45 ms·

Google will allow only apps from verified developers to be installed on Android

• mapper32 1y ago
  Please consider using GrapheneOS. If it gets more momentum and users it's the only option pushing back at these tactics.
  • tcfhgj 1y ago
    GrapheneOS only supports Google Devices, are you serious?
    • hollerith 1y ago
      The point is that GrapheneOS will continue to allow the sideloading of Android apps (and Google cannot do anything to prevent that). Just because Google has been generous enough (or inattentive enough) to allow Pixel devices to run alternative OSes is not a reason to avoid GrapheneOS. Also, the Graphene project is in discussions with a manufacturer to produce a non-Pixel phone running GrapheneOS.
      • tcfhgj 1y ago
        Well, there are other smartphone manufacturers which support using alternative operating systems. And there are other AOSP derivatives which aren't restricted to Google devices. Why would you buy a Google device as a response to Google restricting user freedom?
        • hollerith 1y ago
          One reason is that Graphene has much better security than any of the other AOSP derivatives. I seem to recall that Graphene's leaders maintain that Pixels are more secure when running Graphene than any other smartphone would be (when running Graphene), which is not surprising given how good in general Google is at security compared to other large tech companies.
    • gck1 1y ago
      It just so happens that Google phones have good hardware level security - unparalleled in market, actually. The only issue is that default OS installed from factory uses this hardware security for nefarious purposes. If you swap the OS, you get the best of two worlds.
• skylurk 1y ago
  The day is coming when I just turn off my phone and leave it in a drawer 90% of the time.
• tambourine_man 1y ago
  Android is getting more closed and iOS more open, I expect more people dissatisfied from both camps. We’ll have less choice overall as they gravitate towards a common middle ground.
• unit149 1y ago
  [dead]
• emsign 1y ago
  Android is dead. With fascism now in power in the US I was going to save myself by degoogling my life anyway. This is the nail in Android's coffin for me.
  • kurito 1y ago
    Likewise. I've jumped ship from Chrome to Floorp/Firefox mobile, after 15 years. The problem is, where do we go now, from Android?
• cromka 1y ago
  I don't think EU will be OK with that. Not because they care so much about user privacy, because they don't, but because they won't let citizens get tied into US-controlled devices for most critical stuff, like banking, healthcare, eGovernment, etc. And I do get that Apple does that already, but once Google goes same way, they EU will be forced to acknowledge the status quo.
• chankstein38 1y ago
  Potentially stupid question, how will android developers load their apps onto their devices to debug? Will they just have to be verified beforehand? Or is there still a path to installing APKs through ADB and/or Android Studio?
• sabdaramadhan 1y ago
  This is a nightmare, i mean we cant put malware on our device now?
• nativeforks 1y ago
  A fellow developer started a petition to stop Google from limiting app installation on Android devices unless developers provide personal identity documents. Even though Google has not revoked similar controversial policies in the past, we do our best as much as we can. This change particularly threatens the freedom to build, share, and use software without giving away sensitive personal information. It affects independent developers, FOSS contributors, and even regular users who want to install apps outside of Google Play. "Just imagine giving sensitive personal, government-issued ID to a corporation to install an app outside Google Play" Let’s stand together to protect our freedom to create and use software without handing over personal information to a corporation. Every signature, share, and voice counts here Support the petition here: https://chng.it/tyHZjstxWQ https://chng.it/tyHZjstxWQ
• aftergibson 1y ago
  I’m sick of half-measures around getting off iOS and Android. If you’re an open-source app developer building for Android, please reconsider and put some of that energy into Sailfish. You have the power to help turn a passionate subset of people away from Android, and now is the best time to do it. Instead of scattering effort into a dozen fragmented experiments, let’s rally around the best bet we have right now: SailfishOS. I'm not at all affiliated with Sailfish, just someone pissed off and am trying to point folks at the most mature alternative out there. I know it has its problems. I know there's even better alternatives that even less people use but seriously, rather than fragment the frustration around android right now, please, just try to rally around a serious legit alternative. We might actually make meaningful change here but it needs focus. Intro for developers: https://docs.sailfishos.org/Develop/ https://docs.sailfishos.org/Develop/ Getting started guide: https://sailfishos.org/wiki/SailfishOS https://sailfishos.org/wiki/SailfishOS Let’s push for something truly independent
• rep_wex 1y ago
  Google to make sideloading Android apps _harder_ by _force_ verifying developer identity for 25$ and bunch of legal documents.
  • jajuuka 1y ago
    If you read the article you'd see that this is a separate account type that does not have a submission fee or require legal documents. It also doesn't prevent you from side loading. It's just part of the current scare screen system when it comes to side loading.
    • ohdeargodno 1y ago
      The only promises on the announcement are: > Verify your identity > * You will need to provide and verify your personal details, like your legal name, address, email address, and phone number. > * If you're registering as an organization, you'll also need to provide a D-U-N-S number and verify your organization's website. > * You may also need to upload official government ID. Only one of those three applies to organizations. >A note for student and hobbyist developers: we know your needs are different from commercial developers, so we’re creating a separate type of Android Developer Console account for you. Nothing about it says anything about having lighter requirements, just not going through a Play Console link. Even if the requirements end up being "lighter", the minimum will always be at least "link a Google account", which is already a massive privacy breach. > It also doesn't prevent you from side loading. It absolutely does. Quoting from Google: >Starting next year, Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed by users on certified Android devices. certified Android devices being... 99.9% of all Android devices in existence. https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...
      • jajuuka 1y ago
        Then you're familiar with the process of getting a DUNS number. Because that is a massive barrier for individual devs and small teams. That is actual legal paperwork. Not having to do that makes the process significantly easier. It's not a massive privacy breach. If you are so anti-Google yet use their devices then most likely you're already only distributing to GrapheneOS or LineageOS anyway. For most people who already have a Google account this is a very small bar to clear.
• NoahZuniga 1y ago
  [flagged]
• ohdeargodno 1y ago
  Additionally, this kills apps like Revanced, NewPipe, SmartTube that will now be required to give out ID to Google, surely that's something they really want to do. All Open source development is at threat, Google's absolute dogshit procedures already imposed for the play store now imposed to the entire ecosystem. All for a shitty system that breaks down to "registering package names". Cool then, guess it's time to typo squat on every variant of com.faceboook.app, because users definitely check the package name and not "oh the icon is right and so is the title". More and more locked down devices, Android source releases only being published once a year, device drivers for reference devices disappearing, and now, verification of all your software for your "security". The war on general computing is well and truly on. What the absolute fuck.
• Zak 1y ago
  The core benefit of Android over iOS for me has always been that it's my device, not Google's. They've been chipping away at this over the years. Safetynet was the first offense, but if they start restricting app installation from sources of my choice (I hate the term "sideloading"), there's not much advantage left.
  • flawn 1y ago
    I agree 100% with you. I am in a similar situation, rooted and unlocked, slowly but surely getting access restricted. Google is trying something which will be a net negative for everybody, instead of keeping this _massive_ USP that also keeps a core userbase. Might as well switch to iOS now, I don't have anything which keeps me on Android.
• shadowgovt 1y ago
  This has the potential to be disastrous for Google, but maybe not. Personally: I don't use Apple because I like being able to whip together little apps to side-load without having to check in with a walled-garden mothership. If Google is going to move closer to Apple in that regard... Apple's UX ecosystem is better, so I have far fewer reason to keep using Android.
  • bigstrat2003 1y ago
    I suspect this won't be disastrous for Google, because where will people care about this go? Apple, who is even more restrictive? This is just another in a long series of incidents showing why we desperately need a real alternative to the mobile duopoly. I would ditch Android over this, but there's no realistic alternative available to me. Damn the future sucks ass.
    • krick 1y ago
      I think "disastrous" is a bit too strong of a word, but I don't see any "real" reasons mentioned here why it won't be. Sure, there are "cheap" phones that are (almost always) Android, it's also probably true that "most people" use those and wouldn't switch no matter what. But there are also Pixel phones, Samsung Galaxy phones, you know, what people call "flagships". Why people buy these? It's been a long time since they stopped being competitively cheaper they Apple. Even flagship Huawei phones now cost the same as an iPhone. Who buys them? Well, I did. Solely because I couldn't install software I want on iPhone. If I truly won't be able to install what I want on my Android phone — I don't know yet, how I'll deal with that issue (surely I'll figure it out) but I promise you — I'll buy an iPhone for the first time in my life, if only to say "fuck you" to Android. And I urge you to do the same. Vote with your wallet.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    • asyx 1y ago
      I think the only thing hat can save us is a jailbreak. Either for iOS or Android to let you sideload apps. Alternatively, and that’s almost bullshit, the dumb phone trend continues and we might get devices like PDAs. Get a dumb phone and a small camera and then your PDA for everything that is essentially an app. Not sure what OS they’d run but I don’t see another way.
• malkia 1y ago
  What would happen to projects like F-Droid, Termux, etc.?
  • gruez 1y ago
    Taking the article at face value, they'll have to register with google and have their apps be signed. Presumably this is subject to less review than the play store (eg. you don't have to justify your permissions list or whatever[1]), but there's no guarantees that developers will bother with the hassle. A lot of developers are willing to put some release up on github, but not dox themselves to google. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41895718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41895718
    • netsharc 1y ago
      Guess whether the makers of alternative YouTube clients will want to tell Google, "Hey, this is a copy of our ID card our address"...
• antiloper 1y ago
  Why even run Android at that point anymore? iOS devices get security updates for longer and have much less data collection than stock Android. GrapheneOS won't survive the next generation of devices because bootloader unlocking will also go away (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44765939 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44765939), and without kernel security updates that OS can't continue. Now there's also no more sideloading, so what purpose does Android even serve anymore?
  • gruez 1y ago
    >GrapheneOS won't survive the next generation of devices because bootloader unlocking will also go away (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44765939 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44765939), and without kernel security updates that OS can't continue. The comment in the thread you linked directly contradicts the claim that "bootloader unlocking will also go away".
  • ranger_danger 1y ago
    > what purpose does an open source OS have against a proprietary one
    • lenerdenator 1y ago
      FOSS means a lot less than it used to in Android. Can you download, build, and install a basic Android system these days without touching a single piece of closed code? Absolutely. Will it be able to do much without closed binaries? No. Android isn't GNU/Linux where there's a general ethos of making everything in userland FOSS if at all possible. Rather, it's a free OS that both Google and manufacturers can do anything they want with, including shove a ton of spy and bloatware on it, then make it to where you can't get rid of those things, at least not easily. The optimism from 15 years ago surrounding FOSS in the mobile space is on its deathbed.
      • ranger_danger 1y ago
        I would argue any amount we can get is still lightyears better than not being able to replace or inspect anything at all on the system.
• 87636899376 1y ago
  Official announcement: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-... More info: https://developer.android.com/developer-verification https://developer.android.com/developer-verification https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/16471116 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... Personally...we all know the Play Store is chock full of malicious garbage, so the verification requirements there don't do jack to protect users. The way I see it, this is nothing but a power grab, a way for Google to kill apps like Revanced for good. They'll just find some bullshit reason to suspend your developer account if you do something they don't like. Every time I hear mentions of "safety" from the folks at Google, I'm reminded that there's a hidden Internet permission on Android that can neuter 95% of malicious apps. But it's hidden, apparently because keeping users from using it to block ads on apps is of greater concern to Google than keeping people safe. > we will be confirming who the developer is, not reviewing the content of their app or where it came from This is such an odd statement. I mean, surely they have to be willing to review the contents of apps at some point (if only to suspend the accounts of developers who are actually producing malware), or else this whole affair does nothing but introduce friction. TFA had me believing that bypassing the restriction might've been possible by disabling Play Protect, but that doesn't seem to be the case since there aren't any mentions of it in the official info we've been given. On the flip side, that's one less platform I care about supporting with my projects. We're down to just Linux and Windows if you're not willing to sell your soul (no, I will not be making a Google account) just for the right to develop for a certain platform.
  • baby_souffle 1y ago
    Can you elaborate a little bit about this hidden internet access control setting?
    • 87636899376 1y ago
      "Hidden" isn't exactly right. It's completely inaccessible, unless you use a custom ROM like LineageOS. But it is a real permission: https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-ops/connecting https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-o...
• Yokolos 1y ago
  > Google notes “supportive initial feedback” from government authorities and other parties: Ah, then I guess everything is fine. I'm sure they aren't in favour because it gives governments greater control over what apps we're allowed to have on our phones. That would be absurd.
  • jajuuka 1y ago
    I feel like that makes the most sense. That this isn't something Google thought up but something that the EU wanted to ensure its government ID app was "safe". Google does benefit but the timing seems to line up.
    • JimDabell 1y ago
      They trialled this in Singapore and I’ve been telling people on Hacker News that it’s been going to happen for a while: > Singapore Android users to be blocked from installing certain unverified apps as part of anti-scam trial (07 Feb 2024) — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-devices-malware-scam-unverified-apps-sideloading-4102991 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-dev... It makes total sense to the average person. There has been a constant stream of “yet another Android user got scammed out of their life savings because of Android side loading; iPhone users not affected” It’s an inconvenient fact for power users, but side loading makes users significantly more vulnerable to scams and restricting side loading is both a predictable and reasonable response to that fact. If you don’t like this, you need a better argument than “my desire to run any app I want is more important than pensioners losing their life savings” because that is not a winning argument with the average person, with governments, or with Google/Apple. — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44194034 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44194034 > As I’ve mentioned here before, sideloading is a genuine security concern, not merely an excuse for Apple to exert control. There is a never-ending stream of people losing their life savings. It happens on Android and not iOS because Android allows sideloading and iOS doesn’t. There is a very real human cost to this. > Police warn new Android malware scam can factory reset phones; over S$10 million lost in first half of 2023 > There have been more than 750 cases of victims downloading the malware into their phones in the first half of 2023, with losses of at least S$10 million (US$7.3 million). — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc... > DBS, UOB become latest banks to restrict access if unverified apps are found on customers' phones > They are the latest banks in Singapore to do so – after OCBC and Citibank – amid a spate of malware scams targeting users of Android devices. — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/dbs-uob-anti-scam- https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/dbs-uob-anti-scam-... > 74-year-old man loses $70k after downloading third-party app to buy Peking duck > “I couldn’t believe the news. I thought: Why am I so stupid? I was so angry at myself for being cheated of my life savings. My family is frustrated and I ended up quarrelling with my wife,” said Mr Loh, who has three children. — https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/74-year-old-man-loses https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/74-year-old-man-loses... > Singapore Android users to be blocked from installing certain unverified apps as part of anti-scam trial > "Based on our analysis of major fraud malware families that exploit these sensitive runtime permissions, we found that over 95 per cent of installations came from internet-sideloading sources," it added. — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/anduril-secures-305 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/anduril-secures-305... > CNA Explains: Are Android devices more prone to malware and how do you protect yourself from scams? > Why are scammers more likely to target Android users? How do you spot a fake app and what should you do if your device is infected by malware? — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc... > Nearly 2,000 victims fell for Android malware scams, at least S$34.1 million lost in 2023 > In 2023, about 1,899 cases of Android malware scams were reported in Singapore. The average amount lost was about S$17,960. — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-malware-sc... > Android users in Singapore tried to install unverified apps nearly 900,000 times in past 6 months > These attempts were blocked by a security feature rolled out by Google six months ago as part of a trial to better protect users against malware scams, which led to at least S$34.1 million (US$25.8 million) in losses last year with about 1,900 cases reported. — https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-users-inst https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/android-users-inst...
• rahidz 1y ago
  Sorry, we're getting rid of Revanced, Newpipe, Xmanager, etc. for your own good. Just like how Manifest v3 was for security. /s
  • pmontra 1y ago
    That might be one of the reasons. Get rid of competition by legal means. In my case I keep a copy of K9 Mail 5.6 with the original UI (the reason I choose K9) and I sideload it to every device of mine. I'm afraid that I'll have to register an account and what, claim that that K9 is mine?
    • MSFT_Edging 1y ago
      I miss K9. -- Apologies for my brevity.... --
• hollow-moe 1y ago
  They saw Apple getting away with notarization under the DMA so they're doing the same. I must admit the mass demotivation strategy is working really well. Seeing this kind of news every single day, affecting you directly and not even being able to do anything
  • kelnos 1y ago
    Yep. I feel powerless, and I don't know what to do. I don't think there is anything I can do, except for watch all of technology get locked down to the point that you need a monopolist's or a government's permission before you do anything with it. It's so fundamentally depressing, and completely at odds with how I grew up viewing tech.
    • myaccountonhn 1y ago
      There are tons of things you can do, from spreading the word, organize politically or work on building an alternative ecosystem. Also donate to organizations like EFF. We're being pushed a message that we're all impotent but the reality is that collectively we can change things, and apathy is exactly what these people try to push onto us. Things get worse but there are also good laws being pushed: see for example digital markets act and GDPR. 2008 when I started using Linux, gaming on Linux was horrible. Now it's day and night, and linux, while still small, is more popular and usable than ever. Recently alternative social medias like Bluesky, and Mastodon enable more open ecosystems and they've gained a lot of traction. Android has alternative ecosystems like F-Droid and GrapheneOS that can be built upon and hopefully we can get it to a point where we can ditch Google. We need to keep up the fight.
      • popcar2 1y ago
        Donate is the key term here. If you want there to be alternatives to everything that's getting worse, you need to make those alternatives sustainable - even if they're not there yet. You can donate to alternative Android ROMs, efforts to make Linux on mobile usable, and support companies that actually care about users like Fairphone. They all need money to live. Sweet talk and online activism is great, but the TLDR is always open-source developers need money to work.
• EMIRELADERO 1y ago
  So that's it then. If this actually goes through, there will be no option in the mobile OS market for an OS that both: a) allows the installation of apps without any contractual relationship with any party, and b) allows the use of mainstream and secure apps like banking
  • CalRobert 1y ago
    In time, you will only be able to access banking from your desktop using an approved OS and browser with attestation...
    • ffsm8 1y ago
      For what conceivable reason would they make the users go on desktop, considering mobile is in the process of being fully locked down? If anything, they'd eventually deny access from desktop, forcing everyone to login via the fully manages mobile devices without any user freedom. Some banks are already getting there btw, as their preferred 2fa is a companion app... One small step away from making that the only option, effectively denying access to anyone without a locked down mobile device.
      • crvdgc 1y ago
        A recent real life example: You can apply for an HSBC Global Money Account if you have: […] The HSBC UK Mobile Banking app (Global Money is only available via the app) From https://www.hsbc.co.uk/current-accounts/products/global-money/#apply https://www.hsbc.co.uk/current-accounts/products/global-mone...
      • homebrewer 1y ago
        It's already that way in my country. The few banks that still have the web version only support it for their business clients, and it's only something like two or three banks. If you're a regular client, there's not a single bank left that you can still use without a smartphone (unless you're ready to visit a branch for every little thing — so pretty much daily).
• ycombinatrix 1y ago
  This is crazy. I can't install my own apps on my own phone anymore. I am gonna start carrying around a laptop with a 5G modem instead.
  • dingdingdang 1y ago
    I'm thinking it's time for a 2nd phone (in my case old one from cupboard) to become the regular daily GrapheneOS enabled driver and then keep a modern Google(tm) updated one at home for all the "official crap" whenever needed. That way I can also separate banking / paypal / etc. from my carry phone with all it's various apps that I trust to varying degrees.
    • UnreachableCode 1y ago
      I'm curious why you need a phone for banking at all, at home as you say. Wouldn't a laptop suffice? Granted, not all banks have a web app these days
      • reorder9695 1y ago
        Not for me at least, 3DS requires approval in an app on my phone. I'd love if the banks just used TOTP instead but no, I have to use their app, some of which don't work with an unlocked bootloader, so I have to have stock android
    • donmcronald 1y ago
      This was the first thing that crossed my mind. If it’s not too much money and hassle I could buy a second device for GrapheneOS and tether to the cheapest phone I can get for the official ecosystem. Really though, it doesn’t have enough impact for consumers. If I get unfairly banned as a developer, no one even notices because that’s nothing more than an opportunity for another developer to step in. Individually we have no power :-(
      • A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
        Those are the moments I am starting to fantasize about starting a customer protection group that is sufficiently committed to follow through on organizing boycotts. Naturally, reality hits once you see average human on the road ( on a highway, full speed ). We might be lost a species.
• kykat 1y ago
  What was the last time there were some actually good news in big tech? For those that don't hold stocks I mean.
  • hnpolicestate 1y ago
    We're in the era of less control, more surveillance, more "security", more being treated like a child and lied to. Just yesterday I got a venmo prompt to add biometrics for "security". F off.
    • jbhifilover 1y ago
      "Just yesterday, an app that directly impacts my money, asked me to make it more secure" - how did you survive? Vemno doesn't get your bio data, it just gets a true or false from the OS.
    • donmcronald 1y ago
      I had to do a government ID upload and a live face scan to install my banking app on a new phone even though I had other devices I could have used to authorize it. It made me want to switch banks, but where do you go?
      • const_cast 1y ago
        Jesus fucking Christ this is bleak. You should not have to do this. If your bank allows a browser log in just use that. DO NOT trust financial institutions with your data. They WILL leak it. Its only a matter of time.
    • ohdeargodno 1y ago
      For what it's worth, Venmo will not get access to your biometrics data, it's a black box in which you specify a desired level of authentication and the OS just returns ok/not ok. It is, however, to make you use Venmo more easily, thus more often, thus spend more money through them.
  • donmcronald 1y ago
• Animats 1y ago
  Does this break F-Droid?
  • kykat 1y ago
    Maybe F-Droid can sign all packages themselves? Would google let them do that?
