6 ms·

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. If it did then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a devel

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. If it did then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a developer setting. The fact that some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website is not a good reason to take away everyone's freedom. Consolidation of power is all this is about.

jrmg 7mo ago
This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. ...and... some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website are kind of contradictory.
- zadikian 7mo ago
  It's not a contradiction. Removing that setting solves that problem, but it's not the only solution.
  - array_key_first 7mo ago
    It also only solves that very specific problem. You don't need to side-load an app to scam someone. There's plenty of malware on the play store you can use. And, you don't need malware. There's plenty of legitimate apps you can use for scamming. And, you don't need an app, I would imagine most scamming is done without an app. So, really, we're solving a subset of a subset of a subset of a subset of the problem.
    - johnnyanmac 7mo ago
      yes. Hence, "this isn't about keeping people safe". The most effective means of hacking is social engineering. You can't solve that with any number of "security measures". If you require all the DNA sources in the world, a scammer will still charm a target into opening it up for them.
    - lyu07282 7mo ago
      Exactly, it's about 'trusted computing' and that never meant your 'trust'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Criticism
- asveikau 7mo ago
  There's much easier ways for gullible people to be scammed than convincing them to install an android app.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
SchemaLoad 7mo ago
There is immense pressure to stop online scams which are draining old people of their life savings. The whole flow from the article seems entirely based around letting power users install what they want while being able to break the flow of a scammer guiding a clueless person in to installing malware. It is promising that Google has avoided just turning off sideloading but still put measures in place to protect people.
- bhhaskin 7mo ago
  Why is it on Google to stop this and not the banks?
  - igregoryca 7mo ago
    What can Bank X do to stop phone malware from scraping the user's session token from the Bank X app or website? Yes, banks should (and sometimes do) double- and triple-check with you before allowing large transfers/withdrawals, but scammers know how to coach their victims past this. Speaking from experience. (I also don't fully agree this is Google's responsibility, and I am not happy about this development. But there are legitimate points in favor of outsourcing the question of "will this software do nefarious things" to some kind of trusted signing authority.)
    - bhhaskin 7mo ago
      Don't do instant non-reversible transfers. Specially for a transaction that is highly likely to be fraud. I.e. person transfers to someone you haven't done business with before or foreign accounts. Also the fraud detection needs to go both ways.
      - pas 7mo ago
        they can wait. how would the clueless victim check anyway?
  - Gigachad 7mo ago
    Because they want to shake the image that the iPhone is for the average person while Android is for technical people who take the risk of malware and scams. There are more grandmas who just want their banking secure than there are FOSS advocates wanting full system access.
staticassertion 7mo ago
It absolutely has to do with keeping people safe. You not caring isn't relevant.
- basilikum 7mo ago
  If Google cared just the slightest bit about keeping people safe, they would stop hosting scam ads as core part of their business model. Google is on the side of the scammers.
  - staticassertion 7mo ago
    Total nonsense. Google is a large company with different teams that have different goals.
    - basilikum 7mo ago
      Google is one large public company with exactly one goal: making money. Stop shilling
      - staticassertion 7mo ago
        Not shilling, your points are just bad. I could just as easily say "You are one person who makes money, therefor you are always bad". Silly. Your argument is basically "If the Android team cared about user safety then Google would shut down as a business to support them". It's nonsense.
        fsflover 7mo ago
        Google restricts sideloading "for your safety", while their app store is full of scam apps and F-Droid has zero malware. Don't you find this slightly illogical?
        staticassertion 7mo ago
Ajedi32 7mo ago
> then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a developer setting That exact setting is literally what this entire article is about.

jrmg 7mo ago

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. ...and... some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website are kind of contradictory.

zadikian 7mo ago
It's not a contradiction. Removing that setting solves that problem, but it's not the only solution.
- array_key_first 7mo ago
  It also only solves that very specific problem. You don't need to side-load an app to scam someone. There's plenty of malware on the play store you can use. And, you don't need malware. There's plenty of legitimate apps you can use for scamming. And, you don't need an app, I would imagine most scamming is done without an app. So, really, we're solving a subset of a subset of a subset of a subset of the problem.
  - johnnyanmac 7mo ago
    yes. Hence, "this isn't about keeping people safe". The most effective means of hacking is social engineering. You can't solve that with any number of "security measures". If you require all the DNA sources in the world, a scammer will still charm a target into opening it up for them.
  - lyu07282 7mo ago
    Exactly, it's about 'trusted computing' and that never meant your 'trust'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Criticism
asveikau 7mo ago
There's much easier ways for gullible people to be scammed than convincing them to install an android app.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

SchemaLoad 7mo ago

There is immense pressure to stop online scams which are draining old people of their life savings. The whole flow from the article seems entirely based around letting power users install what they want while being able to break the flow of a scammer guiding a clueless person in to installing malware. It is promising that Google has avoided just turning off sideloading but still put measures in place to protect people.

bhhaskin 7mo ago
Why is it on Google to stop this and not the banks?
- igregoryca 7mo ago
  What can Bank X do to stop phone malware from scraping the user's session token from the Bank X app or website? Yes, banks should (and sometimes do) double- and triple-check with you before allowing large transfers/withdrawals, but scammers know how to coach their victims past this. Speaking from experience. (I also don't fully agree this is Google's responsibility, and I am not happy about this development. But there are legitimate points in favor of outsourcing the question of "will this software do nefarious things" to some kind of trusted signing authority.)
  - bhhaskin 7mo ago
    Don't do instant non-reversible transfers. Specially for a transaction that is highly likely to be fraud. I.e. person transfers to someone you haven't done business with before or foreign accounts. Also the fraud detection needs to go both ways.
    - pas 7mo ago
      they can wait. how would the clueless victim check anyway?
- Gigachad 7mo ago
  Because they want to shake the image that the iPhone is for the average person while Android is for technical people who take the risk of malware and scams. There are more grandmas who just want their banking secure than there are FOSS advocates wanting full system access.

staticassertion 7mo ago

It absolutely has to do with keeping people safe. You not caring isn't relevant.

basilikum 7mo ago
If Google cared just the slightest bit about keeping people safe, they would stop hosting scam ads as core part of their business model. Google is on the side of the scammers.
- staticassertion 7mo ago
  Total nonsense. Google is a large company with different teams that have different goals.
  - basilikum 7mo ago
    Google is one large public company with exactly one goal: making money. Stop shilling
    - staticassertion 7mo ago
      Not shilling, your points are just bad. I could just as easily say "You are one person who makes money, therefor you are always bad". Silly. Your argument is basically "If the Android team cared about user safety then Google would shut down as a business to support them". It's nonsense.
      - fsflover 7mo ago
        Google restricts sideloading "for your safety", while their app store is full of scam apps and F-Droid has zero malware. Don't you find this slightly illogical?
        staticassertion 7mo ago

Ajedi32 7mo ago

> then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a developer setting That exact setting is literally what this entire article is about.