8 ms·

Popular Flashlight App has been secretly sharing your location

95 points by bobbles 13y ago

ars 13y ago
This is why you should install https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.googlecode.droidwall.free https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.googlecode... and only let aps that actually need it access the internet.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- Groxx 13y ago
  I've been running XPrivacy[1] lately - I really really like it. Extremely granular permissions (down to individual method calls), fakes data so things don't crash, and tells you when permissions were last accessed. [1]: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2320783 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2320783
001sky 13y ago
(1) Its free. You're fucked. On the other hand, (2) Why aren't these people put in jail?
- ctdonath 13y ago
  (1) When it's free, you're probably not the customer - you're the product. Hard lesson for most people. Pay a little and be the customer. (2) Every single user was asked for permission to access the information, and they all gave their approval. Give your consent to (1b) because of (1a), and (2) isn't an option.
  - 001sky 13y ago
    The article outlines how the company asymetrically broke its own terms of service. So there was no consent under (1). I don't disagree withou you that its better to pay and avoid giving consent in the firstplace, but even then what would be the difference? That's the deeper issue...
MAGZine 13y ago
Definitely used this app for quite sometime. I did notice that it had required a number of permissions, so one day I decided to ditch it out of principle. For those looking for an alternative, I've been using the Telsa light, and loving it. Highly recommend. The author even outlines the exact permissions that he's using, and why he's using them. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teslacoilsw.flashlight https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teslacoils...
- unlimited_power 13y ago
  I'm not sure how to check the permissions, but I've been using Tiny Flashlight + LED: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.devuni.flashlight https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.devuni.fla...
- dubyah 13y ago
  I personally use Nexus Flashlight Widget: Only works with camera flash LEDs and only supports 4.2 or newer, but also only requires "Camera: take pictures and videos" permissions and simply exists as a widget (on/off). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flashlightwidget https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flashlight...
AmVess 13y ago
No surprise here. I recently switched from iOS to Android, and the two readily available app stores on my device(Google Play and Amazon)are little more than a cross between a digital flea market and the wild west. Google would do well to copy Apple's approach to app store curation and locking down their OS so that shenanigans like this can't be pulled off.
- girvo 13y ago
  Uh, Path did stuff like this on iOS well before. We aren't immune here, though that is changing with iOS 7.
  - jakobe 13y ago
    Apple already locked down app access to personal data (like contacts) in iOS 6. In iOS 7 they are just going further (eg. now a dialog also pops up for access to camera and mic) The main difference is that Android has this all-or-nothing approach (accept giving the app all these permissions, or don't use the app at all), while iOS asks you for each permission individually, and you can use an app without granting it specific permissions. (eg. the weather app -- disallow access to location, and you can still type in place names manually)
    - ge0rg 13y ago
      The funny thing here is, Android had no choice to do it properly, because the respective "ask the user" mechanisms in Java, though present, are patented by Oracle, and the Android developers had to find an alternative mechanism to prevent infringement. OTOH, maybe they did it this way so you can't prevent ad-driven apps from accessing all the fine data about you.
      - viraptor 13y ago
        Citation please? Popping up a dialog isn't something Java-specific. I don't believe MS would license those patents to implement UAC either. This just sounds really improbable.
mukundmr 13y ago
I really wonder how much companies earn by selling information about their customers, their contacts lists, their location, etc. Is it that lucrative?
pan69 13y ago
What I don't get about app permissions is that it's all or nothing. You see these apps and they require access to just about everything. As if I'm going to install that? Not. However, it should be that an app asks for permissions and as a user I can tick or untick each individual permission. I.e. does this or that weather app really need access to my contacts? Nope. So why can't just untick that permission? Permissions on apps seem to be pretty much broken.
- oakwhiz 13y ago
  What would be neat is a way to "virtualize" permissions. Example: An app asks for GPS. You don't want to give out your location but you still want to use the app. So you lie to the app about your location while still sending your real location to your other apps.
  - mappu 13y ago
    "pdroid" allows this on android - it's built into several custom roms.
- blhack 13y ago