    • can16358p 1y ago
      "Can?" Sure. "Would?" Google has zero incentive to do that.
      • degamad 1y ago
        And zero incentive not to.
      • pxoe 1y ago
        >can? would? They literally already do? https://f-droid.org/docs/Signing_Process/ https://f-droid.org/docs/Signing_Process/
    • imhoguy 1y ago
      The risk is Google could ban all F-Droid apps in one step, which will happen for sure.
  • drumhead 1y ago
    Would be a tragedy if it did. So many interesting and useful apps there without the obnoxious ads or nagging to upgrade.
    • Animats 1y ago
      I'm entirely on F-Droid, with no Google account and no Play Store. Losing F-Droid would force me off Android.
      • 1y ago
• kykat 1y ago
  I cannot resist the urge to point out that we wouldn't have had this problem if people actually sticked to free software instead of "commercial use friendly" open source licensing
  • asdff 1y ago
    Free choice in the market is a lie anyhow. You are limited by what is actually been made available in the marketplace in sufficient quantity. "You can have any color you want, so long as it is black." - some old racist industrialist.
  • pbasista 1y ago
    An interesting idea. But who would have to "stick" to such software? The users? It seems to me that most of the users do not care much about what kind of software their phone runs, unfortunately. As long as it works with Instagram or whatever other big brand social media is trending these days, they are happy. Which is I think understandable. The companies developing the apps are in my opinion driving this cultural shift. And they are doing it mostly because it brings them commercial advantages. Which is, I think, also understandable. Everyone involved seems to to what appears to be in their best interest. And yet, collectively, we as a society get a worse outcome overall. This phenomenon perhaps has a name. In order to break out of it, I think that the incentives on both sides need to be adjusted. It needs to be in the companies' interest to produce apps as open source. And the users need to want them. The only way I can think of to achieve that kind of a change is when the open source apps and products become just inherently better than their proprietary alternatives. In all categories. Then, the people would want them. And then the companies will start to produce them. It is a very tough goal. The commercial apps do not have to be better in all categories to retain their users. They can use vendor locks or other business strategies which restrict the users' ability to leave them. Open source apps cannot do such things. The only fair ground on which they can compete is their quality.
  • merelysounds 1y ago
    In practice we see the reverse and GPL projects being rewritten as more permissive. The busybox/toybox case looks especially relevant and interesting: > In January 2012 the proposal of creating a BSD license alternative to the GPL licensed BusyBox project drew harsh criticism (…). Rob Landley, who had started the BusyBox-based lawsuits, responded that this was intentional, explaining that the lawsuits had not benefited the project but that they had led to corporate avoidance, expressing a desire to stop the lawsuits "in whatever way I see fit". source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toybox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toybox
• occz 1y ago
  That's not a good move at all.
• Mindwipe 1y ago
  So, now there will be a single kill switch where a malicious government can legally compel Google to annihilate apps not of their liking. I find it hard to state how contemptible this is. How stupid. Everyone who worked on this has blood on their hands.
• 0x000xca0xfe 1y ago
  Time for a Steam Phone. Or FirefoxOS reloaded. The general purpose mobile computing market must be sizeable. I cannot believe everybody just puts up with these increasingly draconic restrictions.
  • asyx 1y ago
    I think a big problem is that the users have been trained to accept the status quo. I mean back in the Feature phone days we would share Java phone games at school via Bluetooth. I’d assume kids these days generally don’t anymore. Also, due to the cost of physical media piracy was rampant even amongst boomers. People knew and had the option to buy a dvd player that could play video cd because that’s how movies were ripped. Even during the early iPhones we were so stripped of even basic features that a jailbreak was 100% required if you wanted to even basic things like taking videos or changing the Home Screen background. None of this is necessary anymore. The users gets the phone and it just works from their perspective at least. So who is going to try to run a business off of nerds like us who want to have this sort of control over our devices (I’d call it freedom but the average user doesn’t feel unfree)?
    • 0x000xca0xfe 1y ago
      There has to be a threshold where enshittification has been pushed so far that nerd software becomes the thing cool kids boast about running. Where a less restricted device can do cool things nobody else can do.
    • lucb1e 1y ago
      > we would share Java phone games at school via Bluetooth. I’d assume kids these days generally don’t anymore. I am both happy (from a user-friendliness point of view) and sad (from a "works offline" perspective) that F-Droid's share button now shares a link that will show them info about the app with an option to install the software, instead of the share button directly giving you an APK file with no way to link someone to the 'store' page. I'd personally still know how to send people APKs via hotspot or bluetooth (such as for peer-to-peer voice/message apps) but a lot of people won't This move from sending each other software to sending each other links to centralized platforms has been long ongoing. Most messaging systems don't allow you to send executable (.exe, .apk, .sh, etc.) files anymore. And I believe that virtually all of them individually do it for your own good, but the combined result is a societal shift
• chenxiaolong 1y ago
  If this is enforced via Play Protect, then the whole mechanism can likely be disabled with: adb shell settings put global package_verifier_user_consent -1 This does not require root access and prevents Android from invoking Play Protect in the first place. (This is what AOSP's own test suite does, along with other test suites in eg. Unreal Engine, etc.) I personally won't be doing this verification for my open-source apps. I have no interest in any kind of business relationship with anyone just to publish an .apk. If that limits those who can install it to people who disable Play Protect globally, then oh well.
  • iggldiggl 1y ago
    There's also the related "Verify apps over USB" setting which is even exposed in the developer mode settings GUI.
  • prism56 1y ago
    What does this break?
    • chenxiaolong 1y ago
      There shouldn't be any side effects other than rendering Play Protect inert. No other AOSP component relies on this setting.
      • zozbot234 1y ago
        There could of course be side effects in the future when this restriction is rolled out, as in your device's Play Integrity status could be affected and your banking app/phone wallet might not let you perform app-based payments from that device.
        • ezconnect 1y ago
          Some bank apps and payment processor already check if you have developer mode on and refuses to run.
• _benj 1y ago
  It seems that it was only about time… it just feels like the pace of enshittification with big tech being able to get away with anything is crazy! I’m hoping that projects like Precursor can take off because we’ve buried ourselves in such mountain of complexity that seems like only a billion/trillion dollar big tech company can make an OS. But then again, some body called BS on browsers and we might have a good option soon in Ladybug! https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor
• PenguinCoder 1y ago
  The new face of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
• 9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
  As a developer of android apps that get distributed outside of the Play store, a Google identity verification system sounds like a nightmare. What if I'm deemed to be politically incorrect? Will Google brand safety exclude me?
  • xenago 1y ago
    That's exactly the goal
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
• ChrisArchitect 1y ago
  Source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45016602 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45016602)
• hn8726 1y ago
  > developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or to use any app store they prefer. We believe this is how an open system should work—by preserving choice while enhancing security for everyone I guess words don't don't have meaning anymore, how can you claim to have an open system in an announcement about closing it down? It's also telling that the big supporters of this are apparently corporations and governments. Admittedly I don't know what "Developer's Alliance" is but they don't seem to care about developers very much, and I wouldn't surprised if they were just a "pay us to say what you're doing is good for devs" kind of thing
  • ocdtrekkie 1y ago
    The Developer's Alliance address is a coworking space in Washington DC, if you want to rate the likelihood it's just an astroturf for public tech policy wonks.
  • zmmmmm 1y ago
    > developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users You have here Google making a statement it can't actually fulfill and one that it knows it can't fulfill. So Google is willfully lying here. The minute Google has a technical capability to control what applications run on Android it's out of their hands. It is in the hands of courts, governments, dictators and authoritarians. That's just the nature of the world - Google has to obey the law and Google doesn't make the laws. I guess it sounds hysterical, but in that sense, this is an absolutely massive loss of freedom for the entire planet as communication power that rested with individual choice is now transferred wholesale back to governments by this decision.
• lawn 1y ago
  How will this affect GrapheneOS?
• guywithahat 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • ktallett 1y ago
    Why is there no sensible behaviour and knowledge around APK installation like there is about any piece of software on a personal computer?
    • Aaargh20318 1y ago
      What makes you think that people are sensible about installing shit on their personal computers?
      • zb3 1y ago
        This is just an excuse. Google doesn't care about these people, they already proved that by showing scammy advertisements, as long as they get their profits, they don't care. Don't fall for this "it's for your security" argument.
        • Aaargh20318 1y ago
          I'm not saying that Google cares, just that the claim that it's not a problem on PCs is false.
      • guywithahat 1y ago
        They're not, and Windows got decades of hate for it. Google probably wants no part in that, especially since Apple mostly avoids viruses and malware through their app store
    • gjsman-1000 1y ago
      Because only 5% of American adults are highly literate with technology, 30% of working adults self-identify as "never (ever!)" using folders and files for organization, and most people have better things to do with their time to be taught to perfectly analyze the safety of an App Store. Don't hope in the next generation either - only 38% of Gen Z could successfully complete tasks more difficult than moving an email between folders, while an IEA study found that only 2% of Gen Z had reached the anticipated "digital native" stereotype level of fluency.
• stefan_ 1y ago
  I don't understand, when the EU announced that Apples "actually we need to sign all of these and pay us" requirement is illegal, Google was like "hold my beer"? Break them up already, it's getting old.
• storus 1y ago
  Google is really turning into a dystopian company, destroying any goodwill their virtuous employees created in the past. It feels like they are primed to be the main turnkey tyranny facilitators.
  • can16358p 1y ago
    Google was always dystopian and evil. They just wore good mask for some time in the beginning.
• ktallett 1y ago
  Well this is me moving to E/OS full time.
• kmeisthax 1y ago
  [dead]
• zer0zzz 1y ago
  Juggling between Maemo and iOS back in the day I always thought it was so wild that I later years people thought of Android as the open alternative.
• heyheyhouhou 1y ago
  if we continue this direction, in a couple of years, a feature phone might be an excellent choice!
• akk0 1y ago
  This isn't legal in the EU is it?
  • sunaookami 1y ago
    It is. Notarization like Apple does is also legal. In fact the EU commission would welcome this with open arms since they can now access the personal data of every developer and can order Google to ban every app they want. This goes hand-in-hand with their new "Digital wallet" app that will be launched next year.
    • frm88 1y ago
      I wouldn't be so sure. The DMA is very much against gatekeeping and a couple of days ago Google lost in court to 1&1 (in Germany) regarding keeping Android users in a walled garden [0]. This is in appeal now. We'll see. [0] https://www.zdfheute.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/gmx-google-playstore-mailadresse-urteil-100.html https://www.zdfheute.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/gmx-google-pl... in German, I'm afraid
• Dilettante_ 1y ago
  Hopefully this increases the communal pressure to find a real alternative to android.
• mysteria 1y ago
  The article didn't say much about the account approval process, but from the looks of it Google will be able to arbitrarily accept and revoke applications as they see fit. So much for an open platform, bring forth the gatekeeping! Personally I would be fine with unsigned apps requiring the user to click through a notice before install, or having a setting to toggle to enable unsigned apps. Windows does something similar to this where unsigned binaries get a pop up warning but signed ones are executed immediately.
  • fph 1y ago
    That's the first step toward banning NSFW apps like on Steam, I'm afraid.
  • ycombinatrix 1y ago
    That notice already exists. In fact there are 2 or 3 extra confirmations required to sideload apps today.
  • zmmmmm 1y ago
    What they say they want to accomplish could be almost 100% accomplished with self signed certificates. Or public certificates like letsencrypt etc. if you absolutely have to have third party attestation of the key. The fact they incidentally position themselves as the only gatekeepers rather than accomplishing the same without doing that tells you all you need to know about their intent.
• gpm 1y ago
  Google is doing everything in their power to make me move to an iphone... between shit like this, effectively bricking some old models of pixels with un-rollbackable patches that destroy batteries, closing down the android development process, making absurd testing requirements to publish apps, etc. Google doesn't make better phones, they were just less hostile to the consumer. That seems to be going away :(
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • croes 1y ago
    Is sideloading a thing on iOS?
    • kachapopopow 1y ago
      [flagged]
    • Zak 1y ago
      In legal jurisdictions where Apple is forced to allow it, yes. They have a similar scheme for requiring developers to register and are demanding per-install fees for popular apps, though I'm not sure that will survive regulatory scrutiny in the EU. Otherwise, I think it's possible to use developer tools to temporarily install apps on an iPhone. IIRC this requires a Mac and has to be repeated every few days.
      • nicce 1y ago
        > and has to be repeated every few days. 7 days for free account. 1 year for paid (until membership ends?). 90 days for TestFlight.
        • miladyincontrol 1y ago
          Worth adding on there are methods to update signatures, altstore being one example Although using their app to help automate that then takes up one the app slots for free accounts
• turblety 1y ago
  Phew! I was just about to get the new Pixel too, not going to now. I wonder if Samsung will be effected.
  • thayne 1y ago
    > The changes will affect all certified Android devices once live I think that is a yes, it will affect Samsung
    • mh- 1y ago
      Yeah, I think anything that has Google Play would fit that qualifier. So that's basically all major devices (in the West, at least). Oof.
      • logicchains 1y ago
        It'd be really funny if Chinese Android devices actually end up being more free because they don't have any of the Google Play stuff on them.
        • lucb1e 1y ago
          Note that most of them do. Huawei was banned from it but I'm not aware of other notable brands that do not ship Google software (besides that one vendor that ships Apple software)
          • jjani 1y ago
            Most Android phones sold in China include Google Play by default? That's news to me.
            • jamesnorden 1y ago
              He might mean include the "stub" APKs that are necessary for Google Play to function in any phone, Huawei was famously not allowed to have those.
• Ms-J 1y ago
  This is the worst thing to happen to technology in recent times since there is only two major phone OS's. It isn't possible to ban encryption, so the governments have to chip away at security and privacy using these techniques. From: https://developer.android.com/developer-verification https://developer.android.com/developer-verification "You may also need to upload official government ID." This won't end well for Google or the governments involved when the people get so angry that they are forced to roll this back. Switch to an alternative phone OS.
  • csomar 1y ago
    Over a billion people use iOS and more would have if they could afford it. These companies have big data and they know how many people it’ll affect/annoy. You are outnumbered.
  • maxerickson 1y ago
    What's wrong with loading an alternate OS that isn't Play Protect certified?
    • sanex 1y ago
      Soon you won't be able to do this either because most manufacturers are locking down the bootloader.
      • kotaKat 1y ago
        And Google stopped providing device trees and driver binaries... and stopped releasing AOSP as often, and, and...
        • windward 1y ago
          You know, when you phrase it like that, it almost makes it sound like they're taking advantage of their market position to the detriment of consumers.
      • pabs3 1y ago
• zappb 1y ago
  Mobile phone platforms are reverting back to the pre-iOS/Android reality where you have to jump through tons of hoops to even make an app let alone run a viable business with it.
  • IshKebab 1y ago
    I don't recall having to send government ID to any companies to publish MIDlets back in the day. I just uploaded them to getjar.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    • lykahb 1y ago
      I have good memories about a website with ELF's for the Siemens phones. Its name had "kebab" in it. By any chance, was it you running it?
    • int_19h 1y ago
      AFAIK in some countries (US?) phones were usually sold locked in a sense that you could only install J2ME midlets published by your mobile provider, who'd nickel and dime both users and devs for the privilege.
      • const_cast 1y ago
        It feels like US companies have long given up the pursuit of new innovations, and are now innovating new and creative ways to rent seek their own customers.
• Retr0id 1y ago
  These days I don't really want a smartphone at all, but begrudgingly use one for things like mobile banking, receiving SMS tokens, etc. If someone made a screenless powerbank-shaped Android device, I might be interested. The device would double as a 5g wifi modem, and to access the UI you'd remote in over VNC from a laptop, or unrestricted mobile device like a PinePhone.
  • WhyNotHugo 1y ago
    Sounds like you want a laptop with a built-in LTE modem running Android inside a VM.
    • Retr0id 1y ago
      A laptop is far too big, and banking apps and the likes would refuse to run in your VM.
      • A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
        Hmm, don't banking apps run in emulators without much hassle? I am seeing a project on a horizon lol.
  • metalman 1y ago
    The set up I run consists of an older 5g phone that hospots to my other phone, no apps of consiquence on either phone, I sign into my email through web mail, and sign into banking through a browser, all of my apps come from fdroid and similar, mostly used for media, manual updates for those through the fdroid web site. As to the device you mention, it should be possible to take a phone apart and spoof* all of the mic's and cameras, likely the gps, and haptic motor and speakers as well, and have a 5g touch screen modem with plain internet, or keep the speakers and it's a media device, or put all the audio on a micro switch. * use matched resistors, or black out the sensors detach the antena for gps lets just say I realy dont like bieng advertised to
    • Seattle3503 1y ago
• JustExAWS 1y ago
  While I like to jump on the Google bash train as much as anyone, this is to comply with EU laws. Apple implemented a similar change for the EU App Store earlier this year to comply with the Digital Services Act (DSA), a regulation that now requires app developers to provide their “trader status” to submit new apps or app updates for distribution.
  • croes 1y ago
    They usually fight harder against such laws if they don’t suit them.
  • morsch 1y ago
    So they (or rather TC) claim. Does the DSA actually require it, though?
  • mvdtnz 1y ago
    There is no law in EU which requires Thailand-based developers to provide their trader status in order to serve Thai customers. Stop making shit up.
  • thayne 1y ago
    IANAL, but I don't see how that applies to apps that Googled doesn't distribute.
  • 201984 1y ago
    Just wonderful. Why does Europe insist on imposing regulations like this that companies then force on the rest of the world? It's one thing if they're benign but this very much isn't.
    • o11c 1y ago
      Only monetized apps (whether that be directly paid, microtransactions, ads, etc.) are legally required to go through that process - and it's a perfectly sensible requirement for the government to say "if you want to run a business, you need to do so as a business". That is most apps - but not the kind of apps Google is attacking here (personal-scale, actually-free, third-party, etc.). And "apps that are not monetized" is actually a very nice thing to filter for from a user perspective. Of course, the world's largest malware vendors love to use government action as an excuse to do something else malicious.
• myaccountonhn 1y ago
  What does this mean for projects like Grapheneos, or fdroid?
  • anonym29 1y ago
    "The changes will affect all certified Android devices once live". AKA GrapheneOS should remain unaffected (as it is not "certified", per Google parlance), and F-Droid should remain available - in theory. If they keep up this "boil the frog slowly" crap though, I may be migrating off of Android and over to a strictly Linux-based phone, like a PinePhone, Librem, etc. Fuck the scumbags at the top of big tech making decisions like these.
    • zb3 1y ago
      Next step: require all "certified" devices to prevent unlocking the bootloader... then possibly kill AOSP... I have no words.. or more precisely, those words are not the kind of words I'm allowed to write here.
      • janice1999 1y ago
        AOSP is being killed piece by piece - zero community engagements, infrequent dumps with no commit logs, moving everything into Google Play services and recently no more binaries for Pixel phones just to make third party ROM developers lives a little more miserable.
• PokedBear 1y ago
  It will be interesting to see how they handle packages from the various f-droid repos. F-droid builds and signs all their apps themselves, so will all of f-droid be covered by a single signing key and developer account? Or will the fact that they take apps from lots of folks bar them from an account?
  • logicchains 1y ago
    I'd bet money they'd just ban them; the whole point is to stop users running unapproved applications on their phones.
    • DangitBobby 1y ago
      Unless I misunderstood the question, this is covered in TFA > The tech giant stresses that this does not mean developers can’t distribute outside of the Play Store through other app stores or via sideloading — Android will remain open in that regard.
      • MostlyStable 1y ago
        How does that jive with this statement: >The Play Store implemented similar requirements in 2023, but Google is now mandating this for all install methods, including third-party app stores and sideloading where you download an APK file from a third-party source.
        • DangitBobby 1y ago
          Does that amount to "just ban[ning]" other app stores? If not then... it jives fine? Not here to say it's a good thing.
      • vetrom 1y ago
        You have misunderstood the question, or perhaps buried the lede. 'Open in that regard' is tantamount to not open at all. If you gatekeep being able to load an app to an Android phone behind these processes, you're essentially stuck with no recourse if you, say, have a banned google account, or have some reason you don't wish to send your government ID to these companies.
• croes 1y ago
  Imagine MS doing the same for Windows. It’s sad that smartphones now hold so much personal and private data but aren’t really under the control of their users.
  • Pfhortune 1y ago
    > Imagine MS doing the same for Windows. It will happen. We've been the frogs boiled in the pot for years, accepting forced attestation. Eventually they'll close off running unsigned code, and the PCs will probably have bootloaders locked to Windows as well, so you can't escape.
  • janice1999 1y ago
    > Imagine MS doing the same for Windows. They already have a version of that - it's called Windows S Mode (Windows Store apps only, no EXEs or scripts, Edge only for browsing). If they get away with it, they would make it the default. Required Microsoft accounts was a step in that direction.
    • dvngnt_ 1y ago
      This is what caused gaben to create steamos which is now a somewhat viable ecosystem with the steamdeck and rumored machines
• EMIRELADERO 1y ago
  Holy shit, going to the official page[1], there's something that is somehow even worse than the loss of freedom: "You'll need to prove you own your apps by providing your app package name and app signing keys." That is capital-I Insane. [1] https://developer.android.com/developer-verification https://developer.android.com/developer-verification
  • layer8 1y ago
    This is confusing, since signing something already proves that you own the key.
    • mh- 1y ago
      My assumption is they want to eliminate/prevent schemes where a ton of apps are signed as a service by a small number of centrally controlled keys. Someone elsewhere in the thread said this is how F-Droid works, but I can't confirm firsthand.
      • layer8 1y ago
        The signing certificate should indicate who is signing, and therefore who is liable. But maybe that’s not how they set it up previously.
