5 ms·

I actually hate that apps are allowed to blank out content on screenshots, and this can't be disabled. There are apps completely mis-using it, e.g. mobile payme

I actually hate that apps are allowed to blank out content on screenshots, and this can't be disabled. There are apps completely mis-using it, e.g. mobile payment apps which hardly show any sensitive data in most cases, but now I can't share e.g. infos on screen with someone else easily. It's a classic case of someone discovering a feature and thinking "hell yeah, so much security" without understanding or caring about UX impications. I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing.

runtime_lens 2mo ago
[flagged]
- TeMPOraL 2mo ago
  > “Security” that makes ordinary sharing unusable is often just UX debt wearing a security badge. Very true. > The right fix is selective redaction, not disabling screenshots everywhere. That's still a partial fix, though. It would address the problem of accidental screenshots in a better way, but the main point of contention is around intentional ones. Here, the problem is that the app vendor and the user have different notion of what is "sensitive".
  - ryandrake 2mo ago
    The app developer shouldn't even get a vote. The user should be the one who decides what information is "sensitive" and what isn't.
TeMPOraL 2mo ago
> I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing. Yes, this. Payment apps, government apps, IM communications. The other day I almost rooted my phone in anger trying to get around this, before pausing and realizing that this would only cause even more problems with those apps, thanks to remote attestation "features". My favorite recent case, I almost locked myself out of mobile government services when changing phones recently[0], and it would've made for a stellar bug report showing when "fail safe" design can easily become "fail deadly"[1], with UI view of access and invalidation history clearly showing the timeline of a problem... if only I could take a screenshot of it. But I can't, because "much sekhurity". -- [0] - Well, it's not really that big of a deal. With government services, there's always a way back. Might involve walking to a local civil affairs office or, worst case, a police station or a notary, but there is a way back. Big cloud services, on the other hand... [1] - Invalidating a certificate prior to issuing a new one sounds like a good security idea, but in the real world fails critically if the two operations aren't an atomic group. In my case, issuing a new certificate failed, and I ended up walking around for half a day with old one invalidated and not even knowing it.
- Perz1val 2mo ago
  Then they deserve you taking a photo with a second phone
  - TeMPOraL 2mo ago
    Well, I did, after the fact, but it's only because I had a work phone on me (that doesn't yet actively block sharing to non-work devices). I doubt most people have a second phone on hand, ready and able to capture actual screen shots when your phone is preventing screenhots.
  - setopt 2mo ago
    There might be a market for a USB-C camera to take phone screen photos to immediately upload back into the phone.
    - TeMPOraL 2mo ago
      Yeah, few moments ago it hit me there could be a market for a phone case with in-built camera(s) that photograph your screen at a shallow angle on demand, and transform that into a screenshot automatically. However, my idea happens to hit a very new limitation: for some reason, "privacy filters" are suddenly a thing. New phones have them built-in as some new magic display function, and for everyone else, there's this mad marketing push to get people to buy and use privacy foils in place of glass/foil screen protectors. IDK what's up with those. Since when "shoulder surfing" with smartphones is a real problem, and why do marketers and product designers bet there's so much latent demand for it?
      - abustamam 2mo ago
        Recently handled someone's phone who had it. Neat technology. But the use case for it doesn't make sense, for the reason you specified. The only thing I could think of is if you want to browse TikTok or Instagram in public and don't want people seeing the weird shit that's on your algorithm, but even then, that's kinda weird.
- 2mo ago
V__ 2mo ago
I understand the sentiment, but think about the non-technical user. Every time I use my mothers or any elderlies phone there are a lot of screenshots in the gallery, because they accidentally click the combo. How many people get scammed using screen sharing? It isn't that unreasonable to prevent this vector just to be more safe, especially if the bank might be partially at fault if a scam happens.
- TeMPOraL 2mo ago
  > especially if the bank might be partially at fault if a scam happens That's the crux. Yes, it is unreasonable, because scams have proven to be just as effective at getting people to just read the details out over the phone line, and bank these days are not showing much sensitive information in the open anyways (my recent annoyance - someone thought it's a good idea to never show the full account number on screen, showing just first and last few digits, and an option to copy to clipboard...). Meanwhile, those very apps tend to be ones people would most often want to screenshot for legitimate reasons - e.g. to communicate or make a record of specific transactions, accounts, their states, metadata, etc. None of which is copyable text in the app, and most of it isn't even properly exportable, so it's not like there's any other way.
- QuantumNomad_ 2mo ago
  People also take pictures of their government IDs (passports, drivers license, etc) and utility bills. Should the phone identify those things and automatically blur out all of the sensitive information in those photos too? I’d prefer if my phone did neither that nor told the apps that a screenshot was being taken nor allowing the apps to hide anything that was on screen when a screenshot is taken. It’s my phone, I want to decide what I take photos and screenshots of.
- Jtarii 2mo ago
  This just reinforces the notion that apple is the one that actually owns the phone and they generously let you use it. Just do a security alert pop up "You are screenshotting potentially sensitive information, are you sure you want to continue".
kotaKat 2mo ago
I went to screenshot my upcoming Verizon Fios fiber install out of excitement and got an immediate warning dialog. WARNING: You are in violation of the My Fios app end user licensing agreement that prohibits duplication of this screen. Please immediately delete this from your device. ... apparently buried in the app T&Cs is a "Distribution of the technician's picture or information is prohibited". Even if there's no tech assigned, the screen with the picture of the grey fake man with a fake hat apparently causes a big old warning if you screenshot it.
- fc417fc802 2mo ago
  It warns you but it doesn't block or redact the screenshot? Also why are they sharing photos in the first place if they don't want them to be public?
  - kotaKat 2mo ago
    Warned me but did not block or redact the screenshot at all. Absolutely funny. Of course, then I had to screenshot the warning... https://i.ibb.co/hRnn4ssF/2026-08-18-12-48-25.jpg https://i.ibb.co/hRnn4ssF/2026-08-18-12-48-25.jpg So yeah, I have a screenshot of the generic technician's ID photo, I guess. Later on it did populate an actual name and photo when a human was assigned, but still, yeah, I don't get why they didn't just automatically redact it and just throw you the stupidest bullshit warning error ever on the honor system.
Zambyte 2mo ago
Software that intentionally subverts the intent of the user is malware. We now live in a world where most financial institutions literally ship malware as their primary or only interference to access their systems.
Perseids 2mo ago
Hoping to not sound like a broken record, this is why having full ownership of your device and OS is important. My stock Pixel Android recently told me something along the line of "A security policy blocks screenshots for this app. Talk to your administrator if you want to change the policy". I looked in the mirror and my administrator said "time for a policy change, we're moving to GrapheneOS". And just as important: Help your friends and family to move as well, so they can have ad blockers, NewPipe etc. We need a critical mass of users invested in their freedom, otherwise its going to be crushed by malicious/dumb security measures of their banking apps, corporate greed ("oh, a simple misunderstanding, when you clicked 'buy' you rented a limited license. Did you not read the ToS?") and police overreach. It's a perpetual battle.
whywhywhywhy 2mo ago
I get why it's the default but anyone who'd had to navigate an elderly relative around their banking app just via them describing the screen because iOS blanks it out when screen sharing definitely wishes there was a way to opt out of it.
kllrnohj 2mo ago
The remote tech support scam using screen sharing apps like team viewer is unfortunately very common and is basically why this exists. It's also patronizing to ask during setup or whatever if the user is dumb enough to get scammed like this, even though that is kinda the actual piece of information needed
rixed 2mo ago
The use case they have in mind may be screenshots triggered by another app, not by the user.