  It's harder to program for them. You have to code in different cases for "I have this permission" and "I don't have this permission". Consider potentially lots of: if session.gps: show_ads(location) else: show_ads(general) -- but for every feature of the application that could be using extended permissions. -- This flashlight app is a bad example, and I'm not saying this is an excuse, but I think this is the rationale that is generally used.
  - eck 13y ago
    No, you don't. In fact, you couldn't even tell an app that it doesn't have permission, because then the stupid flashlight app will do something like, "let me see your location, otherwise i can only be 50% bright!" Obviously the writers of the app want that info. Instead, it thinks it has a GPS, but you've decided to tell it that, for example, its "GPS" will always be e.g. times square or perhaps something a bit more realistic, but not real.
WestCoastJustin 13y ago
I actually commented on this very thing @ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6266539 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6266539 > "I wanted to install a led flashlight app a couple days ago. The one with 10 million downloads wants access to my phone book, internet, browser, etc. WTF! This is a LED flashlight app and it has an install base of 10 million, why on earth does it need access to the internet and phone book?! Arg, there is a total disconnect between useful apps and privacy! I do not know what the answer is, but the current system really grinds my gears!" > "Imagine if you wanted to use the ls, cd, grep, tar, pwd, top, etc commands on unix and an "ad" would pop up, or maybe you would see it connecting to the internet. These are utilities too. Is this acceptable behavior?"
- thepicard 13y ago
  Definitely. I was going to say, was this not obvious when the app requests every permission related to your personal info?
- andyjohnson0 13y ago
  It is advertising supported, so the requirement for internet access is plausible - even though it was misused.
  - thepicard 13y ago
    But your contact book and location?
    - andyjohnson0 13y ago
      Obviously unjustified and a clear warning sign.
r0h1n 13y ago
> In fact, before they could accept or refuse the app's terms of agreement, the FTC said Brightest Flashlight was already collecting and sending information. Somewhat OT, but I could've sworn Google does this on new Android installs. I updated my Nexus 4 via CM a few days back to 4.3, and as I went into the account settings to turn off Google sync (contacts, Gmail, calendar etc.) I saw the sync icons spinning for all of them. I don't recollect allowing Google to sync any of my data. Of course I subsequently turned off sync for all Google services.
Sir_Cmpwn 13y ago
CyanogenMod ships with a "privacy guard" feature that shuts off any intrusive permissions for an app unless you whitelist it, regardless of what the app claims to want from you.
mrtksn 13y ago
Those permissions are just like an "EULA" or any other legal writing that the users just skip as fast as they can. This is why I switched back to IOS, I had really hard time finding apps with permissions that are not ridiculous. Whats worse, most of the people I know just didn't care and used these apps, making em popular and high rated. IOS as awesome in this regard, after all, my phone is the most privately used device. I think am not a paranoid type but I am not O.K. with somebody out there accessing my location and contacts. I am actually surprised we don't have big scandals with rough apps spreading all kind of private data all over the internet.
- m_mueller 13y ago
  Exactly. Allowing users to deny apps access at runtime rather than install time is the better approach, since apps will usually still do something useful even if you deny them access to your address book or location. Only the dialog and maybe the granularity itself could be improved.
rcthompson 13y ago
I you have root in your Android device, there's a nice app called LBE Privacy Guard, which lets you selectively deny specific permissions to specific apps.
emmelaich 13y ago
Some flashlight apps come with the phone and are system -- uninstallable, start at boot, access to everything.
- Crito 13y ago
  Are there any that abuse that position, and if so, who is selling these phones?
  - andymcsherry 13y ago
    If they are included on the device, they're usually meant to enhance the experience of the phone. Also, as of Android 4.0, you can disable system apps if you choose. If the hardware maker really wants to spy on you, I'm sure they could do it without including a flashlight app.
samweinberg 13y ago
There are laws against this, right?
static_typed 13y ago
My old Nokia phones had a flashlight mode built in, very quick to activate and use, not as a separate app. Even if it does need to be an app on Android, at least include it in the base or core, as it is such a popular and useful thing to have.
- phyalow 13y ago
  Because Goog wouldnt want to be responsible for burning out a users camera flash. Old school Nokia phones are GOAT and had special tested LED's that obviously wouldn't expire after 20mins of run time.
andymcsherry 13y ago