    • nullc 1y ago
      they've been demanding signing keys for apps distributed on the play store for years. The only credible explanation I can come up with is that they need the keys in order to produce indistinguishably backdoored versions of applications, handy for tools like signal. Otherwise one would never think of requesting the private keys-- if google wants to rebuild apps themselves they could sign with their own keys and possessing anyone elses private key is just pure liability as if there is any discovered abuse they can't show that they weren't the vector.
      • luke-stanley 1y ago
        So sketchy!
• logicchains 1y ago
  Anyone even remotely privacy or security conscious needs to vote with their wallet in protest and stop buying Android phones, otherwise it's only a matter of time 'til Google bans side-loading and it becomes impossible to buy a phone that can run any kind of anonymous or end-to-end encrypted communication software.
  • gigel82 1y ago
    I'm curious what you think the alternative is, because Apple is definitely a lot worse, and we all know they're very much a duopoly. BTW, all the GrapheneOS, etc. are still Android phones.
    • seviu 1y ago
      I had a Jolla phone on my hands the other day and I must admit this… SailfishOS is pretty nice I might get one next
      • BoredPositron 1y ago
        It's really nice when you first use it but if you have to use it as a daily driver it's pure pain. Rather go for graphene.
      • storus 1y ago
        Buy Xperia 10 III while you still can. It's the best SailfishOS phone at the moment.
        • panny 1y ago
          I have an Xperia 10 III, but it's running AOSP I built myself. https://developer.sony.com/open-source/aosp-on-xperia-open-devices https://developer.sony.com/open-source/aosp-on-xperia-open-d... Basically none of this new restriction will bother me, since I don't run anything but stock AOSP and get all my apps from f-droid repos.
          • 1y ago
• poulpy123 1y ago
  goodbye newpipe :(
• zb3 1y ago
  Never, I'll stick to LineageOS till it ceases to exist.. then I'll just buy a dumbphone, f... Google!
• moogly 1y ago
  Well, I guess I didn't want to use half of the apps on my phone anyway. Might as well throw the phone in the bin.
• tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
  The problem here is that the EU, which would normally be the only hope to put a stop to bullshit like this, seems to like this.
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • maxerickson 1y ago
    It's easy. For the average user, device integrity is more valuable (by a lot) than side loading. People that think this is unacceptable are not remotely average users. Average users benefit greatly from their pocket appliance not being a full fledged computer.
    • pessimizer 1y ago
      Don't pretend that average users are asked, or that their opinions would matter. Or even that you have some sort of insight into the average user that other people don't have. People who think this is unacceptable are the people who 1) understand what it is, 2) don't stand to profit from it, and 3) don't dream about locking average users into an ecosystem that they control some day.
      • maxerickson 1y ago
        You say this as if the widespread embrace of Apple/locked down Android phones is meaningless, fully a bamboozle with no user choice reflected at all.
    • anticrymactic 1y ago
      > Average users benefit greatly from their pocket appliance not being a full fledged computer. In what way? Seriously, what benefit is there? (And don't say security...)
      • 3836293648 1y ago
        Not having social media? The world would be a much better place if we only had calls and direct messages.
• aspenmayer 1y ago
  Boooo. Fuck this noise! Might as well run iOS at this point, unless your use case needs Android only apps or workflows. What a fucking joke.
• gethly 1y ago
  > Google will begin to verify the identities of developers distributing their apps on Android devices, not just those who distribute via the Play Store This is absolutely unacceptable. That's like you having to submit your personal details to Microsoft in order to just run a program on Windows. Absolutely nuts and it will not go as they think it will.
  • TZubiri 1y ago
    Android is much more secure than windows (its architecture was developed decades later from learned lessons) So yeah, its different and more aecure
  • cellular 1y ago
    Someone create a website to emulate apk!
  • harikb 1y ago
    So long as they don't make it very hard to get an ID approval, I don't see why people shouldn't know who developed an app. Currently the entire ecosystem is riddled with malware, spyware, or adware with shady source information and people have no way to verify the data practices
  • altairprime 1y ago
    Ah, then it would be acceptable if an independent third party who does not share data with Google other than Boolean yes/no was used to do this. I expect that’s their long-term plan anyways, to defuse the predictable backlash and externalize the problem and liabilities altogether, once the initial ID harvesting is done.
    • ozim 1y ago
      I think google has incentive to get that data for themselves so they won’t give that up. One of those would be in corrupt countries you don’t have the „trusted 3rd party”
  • asdff 1y ago
    Why would it not go as they think it will? The big guy always wins against the little guy. The fact they make this move suggest they know it is a sure bet.
• Pfhortune 1y ago
  Disgusting, horrifying, but utterly predictable. A dark day indeed, once no major mobile platform allows running whatever code you wish. Sideloading isn't really sideloading if the app has to be signed by the gatekeeper. Isn't this a death knell for F-Droid, at least for running on most hardware? Since they require their own builds/attestation? The Overton Window for computing keeps inching towards gatekeepers having total control over devices. I can't help but imagine myself lurching along on the last somewhat open hardware I can cobble together in a couple of decades, because I refuse to drink the verification can to continue...
• NelsonMinar 1y ago
  Android's ability to run binaries outside of the Google Play Store is a key differentiator of their product vs. Apple's. Or at least it used to be.
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • jajuuka 1y ago
    I think this is another thing that has changed in time. Custom ROM's used to be the defining feature of Android but over time less and less people used it. I think sideloading has gotten to that point as well. Where it's a power user feature that most people don't touch. So Google feels confident in nixing it since it only affects a small group of people.
    • fluoridation 1y ago
      Fewer people use custom ROMs not necessarily because they don't want to, but because manufacturers began putting hardware on the phones that only they have the firmware for. I have a Samsung phone that I replaced as my daily driver because the phone speaker broke from sweat. Other than the speaker it works literally perfectly. I'd love to use it to try different alternative OSs, but AFAIK, even though it's only from 2021, not a single project supports it.
      • jajuuka 1y ago
        Phones with unlock able boot loaders still exist. Samsung phones outside the US that use Exynos, Pixel, OnePlus, Motorola, etc. The features people made custom rom's for have just become part of Google Android or part of other OEM versions. Even though these popular phones do have unlock able boot loaders there just isn't a large interest in custom rom's. The interest in custom roms and more locked boatloaders happened in parallel.
    • zrobotics 1y ago
      I mean, the epic games lawsuit specifically involved sideloading. There's still ongoing litigation in one of those suits. Playing fortnite isn't exactly a niche or power user thing.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• mid-kid 1y ago
  They have the ecosystem by the balls. Phone manufacturers in recent years have been making unlocking & modifying their devices more and more difficult, google and app developers have been cracking down harder on modded devices by implementing TPM equivalents in the hardware to sign and verify that your system is a google-appproved one, and alternatives still are decades behind in terms of app ecosystem. I think they might just get away with it.
  • jojobas 1y ago
    I don't think Google can be blamed for this - their own phones are one of the last which can still be unlocked.
    • ChadNauseam 1y ago
      true, and recently they deserved a lot of credit for publicly releasing their device trees and drivers. unfortunately, with the 10 series pixels they no longer will be releasing device trees, which makes it much more difficult to maintain custom ROMs
    • mid-kid 1y ago
      They're also the best equipped to tell if you've done so, and restrict access from critical functionality needed by many in their day-to-day lives if you've done so. The intentions behind all the security hardware they introduced in pixel phones first, and is now required by play integrity to function might've been well-meaning, but that doesn't really matter in the end. Security features that the user can't control and bypass aren't security features - they're digital handcuffs.
  • ocdtrekkie 1y ago
    I would say this is a bold choice for a company whose existing restrictions around third party apps and stores and in-app purchases has already been found illegal. While it doesn't look like they're pushing for it right now, forcing Google to sell Android was something the DOJ has considered as a penalty. I'm not sure Google still has the ecosystem by the balls. It's very possible whatever Googlers who made this decision are the type of folks who don't comprehend they work for a monopoly that like actually can't do things like this anymore.
• sltkr 1y ago
  This is what Apple already does, isn't it? Why wouldn't it work for Google too?
  • indrora 1y ago
    Apple requires you to get a developer account with them. Nowhere does that require you to go and get a DUNS number, which is onerous for a single developer to do without the infrastructure of a company.
    • llm_nerd 1y ago
      While the linked article notes that organizations require a DUNS number seemingly as an aside, personal accounts do not. Which is exactly the same policy as Apple.
      • didibus 1y ago
        For me the difference is that Android is an open-source operating system. It sold itself and differentiated itself to users, developers and phone manufacturers as an open ecosystem built on open-source foundations. Over the years, it seems Google has been trying to have their cake and eat it too, by basically subsuming others to use Android through this appeal of a more free and open operating system ecosystem, but have tried to slowly close and close it down now that it has won the other half of the market on that promise. This feels more sly, because it's kind of a bait and switch. Apple never made such claim and was always upfront, so while I don't like it, I never bought into it in the first place for them to have the rug pulled under me after giving them my money as Google might be doing.
        • jonny_eh 1y ago
          > For me the difference is that Android is an open-source operating system Google Play is not open source. You're still free to sideload on phone that use vanilla open-source android like the Fairphone.
    • andyferris 1y ago
• neilv 1y ago
  (Responding to https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/25/google-will-require-developer-verification-for-android-apps-outside-the-play-store/ https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/25/google-will-require-develo... ) > Starting next year, Google will begin to verify the identities of developers distributing their apps on Android devices, not just those who distribute via the Play Store. Odd little phrase, "distributing their apps on Android devices". I think "distributing" in this context is in the sense of product distribution, not in the sense of distributed systems. But "distributing...on" sounds a little odd, like Google is still providing a distribution service. (Contrary to all the precedent of how we've thought of installing software, other than the proprietary, captive-user app stores.) And so, maybe "distributing...on" makes it sound more like Google is (once again) entitled to gatekeep what you can run on your device/computer. > However, developers who appreciated the anonymity of alternative distribution methods will no longer have that option. Google says this will help to cut down on bad actors who hide their identity to distribute malware, commit financial fraud, or steal users’ personal data. Maybe it's not "developers who appreciated the anonymity" (which we immediately try to conflate with bad actors), but that the whole point lately has been to stop the greedy proprietary lock-in app store monopolies, and not have them gatekeeping what everyone else can do.
  • fluoridation 1y ago
    "Distribute on" sounds odd because it's incorrect. APKs are not distributed by putting them on phones and carrying the phones from one place to another. "Distribute to" would be more correct; better yet, "develop for".
• 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
  So that's how they kill newpipe.
• rkagerer 1y ago
  I've grown increasingly hateful towards both my Android and iOS devices over the last decade. The platforms themselves are increasingly user-hostile, and their appstores are crammed full of shitty, privacy-invading, telemetry-hoovering, dopamine-triggering, ad-filled, lipstick-covered apps that are often garbage compared to the pioneering days of mobile. I miss the days of my old Palm Pilot. Is anyone working on fixing this? We can do so much better.
  • indrora 1y ago
    Windows 10 Mobile was good. The entire developer experience was fantastic and the thing that killed it was a lack of desire from the upper leadership when it felt like they couldn't compete with the duopoly.
    • toast0 1y ago
      The developer experience was trash. Did you have a wince app? Too bad, throw away all that and rebuild for wp7. Do you want do anything useful? Actually, you better wait for wp7.5. Oh look, we have a totally new thing with WP8. Upgrade to the newest framework so you can use the WP8 features... Oh, but you still need to build for the old framework for WP7. Hey, how about WP8.1, kind of the same deal. My personal favorite though was WM10; you now need to build a Universal app that only runs on the very small number of WM10 phones... If you want to run on WP7 and WP8 which still have more sales, a universal app doesn't run there. Also, even though we said WP8 phones would be able to upgrade, either we changed our mind, or the experience is so bad most people won't. And the cherry on top... Users who upgrade from 8 to 10 might need to delete and reinstall the app, otherwise it will just show the loading dots. Did we mention, we decided we didn't need engineers in Test in the run up to WM10? Couldn't possibly be why the release was terrible.
      • xyzzy_plugh 1y ago
        It's incredible that by the end of it, the WM rollercoaster made us actually miss WinCE. If you had have told us that initially none of us would have believed you. WM had so much potential and was just totally botched.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• effgoogle 1y ago
  Fuck google. This combined with the 'age verification' coming to all Google properties means it is a very small step from that new world to full Google verification of everything you visit and everything on your device, at any time, for any reason with the penalty being incontestable ban from your device, apps and data. Get ready for facebook style 'we are interrupting you for a video selfie because we have detected you are a threat' across all google properties (Android, Chrome, Gmail, Maps...). Move to linux phones, now.
• mrbluecoat 1y ago
  > The requirement will go into effect in September 2026 for users in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand. Google notes how these countries have been “specifically impacted by these forms of fraudulent app scams.” Verification will then apply globally from 2027 onwards. At least most of the world has until 2027 to install LineageOS or GrapheneOS.
  • aucisson_masque 1y ago
    Apps are increasingly failing to run on grapheneos because Google is pushing for the play integrity verification. More and more apps, some critical like banking apps, some not at all, require your device to be running an official rom signed by Google.
    • 3036e4 1y ago
      So I will go back to carry two devices, I guess. Like when I had a Jolla Phone and an Android phone. Or before that with a Palm PDA and a dumbphone. It is convenient to have everything combined in a single device, but guess that turned out to be just a temporary luxury.
      • aucisson_masque 1y ago
        Great for you. What about the normies ? You know the people that protest and make things change, how they are going to organize themselves when their government gets authoritarian and apple/google obeys to governments request to forbid some app. You know like what happened during Hong Kong protest with Apple App Store. I’m not saying I have a solution but looking at yourself and pretending it’s all fine because you’re 10 times more tech savvy than the average citizen isn’t a viable answer. That kind of issue must be solved by regulation, hopefully Europe gets to bring back on earth whoever at Google agreed on that idea.
        • int_19h 1y ago
          It's not "all fine", but realistically it's the best that you can hope to achieve. The "normies" won't protest because it mostly doesn't affect them, at least not in any direct and obvious way that would trigger a pushback. Regulation is unlikely to give you what you want. For one thing, regulators love centralization in general because it makes it much easier to regulate - when there are only a few large players, you can write the laws around them, effectively forcing them to be the enforcers. A large and diverse field where users can install whatever apps from wherever is much harder to regulate wrt things like banning porn or violent games or whatever it is that "normies" feel upset and demand that SOMEONE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!1! today. This isn't to say that you shouldn't try to use political tools. Just be very clear that what you're trying to achieve is a minority take, and therefore you're unlikely to actually reach the goal in a democracy; at best, you will move the needle very slightly. So, if you want to actually enjoy freedom in the meantime, learn how to be a criminal.
• aucisson_masque 1y ago
  > Google is explicit today about how “developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or to use any app store they prefer.” « Développer will have freedom » yet they are entitled to Google’s verification. It’s just another stone in the grave of Android and even though I shipped off this sinking ship 6 years ago to iOS, this is still concerning because ultimately apple’s IOS is in competition solely with Android. If Android gets so bad it has all the disadvantage of iOS, some more, for instance with the embedded spyware that manufacturer are paid to include, and none of the good side of iOS, then everyone lose. Apple doesn’t have to compete anymore, they just have to not suck.
  • vizzier 1y ago
    Can you even compile an iOS app without registering with apple?
    • aucisson_masque 1y ago
      Is it really different from what Google is doing ? Not being to compile or user not being to install have the very same consequence : your app can’t be used.
    • black3r 1y ago
      Without an apple ID you can compile an iOS app, but can only run it in an iPhone Simulator on a Mac. With a free apple ID (no additional registration needed) you can also install your compiled iOS app on your iPhone and have it working for 7 days before you need to re-install it.
• pentagrama 1y ago
  This means that for example I will not be able to side load Popcorn Time for Android [1] anymore? [1] https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-android https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-android
• macinjosh 1y ago
  Keep your phone. All you have to do is say no to digital for: - money - tickets - identification They cannot force everyone to own and buy a phone.
• edgarvaldes 1y ago
  Sideloading is the only reason I'm on Android. When it goes away, I will be better with an Apple device.
• subarctic 1y ago
  Hmm this is weird. I've recently been considering switch back to Android because of how locked down ios is and it sounds like Google's now gonna do the same thing? Will there be a way to deactivate this?
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• Kim_Bruning 1y ago
  I never really got into "phone" progrmaming, always waiting for the shenanigans to die down. But somehow the shanigans have gotten worse and for a significant chunk of the world population, the phone is the only computation device they have at all.
  • donmcronald 1y ago
    I never got into it because I was convinced developers would refuse to give up control over distribution when Apple started doing it. I wish I was right, but here we are.
    • saganus 1y ago
      Money is a powerful motivator. For better or worse.
    • worldsayshi 1y ago
      Developers sometimes seem to be as in control as farmers are of the distribution of their produce. There's no absolute rule that gives the owners of large scale distribution networks power over both producer and consumer. It's just laws of convenience. It's easier for everyone to go through a few or just a single common broker. There's no law against a more democratic way to implement the broker either but it requires interesting methods of coordination and/or decision making that doesn't seem to exist yet?
      • donmcronald 1y ago
        It limits choice. I don’t have any experience building mobile apps because I didn’t want to buy into an unfair ecosystem. That means fewer mobile apps even if distribution networks change tomorrow.
        • brailsafe 1y ago
          > I don’t have any experience building mobile apps because I didn’t want to buy into an unfair ecosystem Seems like it wouldn't be much of a stretch to compare that statement to not starting a business because the economy is unfair. People indeed don't start businesses when the bureaucratic or tax overhead outweighs the financial benefit, but nobody loses sleep over an individual's hypothetical missed opportunity to learn a new skill but them. Doesn't matter to the platform owners unless it also stops being profitable, so it's their job to maintain the profitability for their ecosystem despite whatever barriers they put up.
• sitkack 1y ago
  This is crazy, this means 10 years from now only terrorists will distribute software. Unacceptable! How many platforms now allow one to build and distribute a binary?
  • Splizard 1y ago
    Only Linux, BSD and other operating systems that are entirely Open Source. Even Windows has scary warnings now that pop up unless you pay several hundred dollars a year plus you have to go through a completely unreasonable process (that often requires being shipped a physical USB device) just to sign your application.
• coconut08 1y ago
  These companies need to be destroyed by antitrust violations. I am so tired of these tech companies abusing their market position. I want the FTC to stop being toothless and useless and just absolutely crush these companies. The amount of disdain I have for these companies can't even be properly expressed.
  • ta8645 1y ago
    These companies are in bed with the government, you're not going to be saved by any legislation. Many people on this site supported Google censoring the Covid anti-vax idiots, but it should have made it very clear that Google was working at the behest of the government. They're in bed together; the government gets to do an end-run around the constitution, and Google gets to rely on special government privileges and protection. Win-win.
  • akomtu 1y ago
    These corpos are part of the government, more or less, and they simply implement the edict to get rid of privacy. Not only in America. Smartphones have become eyes of the govs, while the Internet - something akin to their neural system. What's more interesting is why the govs feel so paranoidal and insecure recently? What are they afraid of?
• antman 1y ago
  This was probably the reason Nokia died. Symbian development, already cumbersome and app deployment required some such procedure. I remember there was an joint effort in a china based forum and many of us got a cert and a key for our phones. I was reading Nokia obituaries from its executives and the sorry state of Symbian development and app deployment was not considered as a cause. So here it, is young executives repeating a simplistic and destructive strategy. ibm, xerox, nokia and intel will be very proud.
  • drpixie 1y ago
    No so young, but just as short-term and thoughtless.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• sebastiennight 1y ago
  So what are our options (eg for EU citizens) for lobbying in terms of legislation or directly to Google to show disagreement with this? It looks like many in this thread are against, but I don't see suggestions for action?
  • derbOac 1y ago
    I'm wondering the same thing in the US. Aside from writing Google and complaining, and purchasing a phone with a different OS (GrapheneOS or PureOS, for example), I'm not sure what else to do.
    • sebastiennight 1y ago
      The issue with that 2nd solution is, "purchasing a phone with GrapheneOS" only registers from Google's perspective as "we just sold an additional Pixel, so we're doing good right now"
      • sorrythanks 1y ago
        buy second hand
  • pabs3 1y ago
    We need to lobby for choice at every stage. You must be able to choose which network, which phone, which OS, which app stores, which apps.
  • whitehexagon 1y ago
    I like your take, we see too many easy-to-write outrage articles on here these days, and rarely do we see a discussion or concrete list of actions that can be taken. eg. send a physical letter to this address, or boycot this or that service for 24hrs on such a date etc. Personally I de-googled last year, but those numbers never get counted by the bean-counters, so it is not much of a protest. In this case I dont think much can be done via legislation, since the governments work less and less for-the-people. This is just the next logical step on the KYC road, but for developers, GitHub is heading the same way, along with EU chat controls, UK age controls, Digital Euro, and the rest. The EU right-to-privacy may as well be torched, and freedoms that were hard won, will continue to be surrendered for an easier swipe of a gadget.
• abeyer 1y ago
  Even aside from the privacy implications (which aren't trivial themselves,) Doesn't this make it prohibitively difficult to do local builds of open source projects? It's been a long time since I've done this, but my recollection was that the process to do this was essentially you would build someone else's (the project's) package/namespace up through signing, but sign it locally with your own dev keys. A glance at the docs they've shared makes it sound like the package name essentially gets bound to an identity and you then can't sign it with another key. Am a I misremembering and/or has something changed in this process? Am I missing something?