runtime_lens 2mo ago

[flagged]

TeMPOraL 2mo ago
> “Security” that makes ordinary sharing unusable is often just UX debt wearing a security badge. Very true. > The right fix is selective redaction, not disabling screenshots everywhere. That's still a partial fix, though. It would address the problem of accidental screenshots in a better way, but the main point of contention is around intentional ones. Here, the problem is that the app vendor and the user have different notion of what is "sensitive".
- ryandrake 2mo ago
  The app developer shouldn't even get a vote. The user should be the one who decides what information is "sensitive" and what isn't.

TeMPOraL 2mo ago

> I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing. Yes, this. Payment apps, government apps, IM communications. The other day I almost rooted my phone in anger trying to get around this, before pausing and realizing that this would only cause even more problems with those apps, thanks to remote attestation "features". My favorite recent case, I almost locked myself out of mobile government services when changing phones recently[0], and it would've made for a stellar bug report showing when "fail safe" design can easily become "fail deadly"[1], with UI view of access and invalidation history clearly showing the timeline of a problem... if only I could take a screenshot of it. But I can't, because "much sekhurity". -- [0] - Well, it's not really that big of a deal. With government services, there's always a way back. Might involve walking to a local civil affairs office or, worst case, a police station or a notary, but there is a way back. Big cloud services, on the other hand... [1] - Invalidating a certificate prior to issuing a new one sounds like a good security idea, but in the real world fails critically if the two operations aren't an atomic group. In my case, issuing a new certificate failed, and I ended up walking around for half a day with old one invalidated and not even knowing it.

