4 ms·

Answer from VW: > Please note that the use of the Volkswagen app is only supported on iOS devices and Android devices with supported operating system versions.

Answer from VW: > Please note that the use of the Volkswagen app is only supported on iOS devices and Android devices with supported operating system versions. Is it time to mandate app developers support all operating systems for a device?

ranger_danger 4mo ago
[flagged]
- mschild 4mo ago
  Its not a different os though. Its still android. VW seems to just have turned on integrity checks which constantly cause issues for non-google androids. Plenty of banks do the same.
- microtonal 4mo ago
  The app worked without issues until a few weeks ago. I used it for a year. It was not broken. GrapheneOS is just AOSP Android, optionally with Google Play Services. My take is that they were trying to block rooted phones and/or custom ROMs of questionable origin and GrapheneOS just became collateral damage because all these companies do go the minimal route of using Play Integrity. GrapheneOS supports remote attestation through AOSP APIs, in fact, they have a page about it. I think it's worth letting this be heard. GrapheneOS has > 400,000 users and is rapidly growing. Breaking things is not going to affect 5 people anymore, but thousands, ten thousands or hundreds of thousands, depending on what the app is.
  - Zak 4mo ago
    > My take is that they were trying to block rooted phones and/or custom ROMs of questionable origin There are only bad reasons for them to do that. End users don't get compromised that way in reality, but it does mean they might convince the app to do something that's bad for profits.
- ryandrake 4mo ago
  > expensive to support "Support" is such an overloaded and vague word in the software industry. What does it mean for a company to "support" an app/os configuration? 1. They deliberately target that app/os configuration, QA tests it, and answer customer support requests about it. 2. They target the configuration, QA tests it, but it's offered without customer support. 3. They target the configuration, but only release an untested build, use at your own risk. 4. They don't target the configuration at all, but the builds they do release happen to work on the configuration, totally unacknowledged by the company. 5. They don't target the configuration, and deliberately sabotage their application such that un-targeted configurations are actively blocked. Only adversarial users who hack the software are able to use it. Too many companies say: "We can't do 1 because we don't 'support' it, therefore we must do 5!"
  - Zak 4mo ago
    Proton is one of the best examples of this phenomenon. Almost all Windows games work on Linux via Proton. Sometimes they even run better than they do on Windows. About the only time it doesn't work is when the game uses an anticheat system that intentionally blocks Linux. I can even see where the game devs are coming from when it comes to competitive games; cheating ruins the game for other players, and there's no way to prevent certain kinds of cheating without trusting the client to a degree. I can't see any reasonable and user-respecting place VW could be coming from intentionally blocking access from open systems.
- fsflover 4mo ago
  > If 97% of your users are on mainstream OSes, and the rest also account for disproportionately high numbers of bug reports, why should they bother supporting alternatives? Because of those bug reports, very few may be specific to the non-mainstream OS? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28978086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28978086
- strcat 4mo ago
  They don't need to do anything to support GrapheneOS. They only need to stop actively going out of the way to block it and any other alternative OS via the Play Integrity API. They put significant effort into blocking anything other than iOS or a Google Mobile Services Android stock OS certified by Google. They're not only blocking a non-stock AOSP-based operating system but rather anything other than iOS or a Google Mobile Services Android device certified by Google.
- HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
  GrapheneOS maintains 99% android app compatibility. It does not require any additional funding or expenses to support GrapheneOS, and is actually more expensive to add these anticompetitive tools responsible for banning GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS is also not responsible for bugs in this app. Any bug reports coming from GOS are likely to be from the hardening toggles, which uncover bugs in the app. This is the apps fault, and these bugs still exist on other OSs. It should be resolved for the benefit of all users.
Arainach 4mo ago
No. You're not required to use the app. You're not even entitled to use the app. If you want to use the app, you have to play by their rules. Plenty of device manufacturers have chosen to only offer iOS apps. No one talked about mandating that apps were available on competing platforms. If you choose to use something like GrapheneOS, you are signing up for the fact that almost no one will test on your platform and plenty of things will be broken.
- warkdarrior 4mo ago
  Sure the app is not required, though one loses on all of the remote-control functionality (remote start, remote climate control, etc.). Maybe then app developers should be mandated to open fully their server-side protocols, so people can create apps for platforms that are not supported by default. No more undocumented APIs, anybody can get an API key, no API serving limits!
  - microtonal 4mo ago
    Unfortunately, Volkswagen has an API, but made it much harder to use it since a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48319509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48319509
- midasz 4mo ago
  Here it is, the true hacker mentality.
  - DANmode 4mo ago
    Understanding how those around you operate makes you no less of a hacker. It can even make you a great/better one…
    - _factor 4mo ago
      They don’t just understand, they basically promote it.
bossyTeacher 4mo ago
The issue here is the Google-only remote attestation nonsense. It seems pointless to me. A device passing Google's attestation check tells you nothing. The device could well have malware on it and you won't know it. Integrity is a misnomer. The integrity scope is tiny.
chasil 4mo ago
My daily driver is a de-Googled LineageOS device, but I purchased a $50us iPhone SE 3 for FaceTime. I have moved most of the my finance activity to it, along with my license and passport. I would never trust a Google device with this much, and the convenience has been profound in a few circumstances. I would relegate any intrusive apps here, and happily deny them cross-app tracking privileges.