  • luke-stanley 1y ago
    A repo is just files in a directory, so the namespace can be changed, but the whole thing stinks. Having to setup Android signing keys and needing to provide ID is not fun. It means you won't easily be able to run builds on Google certified Android devices that aren't from "approved" people.
    • abeyer 1y ago
      That's where the "prohibitively difficult" part comes in... surely they don't expect every developer on every open source app in the world to have their own app registration/package name for the same app, do they? Feels like an N * M problem, if so.
      • luke-stanley 1y ago
        They are namespacing, like it or not, and clearly they don't care about open-source that much.
      • weikju 1y ago
        Get rid of those pesky open source guys, keep the merchants who want $$$ and can pay $ to Google.
  • ycombinatrix 1y ago
    Not just difficult - it becomes impossible. You can no longer develop any android app without Google's approval, just like iOS. The official emulators might not even work.
• nullc 1y ago
  https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
  • A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
    It is funny how true this becomes with passing day.
• Trasmatta 1y ago
  I rely on an open source app called xDrip to manage my diabetes. It's way way way better than any of the official apps. It's not distributed on the app stores for obvious reasons. Many others rely on this app as well. Are we cooked?
• sirjaz 1y ago
  With more and more things like this, we need to back to making native apps on desktops and laptops where we as the users are in control.
• everdrive 1y ago
  I saw this coming a mile away. Everyone said you could install whatever you wanted on Android, but you were always jumping through some crazy hoops to do so. (compared to a general propose computer)
• devinprater 1y ago
  Well time to make sure mobile Linux is accessible so the blind users aren't the only ones left when all the world switches to Linux /s
  • beeflet 1y ago
    aren't there braille terminals that work with linux? I don't know how you would make a rigorous blind UX other than working with a text interface first.
• subarctic 1y ago
  Maybe Elon Musk can save us /s
  • rvnx 1y ago
    He won’t. But China does, and not tomorrow, not in the future, but today already, by selling unrestricted devices
• p3rls 1y ago
  has anyone had to help any elderly relative with the million scams they've downloaded from google's app store? google does not give a shit about helping regular people avoid scams, it's all just bullshit. not even to mention the h1b indian kickback stuff that's about to hit them. couldn't happen to a nicer company.
  • lucb1e 1y ago
    Helping elderly with scams: Yes, today, with Google Chrome. They got tricked into allowing desktop notifications and they look super legit on Microsoft Windows, styled like antivirus notifications and everything, covering the browser UI to get to the settings. I don't see how using closed software helps here
    • jhanschoo 1y ago
      The demographic of people being scammed in the primary regions impacted typically do banking with their phones and not a PC.
• r1ch 1y ago
  This is the same direction that Microsoft is taking Windows. Smart App Control is already rolling out to some regions - no .exe will run without a code signing certificate. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/develop/smart-app-control/overview https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/develop/smart...
  • ozim 1y ago
    Code signing is somewhat OK as I can get code signing cert using provider in my country that I can go to physically and show their employee my ID. If google does that then it’s not the worst. Worst is having to get my ID and all details scanned and processed by Google.
  • kiicia 1y ago
    Code signing by pseudonymous key is different that requirement to cede personal data to central registry
    • ack_complete 1y ago
      It requires a code signing certificate from one of the trusted central authorities, and generally as an individual you must have your legal name on the code signing certificate. It's not pseudonymous.
  • tensor 1y ago
    I really wish Microsoft made it cheaper to get a certificate. With Apple you pay $100 a year for any number of certs. Last I looked into it a cert for a single Windows app costs $400+ per year and requires a hardware token.
    • evanelias 1y ago
      They greatly improved the situation over the past couple years. Azure Trusted Signing is only $10/month and provides cloud-based signing. It's a huge pain to set up initially, but it's smooth sailing after that. There's a good tutorial at https://melatonin.dev/blog/code-signing-on-windows-with-azure-trusted-signing/ https://melatonin.dev/blog/code-signing-on-windows-with-azur...
• wvenable 1y ago
  I predict Windows will end up going this route before Google backtracks on it. This is the future; partially fuelled by malware, partially fuelled by the desire for platform control, and partially fuelled by government regulation.
  • actionfromafar 1y ago
    control=surveillance
    • Y_Y 1y ago
      This whole thing is getting totally out of surveillance! Someone should hit surveillance-alt-delete!
    • autoexec 1y ago
      control is the entire point of the surveillance
  • bloomca 1y ago
    Microsoft has way too much of legacy software people use, banning it all overnight will not go well at all. They understand that as well. They tried to pull a similar move with WinRT/UWP, but nobody wanted it, so now you can continue with Win32. They would love to do so, but legacy compatibility is a major business advantage.
    • wvenable 1y ago
      Microsoft mismanaged it but there was a potential parallel universe where they were successful at that plan and consumer versions of Windows would be locked to the Microsoft store. They did a bunch of terrible inept rollouts with confusing technology for both users and developers and effectively shot themselves in the foot. But it did not have to go down that way.
      • donmcronald 1y ago
        Yep. They fumbled the ball on step 1 of demand aggregation and we got lucky there was nothing of value for the 99% of users that will blindly take the easy path.
• cesarb 1y ago
  The reason I chose the Android ecosystem over the Apple ecosystem, once I found out that the Maemo/Meego ecosystem was a dead end and the Openmoko ecosystem was a non-starter, is that the Android ecosystem allowed me to develop and install my own apps on my own devices whenever I wanted to, without arbitrary limitations like having to periodically plug the phone into my computer to renew some authorization. Additionally, there was even for some devices the possibility of rebuilding the whole operating system with any changes I desired. If I'm not allowed to develop and install my own apps on my own phone, what advantage does Android have over Apple?
  • Terretta 1y ago
    > without arbitrary limitations like having to periodically plug the phone into my computer to renew some authorization I find it easier to do a git commit once every 89 days and see my app auto refreshed through Testflight for me and anyone else I care to let use it. If you look at the build system SaaS pricing or even IDE pricing on Show HNs here, the Xcode cloud build and distribution ecosystem is an absolute steal at $9 a month. Private Testflight (with no review) can be more convenient than that desktop cable.
    • curiousgal 1y ago
      > the Xcode cloud build and distribution ecosystem is an absolute steal at $9 a month. Private Testflight (with no review) can be more convenient than that desktop cable. I genuinely can't tell whether this is sarcasm or not. Are you seriously comparing a 9$ per month plan Vs simply plugging your phone or syncing an app file wirelessly?
    • ycombinatrix 1y ago
      Are you being intentionally obtuse?
  • aucisson_masque 1y ago
    > what advantage does Android have over Apple? They are cheaper and come full of spyware preinstalled by manufacturer and carrier. Customer see the price advantage, everyone else see the data harvesting (including Google). Everyone benefits in selling cheap Android phone. Now you would be pretty stupid to buy 1k€ Android phone like Samsung ones because they still come with preinstalled and privileged Samsung, third party and Google spyware. For instance, my s23 had 3 preinstalled meta app. 2 systemized app, 1 was Facebook client.
• blinky88 1y ago
  Absolutely disgusting. No reason to keep using Android then.
  • rvnx 1y ago
    iOS is a closed jail even worse. The real solution is to buy uncertified Chinese devices then. China offering more freedom than the supposed free world
• bloomca 1y ago
  This is how macOS works, without a signature they will tell you they can't guarantee it doesn't have malware and you need to go to settings and choose to run anyway (and most people don't even know about it). Microsoft would love to do that too, but it just has too much of legacy software to introduce such a major hurdle.
  • tomsmeding 1y ago
    Is the right-click -> Open workaround not a thing any more on macOS?
    • thebitstick 1y ago
      Open -> Click away the error message -> Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Open Anyways -> Open Anyways -> Authenticate -> app actually opens
      • bithaze 1y ago
        There's a ctrl+open shortcut, if I remember correctly, which may be what the parent comment is referring to.
        • soxfox42 1y ago
          As of macOS 15 (I think?), that shortcut stopped working, it will just show the same unverified software warning.
        • rpdillon 1y ago
          Nope, they've been making it steadily more difficult with each release. The control open shortcut no longer works.
        • swat535 1y ago
          Nope, it has been removed. Also God help you if want to run something that needs system extensions.. You will need to boot to recovery mode, go through utility and enable it: https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/mac-help/mchl768f7291/mac https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/mac-help/mchl768f7291/... Basically average users will never be able to pull this off.
• echelon_musk 1y ago
  When people say just use Linux I can only think of what was known as far back as 2014. > NSA: Linux Journal is an "extremist forum" and its readers get flagged for extra surveillance [0] Looks like this is a part of the move toward Chat Control and ending E2E encryption. [0] https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/nsa-linux-journal-extremist-forum-and-its-readers-get-flagged-extra-surveillance https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/nsa-linux-journal-extre...
• zmmmmm 1y ago
  The worst part is the Orwellian opening sentence they start with in their blog post [0]: > You shouldn’t have to choose between open and secure 2+2=5 Truly the end of an era. I've spent nearly two decades buying Android phones because of a single checkbox in settings that let me have the freedom I consider essential to any computing device that I own. In a way, it's liberating, I've missed out on a lot from the Apple ecosystem because of that checkbox. Maybe finally I can let go of it now the choice is out of my hands. [0] https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-...
  • rpdillon 1y ago
    Very much my exact feelings. I had the first Android phone ever and even wrote my own APKs and enjoyed the freedom of the mobile platform that let me install my own software. But it's been close to 20 years and maybe it's time to check out the other side, as much as I despise Apple's locked down ecosystem.
    • nicce 1y ago
      Maybe it is time to try Jolla as next phone: https://jolla.com/ https://jolla.com/
      • rpdillon 1y ago
        Yes, I was checking this out! Sailfish with Android compat seems very compelling. The videos I saw on youtube showed a bit less polish than I'd prefer, but I'd be OK with that. But then I read up on the manufacturer they partnered with. Reeder, I believe? I ended up looking up some other devices they made and there seems to be build quality problems...I haven't seen reports like this for the Jolla C2, though, so I still might be tempted to purchase one just to see how it drives. Thanks for the recommendation!
        • walterbell 1y ago
          Sailfish supports a few Sony Xperia phones, https://docs.sailfishos.org/Support/Supported_Devices/ https://docs.sailfishos.org/Support/Supported_Devices/
• kirito1337 1y ago
  Gives me another reason to use Custom ROM
  • alex_suzuki 1y ago
    Only a matter of time for them to require "certified devices" to lock the bootloader.
• luke-stanley 1y ago
  So Google won't even offer a system toggle to let users install an app they've made or copied? Google don't even expose a per-app toggle for app Internet access, why am I surprised? This is disgusting. Freedom died a little bit more today. Why is end-user choice and consent not considered? It's really disturbing that the EU and Google would do this. I can't recommend Android or iPhone because of this nonsense.
  • mzajc 1y ago
    > Why is end-user choice and consent not considered? The elimination of user choice was very much considered. In fact, it's the primary goal.
• _blk 1y ago
  Dick move. Go back to "do no evil" big G. Remember how you used to be the kool kid on the block? Now you've just become the grown up you showed contempt for in your prime time. I doubt I'll move away from Android too soon, but that definitely makes me reconsider whether any Google services have a right to CPU time on my device.
• seanw444 1y ago
  Makes sense why they had to get rid of the "don't be evil" motto. They've been on a roll. I've seen a lot of similar sentiment on this thread, but the reason I use Android is because it gives me more control than iOS by allowing full-on painless sideloading, and custom distributions like GrapheneOS. They're doing everything they can to turn themselves into a worse Apple. All of the downsides of Apple, but none of the upsides. Apple beats them in every aspect that isn't "openness". When will the straw break the camel's back? I'm shocked we've let it get to this point with no realistic alternatives. There's no reason a competitive Linux-based smartphone can't exist (no, I'm not counting Android in that).
  • fsflover 1y ago
    > There's no reason a competitive Linux-based smartphone can't exist And it does exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Librem_5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Librem_5
  • IlikeKitties 1y ago
    > There's no reason a competitive Linux-based smartphone can't exist (no, I'm not counting Android in that). Yes there is. You all don't understand that they will use remote attestation to force everyone to use approved devices with signed apps on signed OSes only You won't be able to bank, call a cab, write a chat message, watch a youtube video or do anything relevant on a device anymore that isn't signed, approved and controlled by google. They've made us cattle and now they are going to milk us dry.
    • seanw444 1y ago
      That's the blackpilled take. The whitepill is that sticking up for yourself hasn't ever been easy, but it's always been an option.
      • IlikeKitties 1y ago
        I wish there was a path to victory here. MAYBE there's an antitrust complaint to be made in the EU. But it's already being used against me everyday as a grapheneos user there are several services i am barred from using for no reason.
• marcodiego 1y ago
  How did we let this happen? Oh, yes... Actually I remember: it was a long slow series of accepting small artificial restrictions. I remember people laughing at me at the time. They said it won't matter, they didn't care, that I was paranoid... Now... Here we are.
  • WorldPeas 1y ago
    and don't forget all the people with the dismissive remarks about how it didn't affect them on their Graphene or Calyx phones. We're all downstream of something. The real product of Android for us was always the interoperability with the normal world for the tinkerer.
    • windward 1y ago
      >their Graphene or Calyx phones An important reminder: if your escape hatch is an economic irrelevancy, it might as well not exist. See: Google search with '-ai'.
      • WorldPeas 1y ago
        Though the founders don't stand for it, they unintentionally exist to capture the most vocal people and diverge them from the norm such that the uninformed consumer has no defenses. It's as if the kinds of people who would support the civil liberty charity said "to hell with it" and founded their own parallel society.
  • mrlatinos 1y ago
    We had no part in this. The blame lies squarely with Google and its employees, who trade away user freedom for profit and career gain. Many who are smart enough to know better but instead compromise their principles. It's just another symptom of late-stage capitalism.
  • beeflet 1y ago
    eternal september
  • 1y ago
• GZGavinZhao 1y ago
  I'm curious what is going to happen to all those Chinese ROMs and third-party Chinese app stores.
  • imhoguy 1y ago
    China will push own Android OS forks into other markets even harder, if they do it fully open-source then bonus for them, users will force devs (banking apps etc) to get more support. A good example is one EU bank which publishes to Huawei's AppGallery to support non-Google certified Android phones.
• nvdr 1y ago
  Will this affect GrapheneOS users who have Play Protect / Services disabled? Wondering how they intend to do the verification.
• GZGavinZhao 1y ago
  Year of mobile Linux OS? /s
• nout 1y ago
  You know how folks in the UK are cutting the surveillance cameras, what is the equivalent here?
  • smashah 1y ago
    Not updating Android I guess
  • WorldPeas 1y ago
    making an ADB-based debloater and browser shims to use stuff like bank apps, then sharing that with others. Then again, like cutting wires, it doesn't address the root cause.
• smashah 1y ago
  Oh how I wish I could buy a Nokia N900 16 Pro Max and use Maemo 13
  • chrononaut 1y ago
    The N900. The best mobile device I've ever owned.
• polytely 1y ago
  Are there any competing phone OS'es still around? Maybe there is something in China I dont have a view on?
  • Y_Y 1y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS It does have an Android subsystem stuck on, but it's not necessary.
  • derbOac 1y ago
    https://puri.sm/products/ https://puri.sm/products/
• nubinetwork 1y ago
  > Google wants to combat “convincing fake apps” Google can't even stop the scam ai companion apps on the play store that all use the same same backend full of characters... Google also can't stop the huge wave of scam Bitcoin ads impersonating Canadian media outlets, with ai generated pictures and videos of politicians. Get real Google.
  • PRSXFENG 1y ago
    Their own store has a dozen "AI Photo Editor Pro 2026" and "Turbo Deluxe Ultra VPN Secure Pro" apps that are "approved" and yet for sure have malware at worst and at best steals your data and serves nonstop pop up ads
  • climb_stealth 1y ago
    Don't get me started. Every single app I search for on the play store gets a first sponsored result that is a completely different app. It is so utterly broken by design.
• falcor84 1y ago
  Will this be what finally leads to the success of a fully open-source Android fork such as CalyxOS or GrapheneOS?
  • AlgebraFox 1y ago
    CalyxOS is already dead. GrapheneOS is the only hope. https://calyxos.org/news/2025/08/01/a-letter-to-our-community/ https://calyxos.org/news/2025/08/01/a-letter-to-our-communit...
• matheusmoreira 1y ago
  Of course they will. It started with Play Integrity and hardware remote attestation. Soon Android will be nothing but a shittier version of iOS.
• guerrilla 1y ago
  [flagged]
• kurtoid 1y ago
  How does this affect installing an APK to an offline device? Will there be a local override?
• varelse 1y ago
  [dead]
• geekamongus 1y ago
  This doesn't seem to be going over well.
  • xenago 1y ago
    Only developers care. The users don't even know what sideloading is. This will successfully kill off the single remaining freedom users have.
• xenago 1y ago
  This is the final nail in the coffin for personal computing
  • SJMG 1y ago
    It's a blow, but this is over dramatic.
• kitsune_ 1y ago
  Well I guess that's good bye Pixel and Android for me then.
• passwordoops 1y ago
  "A recent analysis by the company found that there are “over 50 times more malware from internet-sideloaded sources than on apps available through Google Play.” Ok, but what's the real damage? In other words, how many installs and how much money siphoned from users and legit apps?
• DarkmSparks 1y ago
  Well that sucks. So basically all the money weve had taken from us for our play store apps is now "just" going to be spent on administering the registration details of 800 million chinese developers and 6 billion bot accounts. Whose smart idea was that.
• SergeAx 1y ago
  I wonder, how hard is it to build an app on the phone from source?
• coastalpuma 1y ago
  We shouldn't accept "sideloading" as a term. It's meant to make "installing an app without monopolist approval" seem like a dirty/weird/niche trick.
• arnaudsm 1y ago
  Most Android apps are crapware anyways. The only respectful apps that I know are open-source, and are being kicked out the of play store progressively. I'm cancelling my Pixel 10 preorder.
• the_wolo 1y ago
  Yeah... They just want to ban NewPipe. It's sad to see Android getting locked down, also with the source closing of the development branches, etc. I can as well buy Apple then, it doesn't matter anymore.
• coastalpuma 1y ago
  From the announcement > our recent analysis found over 50 times more malware from internet-sideloaded sources than on apps available through Google Play. I will believe this when we stop seeing brazen malware in marquee app store apps, e.g. https://www.tracesecurity.com/blog/articles/meta-pixel-and-the-android-loop https://www.tracesecurity.com/blog/articles/meta-pixel-and-t...
• vagab0nd 1y ago
  When I switched from Android to iOS, this was one of the things I missed a lot: the ability to write my own app and side load it on my phone. Even more so with the advent of LLM. Oh well, now I don't have to worry about that.
• celsoazevedo 1y ago
  This would affect a lot apps that are not on the Play Store for multiple reasons... and if I'm going to be stuck with what Google thinks I should be allowed to use, then why not use iOS instead? At least software updates would be better and the overall experience more polished.
• BLKNSLVR 1y ago
  Can Google do something like this for entities wishing to advertise on their platform? It feels as if that would provide far more of a public service than this... whatever this is. Are there stats on whether more malware and financial scams come from installed apps or from advertising?
• Dragon0 1y ago
  DO NOT UPLOAD YOUR ID/INFO TO GOOGLE. I put my game on their app store some years ago, and they doxxed me right on the app store. Google posted my name and home address right on the game page. Not great when I was already receiving death threats! Later on, had a rando show up at 3AM one night and had to call the cops out. I moved after that. Google is absolutely not to be trusted to keep this data confidential. If Google demands I do anything with them, I'll just tell my fans to install lineageos or whatever instead -- no way in hell I'm having ANYTHING to do with google ever again. GFY google!
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • greenavocado 1y ago
    If you are having random people try to attack you while you are at your home, you need to be prepared. Strengthen your door jambs with nine inch screws to replace the screws your door is mounted to and use metal plates to strengthen the locks (there are kits available at home improvement stores), install adherent plastic frosting on your windows that will slow down break ins by making the window much more annoying to break through, and install surveillence cameras outdoors. On the offensive front, you can consider OC/CS grenades you can throw down the hallway to avoid exposing yourself and handheld pepper spray for non-lethal deterrence at moderate range. Finally, if all else fails, keep a loaded handgun in a easy to use but hard for kids to unlock gun box under your drawer next to your bed. An under barrel flash light severely blinds invaders and makes them think twice about charging you, maximizing the chances that you nobody will get hurt. The door jamb upgrade is the most important one. I have returned home to a severely beaten door with my shattered iron door knocker on the ground laying in front of the door in pieces but the house was impenetrable to the burglar(s) who weren't willing to break through the glass. It also doesn't hurt to install fake $5 security dome cameras around the property.
    • steve_taylor 1y ago
      Or just don't give your home address to Google.
• syngrog66 1y ago
  shameful was a reason I bought Android. will they be sending me a refund?
• AlienRobot 1y ago
  Relevant as always: https://youtu.be/ntICHMV-WMA?t=38 https://youtu.be/ntICHMV-WMA?t=38
• TZubiri 1y ago
  Could someone explain why the personal privacy of software developers is more important than the cybersecurity of consumers and nations please and thank you
• grizzles 1y ago
  This must be because of Epic's win in antitrust court. What someone needs to do is create a "Store" browser that loads apps from random websites like https://site.tld/app.apk https://site.tld/app.apk You could manually parse AndroidManifest.xml and allow only apps that expose <uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" /> I'm somewhat interested in doing this myself actually. What do people think?
  • xyzzy_plugh 1y ago
    How does this differ from Obtainium?
    • grizzles 1y ago
      I wasn't aware of obtainium. Thank you. I was thinking of something more like Google Chrome mobile edition but for APKs. So more focus around the search interface.