Perz1val 2mo ago
Then they deserve you taking a photo with a second phone
- TeMPOraL 2mo ago
  Well, I did, after the fact, but it's only because I had a work phone on me (that doesn't yet actively block sharing to non-work devices). I doubt most people have a second phone on hand, ready and able to capture actual screen shots when your phone is preventing screenhots.
- setopt 2mo ago
  There might be a market for a USB-C camera to take phone screen photos to immediately upload back into the phone.
  - TeMPOraL 2mo ago
    Yeah, few moments ago it hit me there could be a market for a phone case with in-built camera(s) that photograph your screen at a shallow angle on demand, and transform that into a screenshot automatically. However, my idea happens to hit a very new limitation: for some reason, "privacy filters" are suddenly a thing. New phones have them built-in as some new magic display function, and for everyone else, there's this mad marketing push to get people to buy and use privacy foils in place of glass/foil screen protectors. IDK what's up with those. Since when "shoulder surfing" with smartphones is a real problem, and why do marketers and product designers bet there's so much latent demand for it?
    - abustamam 2mo ago
      Recently handled someone's phone who had it. Neat technology. But the use case for it doesn't make sense, for the reason you specified. The only thing I could think of is if you want to browse TikTok or Instagram in public and don't want people seeing the weird shit that's on your algorithm, but even then, that's kinda weird.
2mo ago

V__ 2mo ago

I understand the sentiment, but think about the non-technical user. Every time I use my mothers or any elderlies phone there are a lot of screenshots in the gallery, because they accidentally click the combo. How many people get scammed using screen sharing? It isn't that unreasonable to prevent this vector just to be more safe, especially if the bank might be partially at fault if a scam happens.

TeMPOraL 2mo ago
> especially if the bank might be partially at fault if a scam happens That's the crux. Yes, it is unreasonable, because scams have proven to be just as effective at getting people to just read the details out over the phone line, and bank these days are not showing much sensitive information in the open anyways (my recent annoyance - someone thought it's a good idea to never show the full account number on screen, showing just first and last few digits, and an option to copy to clipboard...). Meanwhile, those very apps tend to be ones people would most often want to screenshot for legitimate reasons - e.g. to communicate or make a record of specific transactions, accounts, their states, metadata, etc. None of which is copyable text in the app, and most of it isn't even properly exportable, so it's not like there's any other way.
QuantumNomad_ 2mo ago
People also take pictures of their government IDs (passports, drivers license, etc) and utility bills. Should the phone identify those things and automatically blur out all of the sensitive information in those photos too? I’d prefer if my phone did neither that nor told the apps that a screenshot was being taken nor allowing the apps to hide anything that was on screen when a screenshot is taken. It’s my phone, I want to decide what I take photos and screenshots of.
Jtarii 2mo ago
This just reinforces the notion that apple is the one that actually owns the phone and they generously let you use it. Just do a security alert pop up "You are screenshotting potentially sensitive information, are you sure you want to continue".

kotaKat 2mo ago

I went to screenshot my upcoming Verizon Fios fiber install out of excitement and got an immediate warning dialog. WARNING: You are in violation of the My Fios app end user licensing agreement that prohibits duplication of this screen. Please immediately delete this from your device. ... apparently buried in the app T&Cs is a "Distribution of the technician's picture or information is prohibited". Even if there's no tech assigned, the screen with the picture of the grey fake man with a fake hat apparently causes a big old warning if you screenshot it.

fc417fc802 2mo ago
It warns you but it doesn't block or redact the screenshot? Also why are they sharing photos in the first place if they don't want them to be public?
- kotaKat 2mo ago
  Warned me but did not block or redact the screenshot at all. Absolutely funny. Of course, then I had to screenshot the warning... https://i.ibb.co/hRnn4ssF/2026-08-18-12-48-25.jpg https://i.ibb.co/hRnn4ssF/2026-08-18-12-48-25.jpg So yeah, I have a screenshot of the generic technician's ID photo, I guess. Later on it did populate an actual name and photo when a human was assigned, but still, yeah, I don't get why they didn't just automatically redact it and just throw you the stupidest bullshit warning error ever on the honor system.

Zambyte 2mo ago

Software that intentionally subverts the intent of the user is malware. We now live in a world where most financial institutions literally ship malware as their primary or only interference to access their systems.

Perseids 2mo ago

Hoping to not sound like a broken record, this is why having full ownership of your device and OS is important. My stock Pixel Android recently told me something along the line of "A security policy blocks screenshots for this app. Talk to your administrator if you want to change the policy". I looked in the mirror and my administrator said "time for a policy change, we're moving to GrapheneOS". And just as important: Help your friends and family to move as well, so they can have ad blockers, NewPipe etc. We need a critical mass of users invested in their freedom, otherwise its going to be crushed by malicious/dumb security measures of their banking apps, corporate greed ("oh, a simple misunderstanding, when you clicked 'buy' you rented a limited license. Did you not read the ToS?") and police overreach. It's a perpetual battle.

whywhywhywhy 2mo ago

I get why it's the default but anyone who'd had to navigate an elderly relative around their banking app just via them describing the screen because iOS blanks it out when screen sharing definitely wishes there was a way to opt out of it.

kllrnohj 2mo ago

The remote tech support scam using screen sharing apps like team viewer is unfortunately very common and is basically why this exists. It's also patronizing to ask during setup or whatever if the user is dumb enough to get scammed like this, even though that is kinda the actual piece of information needed

rixed 2mo ago

The use case they have in mind may be screenshots triggered by another app, not by the user.