don't even have minimal review scripts that Play Store does.
- anovick 2y agoCan't access the site. It says: "Sorry, you have been blocked You are unable to access imranr.dev"
- avipars 2y agosame here
- compootr 2y agohere's their github: https://github.com/ImranR98/Obtainium https://github.com/ImranR98/Obtainium
- ImranR98 2y ago"Israel" is blocked.
- AlexeyBelov 2y agoWhy is it blocked? Why the quotes?
- ksynwa 2y agoI've been using it for a while I'm surprised that Android allows third party app installers that can update apps in tbe background. I don't follow the specifics of Android developments but I 100% expected it to get more locked down with time.
- Zak 2y agoThe opposite happened; for a while, it did not allow third party installers to run without user interaction but now it does. EU legislation probably had a role in that change.
- encom 2y agoI'll give this a shot. F-Droid is broken on Android 15 and nobody cares.
- ap-andersson 2y agoWhat is broken in F-Droid? I just got Android 15 and are using F-Droid but have not noticed anything broken yet.
- encom 2y agoCrashes on startup. Offers to send a stack trace, which I've done. I've been updating apps manually, which is tedious.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y agoHave you tried another frontend? F-Droid has multiple official/unofficial apps on itself.
- nalinidash 2y agoOr else you can open a bug report here: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroidclient/issues https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroidclient/issues
- ap-andersson 2y agoWell I have installed latest APK from their site. Browsed for and installed apps without a problem. On my Pixel 9 Pro. So at least its not a bug affecting everyone.
- MaximusLegroom 2y agoThe Droid-ify client has always worked well for me. I never cared for the official F-Droid client.
- lollobomb 2y agoI use this and it's great. Only problem is when: 1) you want something outside of github (from my experience, already gitlab and codeberg can be buggy here, although very rarely), and 2) when you need a specific release channel (example: Firefox Beta, which requires a bit of work). But overall it works great. Now, one has to consider the security aspects: stores like Google Play (and, to a lesser extent, F-Droid) do perform some antimalware checks. It's not bulletproof, but it gives a bit more trust in case the dev goes rogue or is compromised. BUT you have to trust the store. With Obtainium, you have to trust: 1) the app's developer 2) Github/Gitlab/Codeberg 3) Obtainium's developer. So, it depends what's your threat model. I'm looking forward to seeing wider adoption for Accrescent!
- hasbot 2y agoFor those that have never heard of Accrescent: https://accrescent.app/ https://accrescent.app/
- joemazerino 2y agoJust the app I was looking for.
- fulafel 2y agoIt's weird how many orgs keep their apps unavailable, as lots of users decline to submit to Play store preconditions (link phone to a Google account).