This is really the status quo when it comes to free Android utility apps. Most users skip quickly past the permission when installing, and as a result, you can generally stuff anything you want in there. To compliment this, the app is ad supported and ad networks will pay a premium to target on that. The number of users that notice, care and don't install is insignificant compared to the increase in revenue they see by passing this extra information along. iOS may be better about notifying users when it comes to accessing location and contact information, but Android has a much more robust system of permissions. Users can see nearly every component of the system the device wants to interact with, determine whether that is satisfactory and choose to install the software or not. Unfortunately most users are more concerned about finding their keys in the dark or hanging a picture straight to care.
- eknkc 13y ago
  I think iOS' way is much superior. - It shows up the alert when the app actually tries to use a resource. - It lets me use the app without specific permissions. This is something great. I don't grant location permissions to social apps to avoid sharing my location unintentionally. They work just fine. - The long list of permissions on Google Play store does not really help when the app just wants to be able to pause something when phone rings and that requires absolute access to phone services. That causes a scary list for legitimate apps almost always. To be fair, Android's way of having them listed makes it possible to assess an app's intention before installing it. That's great and all for me and you, but did not help 50+ million users in this case.
  - krisgenre 13y ago
    hmm.. wasn't the iOS app QuizUp in the spotlight only recently for having security bugs that exposes personal information to random users?
    - jdminhbg 13y ago
      QuizUp had legitimate user info needed to manage the game (you need a person's FB account and/or email to contact and identify them), the problem is they were transmitting it unencrypted. So permissions didn't make a difference there.
casca 13y ago
For those on a jailbroken iPhone, firewallIP[1] is the best way to control apps' access to the network. Every time a network connection is requested, you get a system popup that controls access to individual destinations, wildcards, whatever. As long as there's nothing equivalent for Android (after Whispercore was shelved), I'm stuck on IOS. [1] http://yllier.webs.com/firewall.html http://yllier.webs.com/firewall.html
- shrikant 13y ago
  Android Firewall doesn't do what you want? https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jtschohl.androidfirewall https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jtschohl.a...
  - casca 13y ago
    Sadly not. For example, for an individual app I might want to block access to the analytics services like Flurry but allow access to necessary services.
ricg 13y ago
I always wonder what is going on when the YouTube app wants to access the microphone while I'm browsing videos.
CalRobert 13y ago
TANSTAAFL
jgalt212 13y ago
This is why, from the consumer perspective html5 apps must win, but from the producer perspective they won't. For example, it's much easier for a company to spam your entire address book using a native app than using a web interface.
JoeAltmaier 13y ago
SO, their penalty is, promise to not do it again? That's it? Not, for instance, erase all the data and pay a fine?
twobits 13y ago
The whole permissions thing in android is just smoke screen. A talking point about giving power to users, respecting them, etc.
Pxtl 13y ago
Dear play store: let me search by permissions. Or to sort by low-permissions. When I want a flashlight app, I want to be able to search for things that only use the camera system. I appreciate that Android lets developers and users do what they want and lets Users know what the applications have permission to do, but if you have to snoop at every application's specific details to find this out, it's not really good for those of us who care about such things. A big problem is some of the permissions have terrible names - stuff like "read phone state and identity" - what freaking user is going to know what that means?
- judk 13y ago
  Teaching you to care about permissions would ruin Android's ad supported business model.
amouat 13y ago
"But this flashlight app left them in the dark about how their information was going to be used" Is the joke intentional?!
wankerrific 13y ago
Look - its just a crappy permissions system in the OS. I'm looking at my app and we have all these scary-sounding perms: android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE ==> needed to write images to external storage android.permission.ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE ==> pretty much anything that needs to have a working internet connection android.permission.READ_PHONE_STATE ==> link tracking android.permission.GET_TASKS ==> crash reporting android.permission.READ_LOGS ==> also crash reporting but probably doesn't work in 4.3 android.permission.GET_ACCOUNTS ==> Google Cloud Messaging...seriously android.permission.WAKE_LOCK ==> also GCM etc. And when you add ad networks it gets worse. And, they also pay more for gender, location, and age so thats why everyone wants you to sign in with Facebook, etc, because otherwise you can't pay the bills. I don't know why this is a big deal. Isn't Google already vacuuming up this information from their Android users anyways via "Google Play Services".
salem 13y ago
So apparently there was no fine. Amazing. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/12/06/ftc-flashlight-app/3889949/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/12/06/ftc-flashlight...
xyver 13y ago
nothing to hide, please find me i may be lost!!