• JimmaDaRustla 1y ago
  I'm waiting for this with chromium too. Microsoft Edge most removed uBlock Origin on me today.
• cryptoegorophy 1y ago
  Anyone else remembers “don’t be evil”?
• zhyder 1y ago
  Apple and Google are now competing on being more closed, rather than on being more open. Perhaps because we gave Apple a free pass on curbing our freedoms, and even defended its actions as needed for 'security'
• bit1993 1y ago
  Great. I suspect this will push more developers to publish web apps.
• Borgz 1y ago
  Looks like Google will also be limiting each developer's number of apps and installations unless you pay them $25. https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/android-developer-console https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/...
  • privacyking 1y ago
    That's how it's always costed
    • Borgz 1y ago
      Yes, it's the same price as a Google Play Console developer account, but this is for access to the new Android Developer Console.
• sneak 1y ago
  Stallman warned us. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
  • yupyupyups 1y ago
    He was unable to suggest any pragmatic alternatives. He just said "I don't own a smartphone", ignoring the fact that many people become very disadvantaged without one. The real heroes are the people that facilitate alternatives, not those who talk.
    • aleph_minus_one 1y ago
      > He just said "I don't own a smartphone", ignoring the fact that many people become very disadvantaged without one. I know quite some people who live this way, and are very willing to overcome inconvenient hurdles to avoid having to use such a spying device.
      • yupyupyups 1y ago
        Okay, let's say you just became an enlightened person who understands that the current state of things need to be fixed. To actually free yourself requires both commitment on your end and work on other people's end, those people who help facilitate alternatives and guide others to having more freedom and privacy. We need more of that work. The speakers of the world have their place, of course, but that's not the most important part of the solution.
        • aleph_minus_one 1y ago
          > To actually free yourself requires both commitment on your end and work on other people's end, those people who help facilitate alternatives and guide others to having more freedom and privacy. We need more of that work. Such people both lead by example, and try to inspire others towards following their example/lifestyle. The problem rather is that most people want a different lifestyle (in the particular example of privacy and freedom "one with less radical consequences", which I consider to be rather contradictory, but this discussion shall be off topic). To give an analogue: many vegetarians both lead by example, and inspire others to become vegetarians. But many people nevertheless don't want to become vegetarians.
• nabogh 1y ago
  Yeah if this goes ahead I'm going back to my feature phone
• de6u99er 1y ago
  >However, developers who appreciated the anonymity of alternative distribution methods will no longer have that option. Don't be evil Google!
• b3ing 1y ago
  They want to stop adblocking YouTube apps
• majestik 1y ago
  Google welcome to Apple 10 years ago
• 31337Logic 1y ago
  TL;DR If you're not using Linux by now, do yourself a favor and start. You could do worse than starting with Linux Mint or PopOS, but whatever you do, get ahead of the curve and transition to these user-friendly open sourced OSes. The alternative is far, far worse at the moment.
  • jbstack 1y ago
    The issue is with Android, not desktop. Linux Mint and PopOS run on desktop. They aren't alternatives to Android.
• bpev 1y ago
  I see... I guess it's just... web apps then?
• haughtyparakeet 1y ago
  One step closer to The Right to Read: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
• userbinator 1y ago
  The desire for people to keep using their currently working devices just got much bigger, and yet another good reason to root. The infamous Franklin quote always comes to mind when I see things like this happening. Choose freedom over security while you still can, or you'll soon not even have the freedom to choose. It's also worth reading Stallman's "Right to Read" again, to see how scarily prescient he was.
• Ferret7446 1y ago
  The only silver lining I see is if it allows you to bypass this by enabling dev mode on your phone. If you can't sideload unverified apps even in dev mode, that would be insanely bad. IF that is the case, I'm actually willing to be slightly inclined to see this as a positive? We should normalize installing apps outside of Google Play, but that means malware becomes a serious issue with people downloading and installing random APKs. e.g., this may normalize people hosting downloadable APKs whilst also reducing malware risk for "normies", which idealistically could weaken the "monopoly" of Google Play on android. The problem is that Google is the gatekeeper.
  • maxloh 1y ago
    If they keep pushing, you won't likely be able to use any banking or payment apps with that "dev mode." In fact, you may not even be able to use any apps that interact with Google Play Services, which includes almost every app on the market.
• xvilka 1y ago
  Time to donate to GrapheneOS[1] and alternatives[2]. Or contribute [3]. [1] https://grapheneos.org/donate https://grapheneos.org/donate [2] https://members.calyxinstitute.org/donate https://members.calyxinstitute.org/donate [3] https://grapheneos.org/hiring https://grapheneos.org/hiring
  • OutOfHere 1y ago
    Will GrapheneOS even survive the fact that Google will stop publishing Pixel code and such?
    • xvilka 1y ago
      If you maintain it as a hard fork, why not? New phones technical specifications improvements are diminishing last few years anyway. As long as it works, it can last for many years to come. The question is only in the project budget, I think.
  • maxloh 1y ago
    Why not LineageOS? They have better and more updated preinstalled Apps.
    • nosioptar 1y ago
      They also support more devices.
• nullbyte808 1y ago
  GrapheneOS.
• Workaccount2 1y ago
  I don't blame Goggle. Apple escaped anti-trust by simply not allowing anyone except themselves to put software on iPhones. Seriously, Apple doesn't allow competitors so it can't be anti-competitive according to the case. Totally brain damaged ruling, the judge must have been molested by an Android phone at some point, but here we are, and google is now moving closer to an Apple model.
• mugivarra69 1y ago
  [dead]
• sidewndr46 1y ago
  A few years from now: After reviewing the usage of the approved sideloading feature, we discovered no more than 0.01% of users ever sideload an application. For security, sideloading is now disabled on all devices forever.
• 999900000999 1y ago
  Maybe we need phone sized open source computers. The only saving grace is you can always import a Chinese phone without the play store at all, and then you can install what you want.
• FromTheSteppe 1y ago
  So people from countries US has sanctioned can't even develop and use mobile apps anymore. This will change millions of innocent lives. So unfair and racist. The reason my people are in this mess in the first place is a US coup.
  • edg5000 1y ago
    Agreed!
  • sunaookami 1y ago
    These countries are not affected because they don't have Play Services preinstalled, no?
    • eurg 1y ago
      I once had a colleague from Iran. Working (legally) in the middle of the EU. He was already blocked from using credit cards, but thanks to not-100%-US-dominance still allowed to use local banks. For such local banking he will likely need to have Play services. It's not countries that are affected, but people. And people sometimes move.
• accurrent 1y ago
  I knew this was coming thanks to the nincompoops bankers and IMDA together with horny uncles who fall for love/job scams here in Singapore. The reason I use android over iOS is that I can load apps for personal automation. I think the current scenario where bank apps refuse to run on phones with sideloaded apps is far more acceptable. Im not sure scammers will not find a way around this. I can still be able pin web apps. FWIW I'd rather not use my phone for critical transactions its making authorities lazy. The number of times Ive had to fight thanks to "buggy" payment code that deducts money is not funny and banks are getting worse at customer support day by day. Also what the fuck are the governments doing with tax payer money, instead of going after criminals, we go after citizens.
• globular-toast 1y ago
  Squeeze, Raban. Squeeze hard.
• DebtDeflation 1y ago
  The are apk's floating around from the Ice Cream Sundae days where the developer went out of business and is no longer on Play Store and this is literally the only way to run the app. I have a Concept2 rower with the old PM3 monitor which is no longer supported by their ErgData app and the only way to connect my phone to my rower is by sideloading the ancient version of the app that supports it. So that's going to break now?
• nick49488171 1y ago
  Time for Linux phones with Android emulation
  • hodgehog11 1y ago
    This seems like the only sensible long-term solution to me unless anyone else has an alternative. AOSP public access is already on the chopping block, custom ROMs are the short term solution but still operate at Google's whim under the hood.
  • WhyNotHugo 1y ago
    I've been working (slowly, due to lack of time) on running VMs with Waydroid inside of Linux Phones. Sadly, I haven't found any resources to running a _regular_ Android VM on Linux. The few resources focused on that use x86_64, which is not reasonable for a Linux phone.
• Fordec 1y ago
  Welp, I was euphemistically already not a fan of the developer experience for Android, now it's straight dead to me. No reason to ever touch another day of Kotlin. Come to think of it, why am I even on Android now as a user?
  • sorrythanks 1y ago
    What's the alternative?
    • archargelod 1y ago
      Dumb phone, Linux on arm, Older devices with custom OS.
    • Fordec 1y ago
      The better alternative? Dunno. An alternative is iPhone and just take some of the benefits that comes with it. It's been a much more closed ecosystem from the start, but it's owned it. Google had a competitive advantage over that but they seem intent on throwing those advantages away with no foreseeable other upsides. In development, working on completely other problem spaces to mobile development at all. It's not 2012 anymore and there are other noteworthy growth areas to spend time on. But one think in the short term was tonight I just spent some hours migrating registered accounts away using a Gmail account to Proton.
• yupyupyups 1y ago
  I think they got emboldened by EU's impotent response to Apple's Digital Markets Act (DMA) violations. Regardless, this is extremely bad news.
• IFC_LLC 1y ago
  This will be just another boost for de-googled phones, alternative platforms and potentially Mobile Linux. The only reason why google phones became so popular was the fact that they were much less restrictive than iPhones. Thus the platform became the biggest phone platform in the world. Now they are asking for a new start to arise and take their place.
• sqircles 1y ago
  This is another "beginning of the end." All eyes are on this situation and how much push back it gets. If there is little resistance, others will certainly follow suit.
• uutangohotel 1y ago
  I can’t say I’m surprised; but I am disappointed.
• tonyhart7 1y ago
  wow that rather fast [https://ibb.co.com/8LF8qdxm https://ibb.co.com/8LF8qdxm] I already got popup in dashboard this morning
• eadmund 1y ago
  This is completely, absolutely and totally unacceptable. My phone is my phone, not Google’s. They have absolutely no right to prevent me from running whatever software I wish on that phone. This must not be allowed to stand.
  • superkuh 1y ago
    It's actually your telco's phone. They're the one that has the license to run the baseband computer and RF transceiver. The 'pad' computer device is sort of yours. But there's no legal way to have ownership of a cell phone unless you yourself bid for and get the RF spectrum and set up your network in a way that accomplishes the FCC coverage and timing requirements. Then run your own telco for your phone. Basically, impossible. Smart phones try to limit and firewall the interface between the two but tight integration is required for energy efficiency. So a smart phone, or a cell phone, can never be yours. They aren't good choices for doing computing and this legal reality is becoming more and more obvious with time.
  • atomicfiredoll 1y ago
    Looking at what's been going on in the E.U. vs. the U.S., it seems pretty clear that one of the only things companies this big, with this much control over the markets fear is regulation. Maybe people live in a country where adding new regulations is difficult at the moment. In that case, push at for it at the state or province level. Push for it wherever you can. Suddenly these companies have to figure out how to work around 50 different state level laws? Painful. Good. Make it hurt to be evil. People need to come together and push for regulatory roadblocks to things like this at every level. I think that's part of how you keep control of your own property and stand up against it.
  • jbhifilover 1y ago
    You paid for the phone with the OS as a contributing factor (alongside the hardware) to the purchase no doubt, so the OS in itself must be compelling to you for some reason. You didn't fund the development of the OS, contribute to it (presumably), you didn't market it or position it alongside your brand. I'd agree with you if you said you have a right to run anything on the hardware under a different OS, but you have no god given right to run whatever you want on the OS.
• dankwizard 1y ago
  Everybody complaining of this is admitting they are doing nefarious actions. Those of us playing by the rules see no issue with this - In fact I welcome it!
  • Agraillo 1y ago
    Sorry if I didn't recognize your sarcasm, but if you’re serious, you’re probably also assuming that rooting is usually done for criminal activity. In fact, both rooting and easy app creation/side-loading are often tools to solve inconveniences. I didn't plan to root my last phone until I encountered some restrictions in the manufacturer’s version of Android that couldn’t be resolved without rooting. Regarding the topic, I can easily imagine a legitimate app on Google Play with available source code, where you find something inconvenient and your attempts to suggest a fix to the developer did not lead to the desired outcome. Currently, you or your developer friend can simply fork such an app, fix the issue, and release it for the general public without any extra paperwork. This Google policy would make such a developer suspicious/disabled by default (if the developer is not already verified), unless proved otherwise.
• nromiun 1y ago
  Well, when that happens it is finally goodbye to Android from me. I am switching to iOS that day.
• edg5000 1y ago
  It's starting to look like I may end up with two phones. One with Lineage and most of my apps, hopefully, and another one with Play Protect which hopefully will be just my bank app. Google has become way too powerful and is encroaching step by step on our freedom, it's terrible. Tt's been going on for a long time. It's the IT equivalant of authoritarianism!!
  • DanOpcode 1y ago
    Yeah, I think I will do that strategy as well. I will probably put Graphene on my next phone, and if any apps don't work I will keep them on another phone.
• Splizard 1y ago
  Remind me again why we can't use HTTPS certificates to sign code that is linked with a domain?
• DecentShoes 1y ago
  Guess I'm getting an iPhone. If both are locked down, I may as well have the one that has a decent watch.
  • gvurrdon 1y ago
    Pixel watches are pretty good now, and I didn't much like the changes made in WatchOS 10. But, it's a fair point.
• edg5000 1y ago
  If you think about it, the only thing that keeps this OS vendor in this duopolistic position is the fact that people rely on a certain proprietary apps. We need ways to do things like messaging and banking in a universal way, just like we can do with email, calls, texts and web. Banking and messaging should be fully universal so we don't rely on specific apps only available on specific app stores. That would take all power away from this satanic US companies!!!
• djmips 1y ago
  I see how this is developing. First going more or less close source and then reeling in the freedom - they are not going so much Microsoft but Apple.
• babl-yc 1y ago
  One of the reasons I switched to Android was the freedom to make apks for my phone and not dealing with certificates, expiry dates, Google's approval, etc. This is a depressing change if they follow through with this. And "in the name of security" doesn't pass the smell test if there is no way to opt out.
• joemazerino 1y ago
  Tech like f-droid will be important for the future of free Android
• panja 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • tomhow 1y ago
    You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45021560 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45021560 and marked it off topic.
• Henchman21 1y ago
  Remind me why we keep using smart phones? They feel like a noose around our collective necks.
• eviks 1y ago
  "Monopolies" gonna monopolize, all for our safety, of course
• throw10920 1y ago
  This is really bad. I think that most people on HN will agree with that. The problem is that most normal people (HN is not normal - mostly for the better) don't even understand what sideloading is - let alone actually care. How can we fix this? (aside from making people care - apathy enables so many political problems in the current age, but it's such a huge problem that this definitely isn't going to be the impetus to fix it)
  • nabogh 1y ago
    We need another os in the market. A duopoly just isn't competitive enough. Too bad the cost of entry is so high.
    • throw10920 1y ago
      I agree with you idealistically, but practically, creating an entirely new mobile OS with market share competitive with the existing two is an unbelievably massive challenge. It'd probably be just about as easy to get people to care about sideloading in the first place.
      • balder1991 1y ago
        The problem is moves like this will keep happening, since people don’t have much choice. Unless we bring up a societal trend of dumb phones.
        • runarberg 1y ago
          We used to have strong consumer protection advocates on both sides of the Atlantic, and those consumer protection advocates used to influence laws and regulation which forced corporations to stop doing anti-consumer stuff like this. Those days can return with enough organized labor and solidarity among the working classes.
          • calgoo 1y ago
            Yea, but you will need to organize offline because chat control will catch your terrorist messages and report you to the police. And make sure to leave the phone at home so they cant see all the phones meeting in one spot. But how do you go to the location then? Public transport uses the phone for payment, your car uses the phone as authentication / key. Its a very slippery slope that is very close to being implemented. In a way, we can hope that the current political climate somehow decimates the American corporations that control the systems, but it looks more like IBM during WW2 supplying counting machines to the Americans and to the Germans and everyone else. The phone platform is officially lost at this point, there is too much political pressure to control it. We are going to increasingly need to rely on sneaker nets, small mesh networks, and home made "illegal" communication devices. The internet will continue to exist, but it is going to fracture more and more with the political wars that are happening at the moment.
• jovial_cavalier 1y ago
  If this goes through, would it be possible to see a consumer class-action lawsuit? I imagine there is a class of people for whom the sideloading of apps is necessary and removing it renders their phone almost useless. I'd also guess that this market is much larger than Google imagines. Personally, if I'm not allowed to run the software that I want on my phone, it almost makes more sense for me to get some old flip phone or one of those chinese blackberry knockoffs c.a. 2012. Not out of any principled stance, mind you, it's just that's the level of functionality you'd be reducing me to. Why should I pay $500 when I can find something that gives me the same features on a literal junk pile?
• Xevion 1y ago
  Gotta love when the megacorp steps in to "help".
• Superblazer 1y ago
  This is dangerous, they are trying to prevent people from creating apps that don't support their narrative.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• rvnx 1y ago
  If this is a thing then the solution they offer is incorrect. A big giant red screen: “warning the identity of this application developer has not been verified and this could be an application stealing your data, etc” would have worked. What they want is to get rid of apps like YouTube Vanced that are making them lose money (and other Play Store apps)
  • bb88 1y ago
    I've often lamented at work that we lose freedom at the guise of "security". Security and Intellectual Property (IP) protection could both be true. Google has a big enough reason to make it happen now. In a perverse way it's not that protecting Google's IP is making us safer. Yet it, strangely is.
    • kylebenzle 1y ago
      [dead]
  • paradite 1y ago
    It won't work because of too many false positives. People are already trained to ignore warnings, like how they blindly accept T&C without reading.
    • godelski 1y ago
      This is something laughable that Apple does. Anytime you install something from Github it'll make you click a few extra boxes. And their tightening down of things also ends up making people look for third party software in the first place. All this really does is, like you said, teach people to ignore warnings.
      • Ldorigo 1y ago
        Is it possible to install stuff from GitHub on iOS? I thought it was completely impossible on apple devices.
• medhir 1y ago
  Every day we stray farther from the premise that we should be allowed to install / modify software on the computers we own. Will once again re-up the concept of a “right to root access”, to prevent big corps from pulling this bs over and over again: https://medhir.com/blog/right-to-root-access https://medhir.com/blog/right-to-root-access
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • sepeth 1y ago
    This is why I believe GPL v3 is important.
  • eru 1y ago
    Root access on your phone isn't enough: there's layers below root.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    • apitman 1y ago
      I accidentally read this as "there's lawyers below root" and I'm not sure I'm wrong.
      • aspenmayer 1y ago
        No matter what runlevel you’re on, judges are lower still. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runlevel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runlevel
      • RRWagner 1y ago
        It's lawyers all the way down :)
    • preisschild 1y ago
      Yep. I don't need/want root access, as it is too much of a security risk IMO. But of course the possibility to install a `su` binary should be there. I primarily want to be able to unlock the bootloader to install a custom de-googled Android Version (such as GrapheneOS) and then lock the bootloader again (using a custom_avb_key). This is currently possible with Google's Pixel devices, but most Android devices don't even offer this...
• alluro2 1y ago
  This phase from the last couple of years just had to come - and while it's painful to be exposed to it - it seems highly illogical for us to complain and cry about it. - "Free" search - yay, let's all use it for everything and even make a verb out of it - Email - such nice guys, Google - free email forever, what could go wrong if I have my 95% of all my info there - Maps - yeah, let's all depend on these free Google maps with our lives - Chrome - ofc, heck yes, let's all use their browser, it's the best and free - no need for anything else - Google account login for EVERYTHING - so convenient! Google Authenticator app, Google Wallet - yes, more! - Free mobile operating system - nice, take that, Apple! Google has taken over a large portion of our lives, step by step - good enough services, on global scale, for free, until they became essential. They are not evil, like they were never good - they are a company, and in the current socio-economic structure, that means having a duty to use their position to enrich their shareholders - and absolutely have no interest in people's wellbeing or morality or opinions or reputation - unless it temporarily serves to do so more / better. I'm in no way trying to defend them. Just, with all the futility of it, pointing out how hyper-capitalism we've built/allowed to grow, has reached the stage where it's practically impossible for the "free market" to react / provide solutions that people want. Now the big players decide what people get. In this case, you can no longer have a high quality phone of a good manufacturer and install on it what you want. Small manufacturer catering to that demographic won't get government certification, you can't have your e.g. Samsung and install a ROM anymore, and you can't install your app freely on Android unless Google lets you. That's all just in a tiny sliver of space. Our Tetris board barely has any room left for choice and actions.
• bitwize 1y ago
  Sorry, folks, the good times are over. The future of computing is a signed, attested chain of trust from boot firmware through application code, on all platforms people are likely to use -- and remote attestation with user identification if you wish to connect to the network. End users love it because it prevents or reduces all sorts of malicious activity, from bank fraud down to online game cheating, with little to no effort on their part; platform vendors love it because it provides a moat; service providers (banks and such) love it for the assurance that their clients are uncompromised; and governments love it because it lets them surveil users and developers. The only ones who hate it are devs. And who really cares about a bunch of nerds? Remember, general purpose computing really boils down in security terms to "arbitrary code execution" -- a bad thing in the infosec field.
• lern_too_spel 1y ago
  The day this happens is the day I stop using "certified Android devices."
• dpacmittal 1y ago
  Time to move to a dumb phone, I guess. Android is slowly becoming worst of both worlds, none of the privacy features of iOS yet walls of the garden keeps getting higher.
• rkapsoro 1y ago
  This seems equivalent to Notarization on macOS. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing-macos-software-before-distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizin...