ranger_danger 4mo ago

[flagged]

mschild 4mo ago
Its not a different os though. Its still android. VW seems to just have turned on integrity checks which constantly cause issues for non-google androids. Plenty of banks do the same.
microtonal 4mo ago
The app worked without issues until a few weeks ago. I used it for a year. It was not broken. GrapheneOS is just AOSP Android, optionally with Google Play Services. My take is that they were trying to block rooted phones and/or custom ROMs of questionable origin and GrapheneOS just became collateral damage because all these companies do go the minimal route of using Play Integrity. GrapheneOS supports remote attestation through AOSP APIs, in fact, they have a page about it. I think it's worth letting this be heard. GrapheneOS has > 400,000 users and is rapidly growing. Breaking things is not going to affect 5 people anymore, but thousands, ten thousands or hundreds of thousands, depending on what the app is.
- Zak 4mo ago
  > My take is that they were trying to block rooted phones and/or custom ROMs of questionable origin There are only bad reasons for them to do that. End users don't get compromised that way in reality, but it does mean they might convince the app to do something that's bad for profits.
ryandrake 4mo ago
> expensive to support "Support" is such an overloaded and vague word in the software industry. What does it mean for a company to "support" an app/os configuration? 1. They deliberately target that app/os configuration, QA tests it, and answer customer support requests about it. 2. They target the configuration, QA tests it, but it's offered without customer support. 3. They target the configuration, but only release an untested build, use at your own risk. 4. They don't target the configuration at all, but the builds they do release happen to work on the configuration, totally unacknowledged by the company. 5. They don't target the configuration, and deliberately sabotage their application such that un-targeted configurations are actively blocked. Only adversarial users who hack the software are able to use it. Too many companies say: "We can't do 1 because we don't 'support' it, therefore we must do 5!"
- Zak 4mo ago
  Proton is one of the best examples of this phenomenon. Almost all Windows games work on Linux via Proton. Sometimes they even run better than they do on Windows. About the only time it doesn't work is when the game uses an anticheat system that intentionally blocks Linux. I can even see where the game devs are coming from when it comes to competitive games; cheating ruins the game for other players, and there's no way to prevent certain kinds of cheating without trusting the client to a degree. I can't see any reasonable and user-respecting place VW could be coming from intentionally blocking access from open systems.
fsflover 4mo ago
> If 97% of your users are on mainstream OSes, and the rest also account for disproportionately high numbers of bug reports, why should they bother supporting alternatives? Because of those bug reports, very few may be specific to the non-mainstream OS? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28978086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28978086
strcat 4mo ago
They don't need to do anything to support GrapheneOS. They only need to stop actively going out of the way to block it and any other alternative OS via the Play Integrity API. They put significant effort into blocking anything other than iOS or a Google Mobile Services Android stock OS certified by Google. They're not only blocking a non-stock AOSP-based operating system but rather anything other than iOS or a Google Mobile Services Android device certified by Google.
HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS maintains 99% android app compatibility. It does not require any additional funding or expenses to support GrapheneOS, and is actually more expensive to add these anticompetitive tools responsible for banning GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS is also not responsible for bugs in this app. Any bug reports coming from GOS are likely to be from the hardening toggles, which uncover bugs in the app. This is the apps fault, and these bugs still exist on other OSs. It should be resolved for the benefit of all users.

Arainach 4mo ago

No. You're not required to use the app. You're not even entitled to use the app. If you want to use the app, you have to play by their rules. Plenty of device manufacturers have chosen to only offer iOS apps. No one talked about mandating that apps were available on competing platforms. If you choose to use something like GrapheneOS, you are signing up for the fact that almost no one will test on your platform and plenty of things will be broken.

warkdarrior 4mo ago
Sure the app is not required, though one loses on all of the remote-control functionality (remote start, remote climate control, etc.). Maybe then app developers should be mandated to open fully their server-side protocols, so people can create apps for platforms that are not supported by default. No more undocumented APIs, anybody can get an API key, no API serving limits!
- microtonal 4mo ago
  Unfortunately, Volkswagen has an API, but made it much harder to use it since a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48319509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48319509
midasz 4mo ago
Here it is, the true hacker mentality.
- DANmode 4mo ago
  Understanding how those around you operate makes you no less of a hacker. It can even make you a great/better one…
  - _factor 4mo ago
    They don’t just understand, they basically promote it.

bossyTeacher 4mo ago

The issue here is the Google-only remote attestation nonsense. It seems pointless to me. A device passing Google's attestation check tells you nothing. The device could well have malware on it and you won't know it. Integrity is a misnomer. The integrity scope is tiny.

chasil 4mo ago

My daily driver is a de-Googled LineageOS device, but I purchased a $50us iPhone SE 3 for FaceTime. I have moved most of the my finance activity to it, along with my license and passport. I would never trust a Google device with this much, and the convenience has been profound in a few circumstances. I would relegate any intrusive apps here, and happily deny them cross-app tracking privileges.