95 points by bobbles 13y ago

ars 13y ago

This is why you should install https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.googlecode.droidwall.free https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.googlecode... and only let aps that actually need it access the internet.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Groxx 13y ago
I've been running XPrivacy[1] lately - I really really like it. Extremely granular permissions (down to individual method calls), fakes data so things don't crash, and tells you when permissions were last accessed. [1]: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2320783 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2320783

001sky 13y ago

(1) Its free. You're fucked. On the other hand, (2) Why aren't these people put in jail?

ctdonath 13y ago
(1) When it's free, you're probably not the customer - you're the product. Hard lesson for most people. Pay a little and be the customer. (2) Every single user was asked for permission to access the information, and they all gave their approval. Give your consent to (1b) because of (1a), and (2) isn't an option.
- 001sky 13y ago
  The article outlines how the company asymetrically broke its own terms of service. So there was no consent under (1). I don't disagree withou you that its better to pay and avoid giving consent in the firstplace, but even then what would be the difference? That's the deeper issue...

MAGZine 13y ago

Definitely used this app for quite sometime. I did notice that it had required a number of permissions, so one day I decided to ditch it out of principle. For those looking for an alternative, I've been using the Telsa light, and loving it. Highly recommend. The author even outlines the exact permissions that he's using, and why he's using them. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teslacoilsw.flashlight https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teslacoils...

unlimited_power 13y ago
I'm not sure how to check the permissions, but I've been using Tiny Flashlight + LED: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.devuni.flashlight https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.devuni.fla...
dubyah 13y ago
I personally use Nexus Flashlight Widget: Only works with camera flash LEDs and only supports 4.2 or newer, but also only requires "Camera: take pictures and videos" permissions and simply exists as a widget (on/off). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flashlightwidget https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flashlight...

AmVess 13y ago

No surprise here. I recently switched from iOS to Android, and the two readily available app stores on my device(Google Play and Amazon)are little more than a cross between a digital flea market and the wild west. Google would do well to copy Apple's approach to app store curation and locking down their OS so that shenanigans like this can't be pulled off.

girvo 13y ago
Uh, Path did stuff like this on iOS well before. We aren't immune here, though that is changing with iOS 7.
- jakobe 13y ago
  Apple already locked down app access to personal data (like contacts) in iOS 6. In iOS 7 they are just going further (eg. now a dialog also pops up for access to camera and mic) The main difference is that Android has this all-or-nothing approach (accept giving the app all these permissions, or don't use the app at all), while iOS asks you for each permission individually, and you can use an app without granting it specific permissions. (eg. the weather app -- disallow access to location, and you can still type in place names manually)
  - ge0rg 13y ago
    The funny thing here is, Android had no choice to do it properly, because the respective "ask the user" mechanisms in Java, though present, are patented by Oracle, and the Android developers had to find an alternative mechanism to prevent infringement. OTOH, maybe they did it this way so you can't prevent ad-driven apps from accessing all the fine data about you.
    - viraptor 13y ago
      Citation please? Popping up a dialog isn't something Java-specific. I don't believe MS would license those patents to implement UAC either. This just sounds really improbable.

