4 ms·

Android has already gone this way - certain features like access to cardless payments are disabled if you're running a "not locked down" version of Android in a

Android has already gone this way - certain features like access to cardless payments are disabled if you're running a "not locked down" version of Android in anyway. I bought a new 2nd hand phone recently and learned that one the hard way when I went to pay for my journey to work. The previous owner had enrolled the phone in the Android beta program, which, this being Google, is remotely controlled and required me to spend half an hour Googling to understand how to unenrol myself and my phone.

keyringlight 2y ago
What gets me about android is the "have your cake and eat it" way it approaches whether or not it's locked down/secure. Over time the usage of android has changed as more users and more services adopted mobile, for a lot of people it is an appliance, and I can appreciate that payments and linking to bank accounts is a convincing argument for something like play integrity/safetynet. Where I think there's conflict is that android hasn't entirely moved away from the early days where it was something a bit closer to a personal computer with a high amount of freedom, or at least they haven't been clear or drawn a line in the sand (this is while the issue around third party app stores and if they must be somewhat open is still being resolved). If you do some unlocking/rooting and what it enables, it either gets the bare minimum CYA notification or doesn't get flagged in the UI at all as presumably the users is meant to know what they're doing at that point, even if cases where apps refuse to run or just crash with no feedback to inform. I'd appreciate it more if they did put up a big red warning "this is happening because your phone is in insecure mode because you did X", but on the surface level it appears as the phone is fully operational but acting weird.

4 ms·

Android has already gone this way - certain features like access to cardless payments are disabled if you're running a "not locked down" version of Android in a

by stuartjohnson12 2y ago

keyringlight 2y ago
What gets me about android is the "have your cake and eat it" way it approaches whether or not it's locked down/secure. Over time the usage of android has changed as more users and more services adopted mobile, for a lot of people it is an appliance, and I can appreciate that payments and linking to bank accounts is a convincing argument for something like play integrity/safetynet. Where I think there's conflict is that android hasn't entirely moved away from the early days where it was something a bit closer to a personal computer with a high amount of freedom, or at least they haven't been clear or drawn a line in the sand (this is while the issue around third party app stores and if they must be somewhat open is still being resolved). If you do some unlocking/rooting and what it enables, it either gets the bare minimum CYA notification or doesn't get flagged in the UI at all as presumably the users is meant to know what they're doing at that point, even if cases where apps refuse to run or just crash with no feedback to inform. I'd appreciate it more if they did put up a big red warning "this is happening because your phone is in insecure mode because you did X", but on the surface level it appears as the phone is fully operational but acting weird.