• ricudis 1y ago
  Before quickly running to dismiss this move, please at least do your research with regards to the situation in the countries mentioned in the article, especially Singapore and Thailand. Side-loaded malware has been an epidemic in SE Asia, and there are MILLIONS of dollars stolen (mostly from pensioners!) via side-loaded malware disguised as gambling apps - the local population is particularly suspectible to gambling, especially the older generations that are not so tech-savvy. It's good they decided to do something about it.
  • itake 1y ago
    Private app companies should be and are doing more to protect against malware. Banking apps in Malaysia are required to include malware detection software [0]. Companies should have better fraud and trust teams to identity and block fraud activities. The rest of the world shouldn't suffer because a handful of banking companies refuse to offer basic fraud protections for their users. [0] - https://www.abm.org.my/press-releases/banks-to-enable-malware-shielding-technology-improve-safeguards-against-malware-scams/ https://www.abm.org.my/press-releases/banks-to-enable-malwar...
  • computerdork 1y ago
    Brave of you to say this. Yeah, in my humble opinion, agree with you, android and ios devices target the mainstream users more than say a PC or Mac's, and should be more locked down. We can keep PC's and Mac's relative open (although they are getting more secure too, which might be good?), but for devices that truly target the masses, secure them as much as possible (why would typical users like my parent's need to install a remote access server on their phone?). Yeah, my Dad got hacked only a month ago, through a tech-support phishing phone-call. He uses a windows PC which makes him vulnerable, and the scammers did install tons of evil crap. He really should be using an android or ios tablet, to reduce his chances of being hacked like this. I know these devices are still vulnerable, but they do seem more secure based on how much more locked down they are.
  • Springtime 1y ago
    The requirement per Google's post is rolling out globally though in a couple years. There was nothing stopping per country governments that this may disproportionately affect from requiring this for Play Protect/GMS certified Android devices sold in their region but enforcing it worldwide for such non-AOSP devices I don't find surprising to be controversial.
• MathMonkeyMan 1y ago
  "Google to prevent users from installing programs on Android phones." This might do more good than harm, since I'm willing to believe that scams involving APKs are prevalent, but come on. I need your permission to install software on my phone? Are you sure it isn't just that you want more control over everyone's phones?
• derbOac 1y ago
  So where do we complain? (Aside from shaming Google on social media or writing to politicians.) If I look through Google's contact links, it's all oriented around getting help with a problem rather than letting them know I'm going to move to something else if they go through with this. (And yes, even if Apple has the same types of restrictions on app store, if a more open alternative OS didn't work out for me, I'd move to them to punish the one dropping freedom of use.)
  • nosioptar 1y ago
    Could complaint to the FTC or FCC.
• camdroidw 1y ago
  This is actually good if it hopefully paves way for breaking them up
• thunderbong 1y ago
  We really need a third alternative when it comes to mobile
• rs186 1y ago
  Imagine you develop a VPN app that specifically helps people evade government censorship. Everyone can figure out what's going to happen next.
• fithisux 1y ago
  This aligns with their AOSP recent changes.
• ea550ff70a 1y ago
  terrible news. i dont like it a bit. wth are they doing? i know all they care about is money but this is bad for everyone.
• thrown-0825 1y ago
  Maybe its time to stop using an OS developed by an advertising company.
• grahar64 1y ago
  My son uses an android phone as a medical device with apps that are either downloaded or compiled. Hopefully this won't touch lineageOs
• johnnienaked 1y ago
  What the hell is a verified developer lol
• jjani 1y ago
  Thank you, all HNers at Google, for continuing to work there. And yes, before you ask, I have personally quit a job that paid 3x what I was able to get elsewhere over ethics. And no, I'm not rich, probably bottom 5% in terms of assets among my colleagues, coming from a lower-class background.
  • silverliver 1y ago
    Yep, at this point aiding google is simply inexcusable. Taking into account the scale of the harm to humanity, what is being done by these google developers is truly evil. These developers cannot feign ignorance. Not with this level of harm. I wonder if the individuals implementing this will ever be held accountable for their crimes. I would certainly be in support for it.
    • jjani 1y ago
      It's always so rich to see comment sections on here when there's an article about a place like Palantir when the likes of Google and Meta play an even so much bigger role in enabling mass surveillance. I'm sure they'll tell themselves "well but I for one am working on something good like Waymo, or as innocuous as Google Sheets! And we don't kill people!! (please don't look at who provides the underlying services that defense runs on)". While the exact same is said by most employees at those companies they criticize so hard. Sure, no one's perfect, and you have to draw a line somewhere. But if you're at somewhere like Google or Meta, or have been in the last decade and left for other reasons than these, you really don't have a leg to stand on in these discussions.
      • 3form 1y ago
        The way that it works is that most of the people there are not concerned with the topic, and if they are, they will be willingly gaslit into the official excuse which is provided to us, too. It being that it will greatly improve the security for the common folk. The mechanisms are just the same as political discourse on other topics currently in UK, just much worse, because people's livelihoods actually depend on that.
  • 1y ago
• dmead 1y ago
  This eliminates the appeal of andoid over ios.
• notrealyme123 1y ago
  It's only a question of time till DMCA takedowns will be abused to being down every app which remotely competes with any business model. This invalidates so many reasons to still use android.
• poly2it 1y ago
  If your businesses idea doesn't work without you being evil, you deserve to go bankrupt. I perceive a tendency to assume it is necessary for a company like Google to maintain full control over our ecosystem to further our progress and maintain order. However, we should know by now that this isn't the case. You don't have to be evil to be useful. See GNOME, GrapheneOS, Steam, KDE, Wikipedia, Linux or Mozilla (previously). Tricking us of their inevitability is their greatest success.
  • mock-possum 1y ago
    > If your businesses idea doesn't work without you being evil, you deserve to go bankrupt Oh but they hate to hear this.
  • curiousgal 1y ago
    It's so funny to me that they think that forcing power users to cave in is going to bring in more money. Heck I will stop paying for Google Workspace and move my shit to Apple rather than pay for YouTube premium or watch YouTube ads.
    • Llamamoe 1y ago
      I don't think it's about money anymore. These last few years we've seen governments, corporations, lobby groups, and the rich really starting to clamp down on authoritarian measures primarily centering around eliminating digital freedoms. I think we might be past the stage of capitalism where the evil was merely incidental to the pursuit of profit.
  • mrheosuper 1y ago
    Steam is interesting example. Many evil things in gaming: Battle Pass, LootBox, came from them, or being made popular by them.
  • OkayPhysicist 1y ago
    Their business idea works great while not being evil in any new ways beyond what they were already tolerating with advertising. No, this particular brand of evil is so much more offensive, because they're just in it for love of the game.
• JohnTHaller 1y ago
  I'd wager there will be a buried setting to manually enable specific apps along with a warning. Like how macOS does it now by blocking unsigned apps.
• WhereIsTheTruth 1y ago
  Our only choice are 2 american companies, Google or Apple Why did we let that happen?
  • urlwolf 1y ago
    It's not the case anymore. HN is not reflecting it, but HarmonyOS is very much a 3rd option. Huawei got banned from using Android, and they decided to start a mobile OS from scratch. They are binary compatible with Android, so most apps work straight away. Unless they use play services. They wrote it from scratch in C++ so they could avoid some of the legacy cruft in Android. And they are getting adoption. It's a major OS in China and in many developing countries (phones with it are cheaper, and it flies on underpowered hardware!) Before we judge the magnitude of this event (HarmonyOS existing and being successful), let's remember that last time anyone tried to disrupt the duopoly Android-iOS, it was MS, the largest company on earth by market capitalization at the time. And they failed. Well, it very much looks like Huawei is not failing. We in the west don't see it as much, because propaganda is working well. But last tech conference I attended (GITEX Berlin, if you are wondering), had their app available to download with... 3 logos, not 2. Harmony OS was there. This is a major win for consumers all over the world. And this being HN, I hope the inevitable comment "but China!" is slightly more informed that the average internet user.
    • foxrider 1y ago
      If this comes to fruition, my next phone is going to be Harmony OS. I hate the CCP with passion, but if there's sideloading on Harmony - that's where I'm going to go.
• tgma 1y ago
  The funny thing is Stallman started his fight like half a century ago and on regular days Hacker News shits on him eating something off of his foot and not being polished and diplomatic, and loves practical aspects of Corporate Open Source and gratis goodies and doesn't particularly care about Free Software. On this day suddenly folks come out of the woodwork advocating for half baked measures to achieve what Stallman portrayed but they still hardly recognize this was EXACTLY his concern when he started the Free Software movement.
  • BrenBarn 1y ago
    It's possible to believe both that Stallman is over the top and that stuff like this Google action is bad, and even to be right on both. It's even easier to believe that Stallman has had some good ideas but is still a deeply flawed human being, and has also incidentally not been the most effective advocate for his own ideals.
    • tgma 1y ago
      It is possible, sure, but I have a feeling it goes unrecognized how prophetic and precise his concerns were, and that this is very similar to his original issue with the closed-source printer software he was not allowed to fix, and he does not get credit for his predictions, as people simply pass by, and not connect it to the Free Software issue, when issues like this happen; meanwhile he takes all the downsides of being brash and anti-corporate, which is taken advantage of by the Corporate Open Source crowd.
      • BrenBarn 1y ago
        But Android is open source. In a way the situation here shows the limits of what is possible just by imposing license requirements that require distribution of source code. The problem is the concentration of power in the provision of services. Even licenses like the AGPL don't really solve the problem here, which is that there is a coalition of businesses including, say, Google and banks, that via their provision of essential services hold worrisome sway over the practical ability of many individuals to live their lives. Stallman's statements about how the person controlling nonfree software "is your master" are important, but they don't go far enough. The problem is not just the controlling of abstract intellectual property like intellectual property rights to particular software. The problem includes the actual control of how services are provided. When the provision of important services --- be they auth, email, banking, groceries, whatever --- is concentrated in a few hands, those hands become masters of many, regardless of the software licenses involved.
• palmfacehn 1y ago
  The attempts to roll out digital ID are similar to the perennial efforts to backdoor encryption. When one push fails, the proponents regroup and formulate a new approach. The recent successes with "age verification" have encouraged digital ID proponents. Expect further encroachments, scaremongering and trial balloons. Natural incentives exist for tech majors to capture this space.
• RainyDayTmrw 1y ago
  There's an Android app called GPSLogger.[1] It does exactly what it says on the tin. Runners use it to track their own progress. Photographers use it to geotag their own photos. The thing is, GPS access as a permission is a bit scary. You could imagine some dubious uses for it. Moreover, you could imagine some such dubious uses creating a public relations nightmare for Google. So, Google just forces them out of the Play Store. (Technically, it's a routine renewal, but the GPS permission causes them extra scrutiny, to the point where the author burned out and gave up.[2]) Do we expect that this author should, or for that matter will, give their identity to Google after this? Or is GPSLogger just dead after this change lands? [1]: https://gpslogger.app/ https://gpslogger.app/ [2]: https://github.com/mendhak/gpslogger/issues/849 https://github.com/mendhak/gpslogger/issues/849
• mettamage 1y ago
  So, FairPhone with a new OS then?
• joelthelion 1y ago
  I think this might backfire in that it might be enough to prompt technical people to seriously start looking for alternatives. I personally will be extremely unhappy if I no longer can run dns66, newspipe or Firefox with ad blocking on my phone. I think I might also start spending less time on my phone, which would be a good thing for me and a terrible thing for Google (in aggregate of course).
  • curiousgal 1y ago
    Exactly! And I'll even stop paying for their other products as well.
    • OkayPhysicist 1y ago
      The problem is that Google has exactly zero products that it gives a rats ass if you pay for. Google is, was, and always will be an advertising company. Users aren't the customer for Google, they're the product, and frankly the knuckle-draggers that mindlessly consume everything Google makes without any care to a not-so-slow slide into tyranny are far more valuable advertising targets than you are. Online advertising is a whale hunting game. There is a subset of society who genuinely are so suggestible that you can convince them they need a new truck with an online ad. They are largely a disjoint set from people with strong opinions about anything, never mind the subset of those who care deeply about the freedom to modify their devices to suit our interests rather than those of the megacorps.
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
• baalimago 1y ago
  What about webapps?
  • alex_suzuki 1y ago
    That's what I'm wondering about too. Could they enforce verification by requiring you to put a signed "manifest" in your web app's root? Here's hoping this will be a shot in the arm for PWAs.
• zwnow 1y ago
  So for our non public company apps I will now have to verify? What.
• abdellah123 1y ago
  This is a dangerous thing to do! This severely limits the freedom of the internet. At this point, we'd need a new "OS" like dhh did with Omarchy!
• picafrost 1y ago
  The further into this corporatized "vision" of technology we go, the more I relate the elves in LoTR who basically said "our time is over" and then just leave Middle Earth. There is no turning back. Generations of developers will grow up thinking every form of communication and technology by virtue of existing needs a corporate groundskeeper. Government identification will be required for most things. I don't really blame the companies, though. Unfortunately, it actually is the best means to keep a society of the masses functioning more safely online. What makes it all the more sour is that the very idea that things could be different is eroding away, too.
  • mikewarot 1y ago
    >Unfortunately, it actually is the best means to keep a society of the masses functioning more safely online Imagine if people felt that way about electrical power distribution? Every single thing you ever plugged in required a license to be validated at the time you tried to use an outlet? For me, it's obvious that better ways of doing things exist, but I'm weird, and possibly a crank. The solution, in my opinion, is to do the same thing we do with power in the home... limit the damage that can be done by anything plugged in, only giving away a limited capability for power delivery in a given outlet. The analogous way to do this in an operating system is to discard the idea of providing all of the computing resources available to every program you run, and limit it in some way. The "permissions flags" we've all come to dread, first with UAC in Microsoft Windows, and now on our phones, obviously suck, and won't work. The way to do it on a desktop, is to allow the user to choose exactly which resources a program may use, at runtime, by dialog boxes similar to the ones they already use, but with the additional behavior that the operating system enforces their choices, instead of just praying a program operates as intended. On a phone, I don't have as strong an intuition, but I'm sure it can be worked out, both in a friendly, and secure way that doesn't require full time checking with consent from our betters in the corporate overlord hierarchy. We can have secure and user friendly compute, both in our desktops, and in all our devices.
    • iggldiggl 1y ago
      > The way to do it on a desktop, is to allow the user to choose exactly which resources a program may use, at runtime, by dialog boxes similar to the ones they already use, but with the additional behavior that the operating system enforces their choices, instead of just praying a program operates as intended. > We can have secure and user friendly compute, both in our desktops, and in all our devices. I'm doubtful about that, e.g. basically all existing file system sandboxing implementations that I'm aware of tend to break workflows that are more complex than "open exactly the one single file the user selected". (Apple's implementation tries a bit harder, but you still run into limitations pretty quickly.) E.g. when I open an image in my favourite image viewer, I don't just want to view the one picture I've opened, often enough I also want to browse through other pictures within the same directory without having to explicitly open all those other images through some OS-secured gateway. And even that isn't enough, because my favourite image viewer also has the nifty feature of being able to quickly switch into a different directory (plus it has its own built-in thumbnail directory browser), so ultimately the only way to use its full functionality is through full file system access. Or videos – subtitles are often enough stored in separate files, so a video player will want to look for those files, too, when it starts playing a video. Split-up archive files work along the same lines, too. And never mind things like both HTML or DWG files, both of which can reference arbitrary other files up and down the directory hierarchy which need to be loaded at the same time, too… Now the OS can't be expected to know about the peculiarities of each and every file type, plus you can't make permissions dialogues arbitrarily complex, either, which leads you back to the dilemma of ultimately either breaking more complex workflows, or else having to provide an escape hatch that then promptly runs the risk of getting abused by malicious actors, too.
• mastermage 1y ago
  Everytime i read a news like this i loose more hope for our world to not end up a Cyberpunk Dystopia. Like what am i supposed to do. I am just one man. One vote, one guy who isnt even to good at coding.
  • frm88 1y ago
    Mastermage, cast Meteor Swarm!
    • mastermage 1y ago
      That comment just killed me. I am trying to eat Ice Cream here man. But thanks I needed that laughter. Bold words for someone in fireball range.
• mithron 1y ago
  So what's the solution? What's the reaction of semiofficial Android forks? Should we switch to Huawei now? Should we then have two phones? One with Android fork and one with some other "official" OS?
  • mithron 1y ago
    Ok, it seems having GrapheneOS on phone would suffice [1]. 1. https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/25235-google-wants-to-verify-all-app-developers-identities/3 https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/25235-google-wants-to-verif...
  • gitaarik 1y ago
    I would presume that open source android distributions can get around this. Like LineageOS and GrapheneOS. Hopefully this change will give them more popularity. But I assume Google is also trying to lock down hardware so you can't install anything else than their propietary Android.
• bhawks 1y ago
  Somehow I can run a webserver and anyone can browse it but if I make an app I need a DUNS number? What year is it? Couldn't the CA system, for all its problems, suffice?
• anonzzzies 1y ago
  I really need the more open Linux tablet and phone makers to hurry up.
  • Hackbraten 1y ago
    In fact, they need you to survive. You can buy a Linux phone today and make sure the vendors get their food on the table. Software is getting better. If you choose a phone with mainline kernel support (e.g. one that can run Mobian or PureOS), you can literally watch your OS improve month after month. Alternatively, you can support the user-space ecosystem directly and fund the developers who make it happen. Donate to Sebastian Krzyszkowiak [0] and Guido Günther [1] if you can! [0]: https://liberapay.com/dos https://liberapay.com/dos [1]: https://honk.sigxcpu.org/piki/donations https://honk.sigxcpu.org/piki/donations
    • anonzzzies 1y ago
      I have everything... And donate. But its a drop in the bucket.
• zx8080 1y ago
  Is that after the top execs join the US Army? [0] 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44330155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44330155
• bboygravity 1y ago
  And once again our only hope is Elon Musk bringing out a competing smartphone ecosystem that is actually open. sidenote: xAI just opensource Grok 2.5 and will opensource Grok 3 in 6 months.
  • angusturner 1y ago
    You mean the guy that bans people from twitter for disagreeing with him? And has made a chatbot that spouts right-wing conspiracies in the name of being "anti-woke"?
  • hooverd 1y ago
    Can't wait for the Volksphone X.
• throwaway290 1y ago
  Another instalment of HN thread where people try their best to pretend that "security" does not come with "enforced, ideally at hardware level, inability to run random code" for 99% of phone users. Here a tip: you won't solve the problem of security by just whining about corporate interests (which is a real concern) and NOT proposing a better solution that works for an average tech illiterate, very socially engineerable person trained to ignore every warning screen. And no root switch is not that solution because it will be flipped on day 1.
  • hooverd 1y ago
    I say let people shoot themselves in the foot if they want. That's the cost of a free society.
    • throwaway290 1y ago
      You expect random people like your baker next door to be security experts who can beat top notch hackers. It just doesn't work like that. Even you may not be as good as you think is required to protect yourself in the wild internets Also many of them will be your family (if you have it). Maybe even those from whom you would have inherited something if only they were not hacked
  • const_cast 1y ago
    Nothing about this prevents random code running. You still need an app with far too many permissions to pay for parking. All this does and funnel that through the play store. Guess what - play store is infested with malware. In fact, most malware comes from the play store. This fixes nothing.
    • throwaway290 1y ago
      There's so much less malware in the walled gardens compared to wild internet, it's crazy There is still some
      • 1y ago
• mrtransient 1y ago
  Great news which hopefully will shape the buyer away from monopolies.
• rickdeckard 1y ago
  Sep.2026: "The requirement goes into effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand. At this point, any app installed on a certified device in these regions must be registered by a verified developer." Any hint why those countries first? Is it a local law there driving this whole move? Is a critical mass of malware originating from there?
  • anticensor 1y ago
    Low financial activity, high population; except for Singapore, which is high financial activity, low population.
• OhioMan2943 1y ago
  Totally deserved with how pathetically complacent and uncurious our society has become. We had it coming.
• guardian5x 1y ago
  I'm not a fan of restricting sideloading. But i do hope they get better at not offering malware in the official PlayStore
• athrowaway3z 1y ago
  "To combat malware and financial scams" What a horrible, terrible, depressing bag of lies that the anti-humanists keep getting away with saying with a straight face.
• bullen 1y ago
  The solution is easy, stop developing for (selling on) closed platforms: You now have options for cheap (less than $200) portable low energy devices: 1. PineTab-V, a linux on Risc-V tablet. (Got debian a few months back, still waiting for proper GPU support, usable but slow now) 2. uConsole, a linux cyberdeck with optional 4G. (Also has debian for 2711, 2712 and 3588 Compute Modules) I'm not porting my games to Android, iOS, Switch or PlayStation. Only Windows/X86 and Linux/ARM+Risc-V. No Linux/X86 to not encourage power waste after Windows gets too expensive to run on the client side. I'm selling on itch instead of steam. You only need Android for banking, and Nokia G22 (repairable) is/was also sub $200. I am now creating a new Google account for each phone, that way you are not the product any more. But can still operate in society.
  • charlie-83 1y ago
    I don't understand the part about Linux x86
    • bullen 1y ago
      X86 uses more electricity than ARM/Risc-V. So I do not want people to only move to linux (on their X86) but also move to ARM/Risc-V. Directly from Windows on X86 to Linux on ARM/Risc-V in one go. Two flies with one hit. That said all X86 should become linux servers = this is only valid for the client.
      • charlie-83 1y ago
        Surely the e-waste from discarding an x86 Windows computer you could have put Linux on out-weighs the power benefit of Arm/RISC-V. Also seems like you would discourage people who cannot afford new hardware from moving from a closed system to an open one; most PCs and laptops are still x86 except for the newest models.
        • bullen 1y ago
          No, because it uses 10x the energy. Electricity is not an energy source. As I said the X86 would use linux but as a server, not a client. A server has to handle thousands of clients and then it's ok to have the extra power. I don't understand why you think the last sentence, it makes no sense: I am encouraging people to get low price, low power, open hardware and software for everyday use before the KWh goes to $1 which is HAS to do, hopefully not too soon.
• throwaway984393 1y ago
  [dead]
• dheera 1y ago
  I don't get it. Does this stop me from sideloading apps?
• qwertox 1y ago
  Pieces of shit. I have several own-built apps which I use for different purposes only on my own devices. Why the fuck should I become a verified developer just to use/install/update them? I'm already pissed off enough by the fact that I must agree to let them upload and scan my app just to install/update it.
• offbytwo 1y ago
  Nobody will do anything about it and things will continue to get worse.
• petermfam 1y ago
  aside from the obvious power grab, the official announcement mentions that there were discussions about this move somewhere and they claim to receive positive feedback, can anyone point me to these discussions? I can't seem to find them anywhere
• cookiengineer 1y ago
  I hate to break the news to Google, but this will likely be ruled illegal. The relevant German news of the court ruling that makes requiring a Google Account to use Google Services illegal: https://www.zdfheute.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/gmx-google-playstore-mailadresse-urteil-100.html https://www.zdfheute.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/gmx-google-pl... Rechtsprechung (court decision of LG Mainz, 22.08.2025, 12 HK O 32/24), text isn't published yet as of today: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=LG%20Mainz&Datum=22.08.2025&Aktenzeichen=12%20HKO%2032%2F24 https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht... If you search for the Aktenzeichen ("12 HK O 32/34") you'll find other news sources that confirm this.
• tedk-42 1y ago
  Things done 'for the sake of security' often conflict with a vast majority of good actors that benefit from the so called 'threat'. In general this is a backwards step for the ecosystem.
• Ms-J 1y ago
  This will also open the door for targeting you specifically with spyware if software can only be installed from the Play store. If you are logged in with a Google account that the government doesn't approve of or not signed into an account at all, you may receive a modified app that spies on you.
• zoobab 1y ago
  Next is your ID card to contribute to FLOSS projects, not like they thought about it to "secure the supply chain".
• zelphirkalt 1y ago
  Hopefully we get another EU action here soon, to put them back in their place.
• vrthink 1y ago
  [dead]
• sensanaty 1y ago
  I'm curious how this is gonna fly considering the DMA in the EU.
  • vintermann 1y ago
    My guess is that they've taken the correct lesson from all the EU antitrust fines, and it's not that they should be less anticompetitive. It's that they should be more politically compliant, for things like censorship, surveillance and messaging control. For which this is a useful step.
• sunshine-o 1y ago
  We have 2 ecosystems for mobile and the worst case scenario is starting to be clear for Android. I love GrapheneOS but they can only thrive if Google tolerate them. So in its current form, this is not a medium or long term solution (anymore). We really cannot afford to think in terms of "Android OS" or open source OS anymore the problem is getting much bigger. My guess is soon in many "free" countries, ISP will mandate connecting with a "Certified" device (someone was saying that in Brazil only cell phones certified by the teleco government agency can be imported already). And on mobile it is easy to implement since you need a (e)SIM. The Internet is still hard to control at the protocol level, but the gates are easy to mostly control (your ISP). In terms of mobile computing I mostly care about being able to access my home network from the places I am 80% of the time (and I can always bridge to the Internet from there). So the real battle is really at the mesh and multi-hop mobile ad hoc networks. This is the aspect we neglected for 25 years. Regarding mobile, the battle for Android is lost, time to look into things like B.A.T.M.A.N [0] so we be able to keep another open source mobile platform useful. For anything "money" related, your bank (which is inevitably regulated) will have to mandate a certified device too. It will work on (some) Linux too. Ever wondered why for example the Fedora project [1] is proudly part of things like The Digital Public Goods Alliance [2] who works with many govs and if you really look into it they are all about digital ids and "restoring trust"? - [0] https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/open-mesh/wiki https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/open-mesh/wiki - [1] https://fedoraproject.org/ https://fedoraproject.org/ - [2] https://www.digitalpublicgoods.net/ https://www.digitalpublicgoods.net/
  • bradley13 1y ago
    Absolutely. Governments everywhere are now pushing for online identification to access online resources. This is not a coincidence. Google is - imho obviously - in contact with governments. You will need to reveal your verified, online identity in order to create a app. Even if you are just a hobbyist putting the app on your own phone. 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a handbook.
    • skeezyboy 1y ago
      >Google is - imho obviously - in contact with governments. anonymous data isnt worth anything near as much as personalised data.
• lentil_soup 1y ago
  I always wonder, who are the developers doing this? don't they feel bad about going through with these changes or do they fool themselves thinking it's the right thing? is it greed? many other fields have an explicit or implicit ethics code which we seem to lack. I'm thinking about other fields like medicine, engineering, etc. Probably since the entry level to development is low and anyone can do it, it means there's no way to enforce/teach it? The usual answer that their livelyhoods depend on it is simplistic, these are the best paid developers in the US, pretty sure they have some sway power. There are doctors in way poorer countries with higher ethics standards.
  • Perz1val 1y ago
    I think they believe it is a good change, becuase they're tasked with fixing the fact users can install malware. They've been telling themselves their propaganda for months/years before the changes hit production
    • lentil_soup 1y ago
      Yeah, I guess so. That must lead to a lot of cognitive dissonance as I am sure these are not "evil" people, they just find a way to rationalise it away.
  • schoen 1y ago
    They think they're fighting malware, because that is their main motivation. They're just not also worrying about other effects like making it easy for governments to ban software, or making it hard for people to write software under a pseudonym. Paternalistic mechanisms are relatively popular in security engineering right now because users are so often unsophisticated and time-constrained, while attackers are so often sophisticated and well-resourced. Paternalism almost always responds to real risks and threats, so it doesn't feel malicious because it's not rooted in malice. I'm glad that people are so worried about this change, because I find it really alarming. But it's not like restrictions on people's choices have been that unusual as a response to dangers in modern history. In fact, professions like public health, occupational safety, and tort law often seem to presume that the general public probably shouldn't be allowed to make certain kinds of dangerous choices. They might be ethically wrong about that, but they clearly don't see themselves as bad guys for thinking so.
• ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
  Smartphones are over for me.
• HackerThemAll 1y ago
  Everybody DEMANDS Google "do something" about malware, scam and fake apps. So it does. For an average Joe and Jane, who gets their money stolen, that's a good move. They don't care about technology, they just want their bank, instagram, cat pictures and video calls to work and not get scammed. They are often lured into installing scamware through exactly sideloading APK, completely unaware of the risks. In the article there's this comment: > I'm struggling to see the benefit of this new policy. While it's presented as a security measure, the requirement to fill out these forms seems like a trivial barrier for actual malware creators, who will easily abuse the system. Every scammer will have a different code signing certificate which you can then block if they spread malware. Right now it's a huge mass of scammers and malware authors indistinguishable from each other. And Google could possibly block them all which would also block legitimate applications (now that would spark outrage). Thanks to the new policy it'll be easy to add a single cert to the blocklist. If you want absolute freedom on your device, just install a different Android - for example Graphene, Lineage, /e/OS, or Calix. They are all Android too. It's so fashionable these days to go after Google. Thanks Google.
  • gregoriol 1y ago
    No, the average Janes and Joes don't enable side-loading: it's a toggle, not enabled by default, it's in an advanced setting pane and it's good as it is. Google has been controlling what is installed through their Store and that is enough for 100% of average users. They have been doing it badly though, leaving many scams through, same for Apple. They should focus on this, not the advanced users.
    • Gigachad 1y ago
      They do, particularly in developing countries because it allows installing cracked versions of paid software or ad removed versions. They can just follow a YouTube tutorial showing how to get around all the barriers Android added.
      • gregoriol 1y ago
        It's hard to find reasons to protect someone trying to install a shady app. Using that one reason to kill the possibility to install third-party apps for everyone is shady.
• phobeus 1y ago
  What does it mean to app developers like me? if I want to create an app, in however shape and form and want to run the apk from the adb files... I can't do that? What? Then how do I tinker and learn? My app, I would like it to run regardless!
• hiAndrewQuinn 1y ago
  How much is the verification going to cost? If it's something simple like $100, that's not a big deal. That's on the order of what I'm looking at for my code signing certificates. It would be a an eminently reasonable business expense.
• ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
  With Chat Control and similar measures on the way, we are one step closer to your hardware actively working against your interests with no way out.
• buyucu 1y ago
  Malware is just an excuse to kill of competition. This is textbook anti-competitive behaviour.
• ericflo 1y ago
  We have to find a way to punish Google if they move forward with this. We need the Gemini folks to be worried that this distraction will jeopardize their competitiveness in AI.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• g0db1t 1y ago
  [dead]
• prmoustache 1y ago
  While my confidence is usually pretty low with random repos, I am fairly sure there are more malware on the playstore than there are as .apk on github.
• AllegedAlec 1y ago
  Extremely retarded. "Think of the children" all over again in the guise of "Think of the misinformation" when this is all just some kind of easy way to get rid of apps like newpipe.
• AtNightWeCode 1y ago
  I think it would be ok if it was not for the fact that Google will most likely abuse it for other purposes like locking out indie developers even more.
• thund 1y ago
  This is a result of the current tech being filled with dark design patterns. Tech is designed to be addictive, indispensable, indisputable, mandatory. And at the same time complex, hard, difficult, risky. We are so used to tech as it is that it is simple to force these bad decisions for the greater good. Because everyone is sure there is no alternative. There’s no other way to design tech, it will always be so complex and powerful that gov and corps can onesidedly decide what is best for the rest of the world. This might be an area where local AI excels, when ready. No apps. No sharing of personal data. One AI capable of doing what most software does, on the fly, without relying on others to decide what is ok. Remains to be solved who can create and distribute this local AI and whether hardware will be allowed to run “untrusted” AI…
• angusturner 1y ago
  Fuck google for this. Awful decision. Guaranteed to be abused when Google or government despots decide that certain apps (or developers) aren't aligned with their interests. Feeling very frustrated with the way the internet is going lately. This plus OSA + chat control. And compounded by the imperative for AI companies to keep hoovering up any and all data they can get their hands on, wiring it into "agentic" workflows and such.
• silverliver 1y ago
  This deplorable company has just condemned humanity's right to open computing. They sold themselves as open, smothered out all other open competitors, and then once they had complete dominance over the open phone market did this. Even if Google backtracks now. Governments will latch on to this idea just like they have with client side content scanning. This will never go away. Thank you google you despicable pieces of shit. What now? Where do we go from here?
  • Ciantic 1y ago
    I hope something like SailfishOS [1] could take off. They do have Android support, and maybe even by pressure, they could get banking apps working in the EU via that. [1]: https://sailfishos.org/ https://sailfishos.org/
• ygritte 1y ago
  So much for people preaching Android as an alternative to Apple's walled garden. Enshittification advances apace.
• aftergibson 1y ago
  It was only a matter of time. The run lasted a good while. I'm not going to submit to this crap. I'm sick of it. Nor I am going to IOS. It'll be a Linux phone for me or a dumbphone with tethering and a laptop.
• andrepd 1y ago
  > Since we implemented verification requirements on Google Play in 2023, we have seen firsthand how helpful developer identification is in stopping bad actors from exploiting anonymity to distribute malware, commit financial fraud, and steal sensitive data. This is truly some orwellian newspeak bull-shit. For those who don't know, Google Play verification ensures critical apps like banking apps DO NOT WORK in privacy-focused ungoogled ROMs like LineageOS, unless you install the usual google spyware at the OS level. Basically soft-requiring you to buy into the duopoly.
• mdp2021 1y ago
  The details are paramount, and they are missing here. Some of us code our .APK, then do an `adb install`. This already requires enabling a system flag ("developer mode -> allow etc."). It only makes sense that a similar flag would allow to install whatever we want (especially and in particular, our own software).
• cess11 1y ago
  Any developer working on this ought to be ostracised, divorced and shunned by their family.
• renegat0x0 1y ago
  I use linux on nearly all my PCs / servers. I do think about moving my phone to more open platform (fairphone, or rooting phone), but I don't like phones in principle, so I do not install stuff there. I do not do things on phone. I have my apps as web pages, so I access them from phone web browser. I do not care about phone apps that much. I use fdroid for calendar, gallery, and music though.
• anothernewdude 1y ago
  So I guess I'll need to make sure I get a device that isn't certified Android?
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• Pooge 1y ago
  To everyone working at Big Tech: you should be ashamed of helping those oligarchs make their plans reality by working for them. Thanks to you, privacy, free computing and democracy will disappear.
• riedel 1y ago
  It is telling that they have not yet released the process for hobbyists and students. While it is clearly just an evil move, in praxis for tech people this could mean just the extra hurdle of signing an APK with your own developer account: I could see a workflow on top of Fdroid (which also just could become a developer and use their keys for all FOSS apps). But I am guessing those evil geniuses will find a way to make it harder and harder. In the end it is not Google that can make the change but rather banks and streaming services that could accept alternative attestations from e.g. graphene, e/OS or eventually also lineage. Problem is the distribution of power, that won't change with out legislators pushing (see in app payment)
• dariosalvi78 1y ago
  as a general philosophy, anything that I can do on the Web I do it using a browser. The less apps I have the better. And to those, many here, who "but web apps are ugly, native feels better": you are contributing to all of this.
• ramon156 1y ago
  Time for normalizing obtanium
• itvision 1y ago
  There's a huge modding scene out there, people who modify APK's to strip them of bad features, make them leaner, etc. Looks like Google wants to kill it too.
• ptx 1y ago
  The page about developer verification (announcement link 2 in the root post) says that there will be a separate type of account for "student and hobbyist developers". Why? What prevents students and hobbyists from using the regular type of account?
  • bradley13 1y ago
    It is likely meant to be less onerous. The better question is: why do hobbyists and students need any kind of account? You want to write an app that will only ever be put onto your own phone? Why should Google care? This is not about safety. This is all about control.
• SonnyTark 1y ago
  Ha ha very funny from no-evil-google. The worst most misbehaving apps I've ever had the misfortune of using came from their app store. The best apps I use regularly are from F-Droid, github and ones I baked myself. You take that away and your Android is Nodroid. Well I guess my next is an apple, but I'm hoping open-source android distros will get more dev resources now. Will happily use a sub-optimal distro over google's. This of course has nothing to do with security, it's mainly the managements reaction to Youtube alternative apps actually growing in userbase (happy user of one here). And also to ban alternative app stores naturally. Let us all not forget that YT videos are internet users created not google created, and the only reason why Google thinks this will work for them is their belief there is no competition to YT.
• hollowturtle 1y ago
  On the side, I'm even more sad because I feel like the open web can't be the alternative answer to locked down systems. It was the promise and the dream of the many of us years ago, but I'm disillusioned by now. And not only because Chrome and Webkit(on mobile) are a monopoly, but the web keeps failing its users with bad ux and less capapabilities than native. Even the most well crafted web app feels slow and clunky. Unpopular opinion: who makes web standards failed us and browsers independently implementing non-standard anti-user feature(e.g. manifest v3). I really dream of a stripped down browser that just expose some os native apis for making accessible human interfaces, we had flash and we hated it imo we need flash again
• Dban1 1y ago
  SteamOS. It's up to you.
• koushikn 1y ago
  The device maker controlling an app store made no sense always. Its like saying the browser maker controls what websites you can visit. We have so many efforts at keeping the web open, shouldn't we apply that to all platforms?
• egorfine 1y ago
  Obviously Google considered and prepared for a huge negative feedback when they have made this decision, so I don't think we can change that. Having said that I can only see living with two devices going further: one locked down for banking & stuff and another one for freedom. Unfortunately, I can also envision a locked down internet available only on certified devices in ten years. Absurd? A mere idea of a locked-down Android device looked absurd... yesterday. Just yesterday.
• patrakov 1y ago
  I have a horror thought: "We cannot validate your identity as you are of the wrong nationality; therefore, you are not allowed to publish any Android apps."
• thisislife2 1y ago
  This is just an extension of the increasing censorship and government / BigTech control that we have been witnessing in the past few years, with Google seeking the ability to prevent installation of any apps that is on a blocklist controlled by the government. And, like with the iDevices, this will also kill many free independent and open source apps once developers are forced to pay for "developer verification". "Free" apps are an anathema to the App Store business model.
• Marlinski 1y ago
  I used to be an android developer and they disable my account because I took too long to reply to their mail. Since then I have been unable to recover it, they never reply to email and process your request to oblivion. Their bureaucracy is even worse than our french administration and that is saying something! At this point google is basically digital sovietism.
• blurbleblurble 1y ago
  what a betrayal. I'm done with android.
• jacquesm 1y ago
  Software developer used to be one of the most 'free' professions. But now you need a stamp of approval from some corporation to get through the day, even if you are nominally independent. And woe to you if they should ever revoke your license to feed yourself. Because 'verified developer' is just another way to say 'not a threat to Google or Google's corporate image'.
• fdgjgbdfhgb 1y ago
  This truly sucks, since in this day and age we need unmodified phones for banking apps (and I think for oncall my company requires Android/iOS as well). I guess this will be the final push for me to change to iOS, since I already have a bunch of Apple stuff otherwise, and I was holding out on the phone side for this exact feature.
• Bassiestroep 1y ago
  That was one of the last reasons I had an android phone for. Switch to Iphone now? Maybe the in crowd will like me now.
• pajko 1y ago
  The Play Store is full of certified verified malware. How is this going to help? This is all about control...
• nexawave-ai 1y ago
  I don’t have data to support this, but I believe the smartphone is the most widely used device globally on a daily basis. Wouldn’t it make sense to have an Open Hardware Phone and Mobile OS built on an open specification to rival Google’s Android? What’s stopping us from making this a reality? We have passionate FOSS developers and visionary leaders capable of championing this cause and building a strong community around it. I had high hopes for Marc Shuttleworth’s Ubuntu Phone. Unfortunately, after the Kickstarter campaign fell through, development stalled. I still believe consumers missed out on a remarkable piece of technology. That said, I see Ubuntu Touch[1] is still active, though I’m unclear on its current impact or progress. Meanwhile, Smart TVs and smartphones continue to be dominated by Google’s Android OS. 1. https://www.ubuntu-touch.io/ https://www.ubuntu-touch.io/
  • Ciantic 1y ago
    There is also https://sailfishos.org/ https://sailfishos.org/ and they've got hardware too. FOSS/Linux has had many attempts at phones, but they need one good leader to do it, which is very hard unless someone with name recognition gets everyone to work on one project.
• afroboy 1y ago
  For example Telegram they have two app versions one in playstore where google can dictate what channels are allowed and one on their website where google can't force them to take down channels, so now Google will need to approve Telegram second app to be installed on Android?
• 0dayz 1y ago
  I assume that this is Google's way of circumventing the DSA?
• phendrenad2 1y ago
  Here's my prediction: Sideloading will become slightly more popular. Google will not disable sideloading or make it significantly more difficult. Alternative APK stores will flourish. Banks and streaming sites will try to block people from connecting from devices with sideloading enabled, but they are slow and people will find workarounds faster. ISPs will not block devices with sideloading enabled. Governments will not ban sideloading.
• larodi 1y ago
  Now and then I remember this Hyperion book by Dan Simmons where everyone had a cross-like gadget glued to their chests, controlled by a TechnoCore - a civilization of AIs, which enabled people to cast themselves through space portals. As the story unfolds, this cross-like (very nice choice) gadget is revealed to essentially enslaving them. The story unfolds in 28th century, but it all seems have started in the 21st one.
  • nilsherzig 1y ago
    I'm certain that Google would turn their users into resurrected brain-dead meat computers if that would improve their quarterly profits
• anilakar 1y ago
  > Google wants to combat “convincing fake apps” and make it harder for repeat “malicious actors to quickly distribute another harmful app after we take the first one down When will they go against malicious ads in apps?
• quantum2022 1y ago
  There goes the dream of ai allowing normal people to develop cool stuff. Talk about 'big company' stifles the little man.
• renegat0x0 1y ago
  Few my ideas about how things will be going - platforms are going to be forced to collect more data about you - The amount of places without you showing IDs will decrease - There will be more "moderation". You will not be able to provide nsfw contents, then you will not be able to host controversial topics. I suspect games will be more "kid friendly". No more real doom, gta, or Mortal Kombat for you. I remember how they provided more clothes on women for mortal Kombat - The rules will always be vague, and used sporadically. Just like YouTube rules, where companies often abuse DMCA just to shut you off, or ban you, if you are not playing nice. Like Schlep. - Corporations will create pressures on validated users, or ban you for life, but often they will just use "fear" to police people by themselves. Just like people will use "unalive" words, because they know they can get into trouble for saying a different word - Google will be able to police extensions by banning people - It is all a boiling frog scenario, where it creeps one law after another until everything is moderated, controlled by corporations - The safety increases, but freedom decreases - Free software people will often be mixed in article texts with terrorists, bad actors, predators, pedophiles - It can happen because people do not understand these mechanisms, and they want "safer" world, in which nobody can get hurt, but it is also a place without you being free
  • Perz1val 1y ago
    I don't think it's coming for games. Kids don't play on PC or console, they play on phones. PC games are "sad dad stories" like "the last of us" now.
    • renegat0x0 1y ago
      It's already came for the games. Recently there were news about mastercard & visa prohibiting nsfw games from steam.
  • minebreaker 1y ago
    > The safety increases, but freedom decreases It's never safe when there's no freedom.
• teki_one 1y ago
  Maybe it is time for a new entry into the Smartphone OS market?
• palata 1y ago
  > This requirement applies to “certified Android devices” that have Play Protect and are preloaded with Google apps. I would be fine, if it was mandatory for Android manufacturers to allow installing alternative OSes. Normies could benefit from the added security on their certified Android device, and advanced users could install GrapheneOS.
• StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  Blame Apple for this garbage. They have paved the way by trying to circumvent the DMA. Hopefully the EU slaps everyone with massive fines for these obvious anticompetitive plays. Best case scenario would be an outride ban giving local companies space but I doubt this will happen given how spineless the current commission is. Clearly for American companies to be tightening the noose like that quoting the approval of authoritarian countries, it means they’re starting to feel the fire. It’s hard to not see the obvious link with them losing against Epic here behind the usual security smoke screen. Both Apple and Google should have been broken to pieces for their egregious anti competitive behaviour a long time ago anyway.
  • rnhmjoj 1y ago
    Do we know what was the European Commission response to Apple "complying" to the DMA by allowing sideloading with notarization and fees? As far as I can see, the latest developments are from April 2025 when the commision fined Apple 500M€ for non-compliance due to preventing developers to advertise their app being available on a third-party store.
    • StopDisinfo910 1y ago
      The distribution term imposed on developers are a separate investigation that the one leading to the 500M€ fine. Preliminary view as of April 2025 is that Apple conditions are in breach of the DMA [1]. Apple has some time to reply. Except fines to be coming soon. That’s why Trump is threatening the EU about IT firm compliance right now.
• exe34 1y ago
  I have been preparing myself psychologically for this for a long time. I will have to carry a shitty Google phone for anything that requires access to apps, and a proper Linux phone for my own use like browsing and reading/watching videos/listening to music.
• dabedee 1y ago
  The D-U-N-S requirement is the real killer here. It's a business identifier that costs money and requires a registered business entity. Even with the promised 'student/hobbyist' path, this fundamentally changes Android from a platform where anyone can distribute software to one where Google decides who's allowed to code. They're further normalizing the idea that installing software requires permission.
• hoppp 1y ago
  They are following apple Its good and bad at the same time imho.
  • yonatan8070 1y ago
    How is it good and bad? I'm only seeing the bad part at the moment?
    • hoppp 1y ago
      Malware app makers could be forced to KYC, that's good.
      • AlgebraFox 1y ago
        They really got into your head, huh?
• OJFord 1y ago
  You can just disable Play Protect though, can't you?
  • jamesnorden 1y ago
    For now, that might change.
• evilmathkid 1y ago
  This is why OS is so important for LLMs and the AI ecosystem in general. Its also why we should not trust large AI corporations that appoint themselves as stewards of "AI safety". If a company that once had the slogan "don't be evil" can do this, so can all the frontier labs
• egeres 1y ago
  Will it be possible to bypass this limitation for users with rooted devices? If that were the case then I guess that would add more weight to companies who provide firmware and OEM unlocking for android devices: https://github.com/melontini/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame https://github.com/melontini/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame
• gspr 1y ago
  These people. I don't have words. I'm getting ready to give up on smartphones altogether. I used to think that surely a sufficiently open phone would come along, and that you could then just run a sandboxed Android emulator on that for whenever you needed some proprietary apps where society has stupidly decided you need them. But that also seems to be getting progressively harder. So maybe I just give up on actually using a phone for much. Has anyone tried living with cheap Android or iPhone as a source of connectivity and making phone calls, perhaps with the odd app you just can't get through daily life without (see above), and then move everything where privacy and control actually matter the most to a small "pocket computer" that connects to the internet through a connection shared by the cheap phone? Are there any sufficiently compact and nice such devices? Surely they're easier to produce when you don't require a phone baseband and all the things that are needed for Google to certify it as an Android phone? Thoughts?
• mirrorsaurus 1y ago
  Google doesnt like competition when it comes to selling you out
• roody15 1y ago
  Google (and Apple) want to turn the idea of a phone and computer into that of a gaming console. You use the device according to how they design it, apps are rented, the whole ecosystem is around controlling the experience and maximizing revenue from sites and services. Microsoft seems to be moving in this direction as well (but cannot quite execute for a variety of reasons.. legacy support being one) Linux really is the only way to have an experience where the computer is your device to do what you want to do with it.
• arielcostas 1y ago
  Meaning to use your device you need to have a contractual relationship with a foreign (unless you are in the US) third party that decides what you can or cannot do with it. Plus using GrapheneOS is less of an option every day, since banks and other "regulated" sectors use Google Play Protect and similar DRMs to prevent you from connecting from whatever device you want. Client-side "trust" means the provider owning the device, not the user. Android shouldn't be considered Open Source anymore, since source code is published in batches and only part of the system is open, with more and more apps going behind the Google ecosystem itself. Maybe it's time for a third large phone OS, whether it comes from China getting fed up with the US and Google's shenanigans (Huawei has HarmonyOS but it's not open) or some "GNU/Linux" touch version that has a serious ecosystem. Especially when more and more apps and services are "mobile-first" or "mobile-only" like banking.
  • sorrythanks 1y ago
    Wouldn't a third large phone os have the same problems as GrapheneOS?
  • markus_zhang 1y ago
    Everything coming from China is going to be closed source as well, and it's going to be pretty hard for banks to onboard themselves on open source solutions. I think the ultimate solution is: two phones, one shitty one just for banking/trading/whatever, which only stays at home most of the time, and one Linux phone that we more or less own, for calls/texts/web browsing, which stays with us.
    • Aperocky 1y ago
      It only matters if you treat phones as a development environment. It's tempting to have full control over everything OSS style, but the reality is you can only tenably have that for very specific parts of life.
      • skeezyboy 1y ago
        i wanted my phone to be more than just a kiosk though. thank fuck desktop never ended up in this mess
• vtubermodels 1y ago
  I think there are some errors when trying, but it should be fixed soon.
• lo_fye 1y ago
  Feels like Google is either following Apple's playbook from iPhone OS 1, or they're working together so they can argue this is standard practice in the industry... or something. Either way, no more Android gloating that they can install any app from anywhere any time without centralized approval. Not great. I'm an Apple fan, BUT I like having a fully open backup plan.
• akagusu 1y ago
  There is a guy with beard that people love to hate that warned about this kind of thing. Of course people called him a paranoid and lunatic extremist, but in the end he was right and we are f*cked
• msephton 1y ago
  Some cross platform iOS/Android apps I use have been retired or discontinued because of this ruling. Devs don't want to open themselves up to legal, bullying, harassment, etc.
• preciz 1y ago
  Would be the best time for China to come out with a fully open source OS as competition.
• flntzr 1y ago
  This is disheartening. I feel as an Android user, you've always had to put up with a more incoherent overall experience compared to iOS but received some additional freedom in return. In recent years, Google has been steadily eroding their end of the bargain. I wonder where that will leave them in the long term. Short term, I think restricting side loading will reduce piracy and drive sales of their subscriptions. Long term though, I wonder what will set Android devices apart from iOS for the average user, apart from being offered at different price points. It feels they're playing themselves into a position where they're more directly competing with Apple, ultimately restricting themselves to lower price devices and lower margin sales. As far as walled gardens go, I personally prefer Apple's and I assume most people do.
• johnny77 1y ago
  This isn't a big deal to me because I hate smartphones and do everything on PC anyways. The real problem for me is Microsoft, I guess we're stuck with Linux now
• redbell 1y ago
  Oh, no! This is the least thing I expected to see as the #1 in Hacker News' front page! This is a plot twist I never thought it would happen. While the EU [1], Japan [2] , UK [3] and Australia [4] are in the process of forcing Apple to allow sideloading and alternative App Stores, Google, which was far from these obligations, had taken a totally unexpected road to limit/control how sideloading should work. ____________________ 1.https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/ https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/ 2.https://www.phonearena.com/news/the-world-is-changing-japan-to-force-apple-to-allow-sideloading-on-ios_id153843 https://www.phonearena.com/news/the-world-is-changing-japan-... 3.https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/uk-passes-bill-which-could-force-apple-to-allow-fortnite-and-an-epic-games-store-app-on-ios/ https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/uk-passes-bill-whic... 4.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/06/australians-may-soon-be-able-to-download-iphone-apps-from-outside-apple-app-store-under-government-proposal-ntwnfb https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/06/australia...
• Hilift 1y ago
  I'm surprised so many people would be impacted by this. Why bet your livelihood on a corporate sponsored, second class ecosystem?
• ulfw 1y ago
  Okay so that removes the last reason to use Android. This is just another 'it's only about money' move from Google. Only Google approved apps means monetised apps. Monetised means Google gets it's cut. Google gets richer. More in-app purchases, more ads, more money for Google Customers? Eh. What? Huh? Who cares
• hendo3000 1y ago
  I pin a webapp to my homescreen, open it and pay without any issues. Aren't webapps the way around this, and pretty common already?
• gokuldas011011 1y ago
  My device, i want to install whatever i want. If for safety, make it an opt-out feature, so the ones who know what they're doing can disable it. Mandatory locking down is not for safety but for corporate control.
• sergiotapia 1y ago
  This is the singular reason why I moved to Android in the first place. I want to install whatever APK I want without anyone having a say on my device.
• user3939382 1y ago
  GOOGLE SHMOOGLE IM WITH PEWDS We have to rebuild and replace this entire stack NOW! It’s out of control!
• ktosobcy 1y ago
  first they avoided publishing drivers (makers), then gutted unlocking bootloader, and now this... can we like... regulate the ** out of makers to force them to make bootloader unlocked & provide drivers (for linux) for their devices?
• hereme888 1y ago
  Wouldn't developers be the most powerful protesters? Stop making or maintaining Android apps. Make apps warn users about upcoming changes and why they'll lose access to the apps they love. Decrease Google's ecosystem appeal. Money is king.
• misterbishop 1y ago
  The ability to sideload on Android is the main reason I've never bought an iPhone. This is a terrible move from Google.
• Funes- 1y ago
  Guys, it's been over for a while now. And I mean decades... This is just one of the next steps in the path that's been laid out in front of us since the general population reached critical mass on the Internet and the ruling class (politicians, the media, corporations...) went all in on exploiting them for money and power. If we don't radically change the underpinnings of how the entire system works, we're in for much worse than this.
• pwillia7 1y ago
  That's it! I'm out! Had every pixel from the beginning but I think I'm going Iphone so at least people will quit making fun of me.
• Roark66 1y ago
  I think time quickly approaches when everyone will have one mobile phone for "banking/crypto" and the other for everything else. Samsung used to have a very cool feature on their phones (perhaps they still do, I switched away from the galaxy line). It was called Knox and was basically containers for your apps. Unfortunately it was limited to only one secure container. What I did was I had all my secure apps outside the container. And insecure inside. I had a fake address book that had only one phone number in "My Knox" and any app I installed there I could give all the file and address book permissions it wanted. As I knew it could only see what is inside. That is what we need, but better. I never tried Graphene, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was such a feature thre already. It's kind of obvious.
  • Teknomadix 1y ago
    Interesting. I've never really thought much about Samsung phones because I always felt that they were really full of bloatware and features that seemed to distract more than present usefulness. Knox sounds like a pretty awesome feature though. I use `nix-on-droid` on a Pixel 9 running stock Android 16. It provides me with a nix shell that gives me ZSH, Starship prompt, NeoVim, w3m, ssh, alpine, Claude-code, Circumflex (TUI HackerNews Client) and just about anything else I want from the Nix packages ecosystem. I even have NUR ( Nix User Repositories) set up. I daily drive NixOS for work and for Pleasure. It's the most advanced operating system I've ever encountered. I can't wax enough praise. The closest thing to a truly open source, fully functional and daily used mobile that I ever had was the Nokia N900. Man how I miss that thing. Maemo was Nokia's original Linux-based mobile OS, which ran on the N900/950. MeeGo was created when Nokia merged Maemo with Intel's Moblin project around 2010. It was supposed to be the future of Nokia smartphones, but Nokia abandoned it in 2011 when they switched to Windows Phone as their primary smartphone platform. Idiots. Mer was created as an open-source continuation of MeeGo after Nokia dropped it. Sailfish OS was then built on top of Mer by Jolla, a company founded by former Nokia employees who had worked on MeeGo. Jolla launched in 2013 with the goal of continuing the Linux mobile vision that Nokia had abandoned. They make phones and tablets. https://jolla.com/ https://jolla.com/
• ape4 1y ago
  I know Android apps are already in a pretty tight security environment. Perhaps they could put unsigned side-loaded apps in an actual container.
• nechuchelo 1y ago
  Glad I still have time to cancel my Pixel 10 preorder. Fuck google
• mbix77 1y ago
  One can only hope a company like Framework, Nothing, or Fairphone actually can produce and maintain some flagship devices running GrapheneOS or similar. The only reason I have been using Android is because of the freedom I have in my apps, customization, alternative app stores,... I hope the EU fights this with all their might. It also seems like a major geopolitical risk too.
  • quantumsequoia 1y ago
    Nothing aspires to be Apple. They're all about design. I can't see them getting invested in a nerdy philosophical cause like this
• cwillu 1y ago
  Just going to leave this here for the canadians: https://competition-bureau.canada.ca/en/contact-competition-bureau-canada/complaint-form https://competition-bureau.canada.ca/en/contact-competition-...
• hn_throw_250822 1y ago
  [dead]
• pvtmert 1y ago
  Meanwhile, I suppose a big "rollback" will needed in EU for the DMA (Digital Markets Act)
• OtomotO 1y ago
  Okay, so Android is dead to me then.
• ApolloFortyNine 1y ago
  I've been saying in threads on iOS vs Android for years how we're lucky the only other phone OS out there allows sideloading, and the nightmare we'd be living in if it didn't. Guess we've arrived, I wish people voted with their wallets more, iOS could have added this a decade ago.
• Swoerd 1y ago
  [dead]
• never_inline 1y ago
  OK, fine, but how will I build and launch an APK through android studio / flutter?
• Varloom 1y ago
  If I wanted only apps signed by developers I'd use Playstore.
• casenmgreen 1y ago
  It occurs to me this may have occurred in some way at the behest of the Trump administration, as a way in which to move towards controlling the apps installed on phones.
• Quiark 1y ago
  This means even more influence to Chinese phone makers which don't bother themselves with compliance to Google's platform ideas
• MetaWhirledPeas 1y ago
  I wonder if this was hastened by groups like DJI, who are too popular to be bound by a silly app store and chose instead to give their users sketchy side-loading instructions for their apps.
• JCGoran 1y ago
  As someone who never comments on HN, I would like to voice my absolute disapproval of this new policy. As these decisions are not made in a vacuum, I have no doubt the recent developments in the political landscape have contributed to this decision (e.g. UK Online "Safety" Act, EU Chat Control, EU Age Verification solution, probably others). Coupled with the recent "mandatory" (read: forced) upgrade of my Pixel 4a, I get the impression Google's attitude towards phones has become equivalent to Apple's: namely, the illusion of choice. Since there are no viable alternatives, I guess it's time to go back to owning a cheap corporate/government approved phone for official business (i.e. banking), and another one that I actually use. As an aside, the presentation[0] doesn't really go into the details how they will enforce this (on-device? Remotely? If the latter, can I just remove Play Services from my device to sideload whatever?), but you can apparently submit feedback about the verification process here[1]. [0]: https://goo.gle/play-console-android-developer-verification https://goo.gle/play-console-android-developer-verification [1]: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdpZbsJCS-f7CtMbZPnnUeVYhINJ7Dr396BuflbchKKIF0AOg/viewform?usp=header https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdpZbsJCS-f7CtMbZPn...
  • fsflover 1y ago
    > Since there are no viable alternatives Depending on your definition of "viable", you might consider GNU/Linux phones.
  • 827a 1y ago
    Feedback submitted. It takes five minutes; everyone please go through it and tell Google directly how idiotic of a decision this is.
• tim333 1y ago
  >Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed by users on certified Android devices. It's annoying combined with them making that much harder to be a verified developer. I had an android dev account for years and published an app when it was $20 for life but now there's a bunch of hassle involved. If they had the old $20 and upload your passport to prove id it wouldn't be so bad.
• butz 1y ago
  Considering that Android 5 devices are still alive and well, it will take another 10 years for google to catch up. Hoping in that time Linux based true open source mobile operating systems will make some headway. Another alternative might be PWAs (progressive web apps), that one can "install" on your homescreen, but they could be axed next.
• pacetherace 1y ago
  As much as people are making this out to be a Google thing, I think this is more about the security requirements many countries are imposing.
  • Rick76 1y ago
    I did some surface-level research, but I couldn’t find any country that explicitly or publicly requested this from Google. While I saw countries discussing the issue, none of them seemed to ask Google directly to only allow authorized third party apps. That makes me think this is entirely a power move. If those countries had actually asked Google to step in and make phones safer, there are other ways to do that. And if they did explicitly request this particular solution, then why isn’t it being implemented only in those countries? This is a software-based solution—just like Apple limits certain features to specific regions, Google could do the same and restrict it to the countries that require it.
• noisy_boy 1y ago
  If I have to be in handcuffs, I would rather them be high-quality hardware like Apple. So far, the only two things that have held me away from the Apple ecosystem are Linux and Android and the flexibility they offer. Seems like we are just left with Linux now. A very sad day.
• ibic 1y ago
  We are in an age that being screwed by the Giant Techs is inevitable and there is pretty nothing much we can do.
• yyyk 1y ago
  Well, there are two options now: Linux phones and forking/deGoogling Android. I still believe the second is far more viable. There never was much reason to do all the work twice when there's sufficiently well licensed source around, and much of the app/phone compatibility is built-in. Maybe it's time I give a chance to /e/ OS or something of the like...
• Humorist2290 1y ago
  So "certified" Android devices are phasing out side loading, making Google Play the only way to install an app. This is the norm on iOS, right? And in many jurisdictions, from Russia to Denmark, there is an actively hostile, and rapid, legislative push to prevent or criminalize using E2E messaging apps like Signal. How long is it until we see countries pushing to just delist Telegram, Signal, etc from the app stores?
• yndoendo 1y ago
  This is why I started investing in alternative Linux based solution providers in the smartphone market years ago. It was not if but when Google would take this path. The only way I want to engage with Google is when it cost them money. I will not give them a penny directly.
• noisy_boy 1y ago
  I see opportunity for a Google "certified/verified" Android phone with mediocre CPU, average screen (4.5-5") and 15000mAh battery.
• BinaryIgor 1y ago
  They cannot solve all problems but thank God we have Progressive Web Apps; long-term, I guess there needs to Android-like alternative
• CommanderData 1y ago
  You will soon be viewed as a criminal if you run a custom ROM / flavour of Android. What the fuck is happening to computing and our personal devices.
• Phui3ferubus 1y ago
  > To combat malware and financial scams, Google Not 75%, not 80% and not 90% but literal 100% of adds YouTube served me for a week were financial scams. It sounds to me the quickest way to fight it, is to make ad publishers finally take responsibility for taking part in crime.
• e12e 1y ago
  A little reminder about the GNU definition of free software and the four freedoms: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html#four-freedoms https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html#four-freedoms Quote below: The four essential freedoms A program is free software if the program's users have the four essential freedoms: [1] The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0). The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2). The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• RandyOrion 1y ago
  Just like force pushing Manifest v3 on Chrome/Chromium, this is a step towards 'more security', from mouthpieces of Google. Note that 'security' here is only for Google itself, for users it's an utterly different thing, e.g., inconvenience, censorship, etc..
• cat-whisperer 1y ago
  I think the push for verified developers is a double-edged sword. I got into this space, precisely because of how easy it was for me with my pentium computer a decade ago.
• ZeroClickOk 1y ago
  From the article: In Brazil, the Brazilian Federation of Banks (FEBRABAN) sees it as a “significant advancement in protecting users and encouraging accountability.” Brazilian government right now is pushing hard to destroy any kind of freedom in social networks, so take this with (really big) grain of salt.
• tonymet 1y ago
  does this kill F-droid? can you build apks outside of google play and sign them with Google Play CA?
• TeeMassive 1y ago
  This reminds me of Microsoft's Project Palladium, 20 years ago. This was the ancestor of TPMs and trusted computing in general embedded in the CPU. It used to be a huge scandal because people (rightly) feared that it would enable Microsoft to have a say on what can be executed or not, or only allow DRM protected content to play.
• headsman771 1y ago
  It would be really nice if all you people with deep insight into this issue would inform politicians of the unacceptable nature of things like this. - Submitted FTC and FCC complaints. Likely does no good but going silently into the night isn't going to to fix anything either.
• Ms-J 1y ago
  Why is this story not on the front page any more? It has the most points and the most important issue at the moment.
• SLWW 1y ago
  So Android is just iOS now.
• thebharathpost 1y ago
  [dead]
• gck1 1y ago
  Play Integrity and device attestation need their own torrent-tracker moment, just like DRM did. GrapheneOS says they won't touch it because it's a cat-and-mouse game. I think that's the wrong call. DRM was the same, yet torrent trackers are still here.
• octo888 1y ago
  My favourite part of this thread is that the Google pr team know it's bad and aren't even attempting the usual spin in the comments. I guess they're waiting for it to blow over and just work on the "it's here and it's happening" stage
• Supermaker 1y ago
  [dead]
• Supermaker 1y ago
  [dead]
• nzrf 1y ago
  How does this impact security researchers? Or just student developers or tinkerers? This all seem like bad idea. I would imagine security researcher could be registered developer but I could also see autobans if that is a thing to their accounts making life complicated. Also some folks just being locked out of the due to government censorship etc..