mukundmr 13y ago

I really wonder how much companies earn by selling information about their customers, their contacts lists, their location, etc. Is it that lucrative?

pan69 13y ago

What I don't get about app permissions is that it's all or nothing. You see these apps and they require access to just about everything. As if I'm going to install that? Not. However, it should be that an app asks for permissions and as a user I can tick or untick each individual permission. I.e. does this or that weather app really need access to my contacts? Nope. So why can't just untick that permission? Permissions on apps seem to be pretty much broken.

oakwhiz 13y ago
What would be neat is a way to "virtualize" permissions. Example: An app asks for GPS. You don't want to give out your location but you still want to use the app. So you lie to the app about your location while still sending your real location to your other apps.
- mappu 13y ago
  "pdroid" allows this on android - it's built into several custom roms.
blhack 13y ago
It's harder to program for them. You have to code in different cases for "I have this permission" and "I don't have this permission". Consider potentially lots of: if session.gps: show_ads(location) else: show_ads(general) -- but for every feature of the application that could be using extended permissions. -- This flashlight app is a bad example, and I'm not saying this is an excuse, but I think this is the rationale that is generally used.
- eck 13y ago
  No, you don't. In fact, you couldn't even tell an app that it doesn't have permission, because then the stupid flashlight app will do something like, "let me see your location, otherwise i can only be 50% bright!" Obviously the writers of the app want that info. Instead, it thinks it has a GPS, but you've decided to tell it that, for example, its "GPS" will always be e.g. times square or perhaps something a bit more realistic, but not real.

WestCoastJustin 13y ago

I actually commented on this very thing @ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6266539 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6266539 > "I wanted to install a led flashlight app a couple days ago. The one with 10 million downloads wants access to my phone book, internet, browser, etc. WTF! This is a LED flashlight app and it has an install base of 10 million, why on earth does it need access to the internet and phone book?! Arg, there is a total disconnect between useful apps and privacy! I do not know what the answer is, but the current system really grinds my gears!" > "Imagine if you wanted to use the ls, cd, grep, tar, pwd, top, etc commands on unix and an "ad" would pop up, or maybe you would see it connecting to the internet. These are utilities too. Is this acceptable behavior?"

thepicard 13y ago
Definitely. I was going to say, was this not obvious when the app requests every permission related to your personal info?
andyjohnson0 13y ago
It is advertising supported, so the requirement for internet access is plausible - even though it was misused.
- thepicard 13y ago
  But your contact book and location?
  - andyjohnson0 13y ago
    Obviously unjustified and a clear warning sign.

r0h1n 13y ago

> In fact, before they could accept or refuse the app's terms of agreement, the FTC said Brightest Flashlight was already collecting and sending information. Somewhat OT, but I could've sworn Google does this on new Android installs. I updated my Nexus 4 via CM a few days back to 4.3, and as I went into the account settings to turn off Google sync (contacts, Gmail, calendar etc.) I saw the sync icons spinning for all of them. I don't recollect allowing Google to sync any of my data. Of course I subsequently turned off sync for all Google services.

Sir_Cmpwn 13y ago

CyanogenMod ships with a "privacy guard" feature that shuts off any intrusive permissions for an app unless you whitelist it, regardless of what the app claims to want from you.

mrtksn 13y ago

Those permissions are just like an "EULA" or any other legal writing that the users just skip as fast as they can. This is why I switched back to IOS, I had really hard time finding apps with permissions that are not ridiculous. Whats worse, most of the people I know just didn't care and used these apps, making em popular and high rated. IOS as awesome in this regard, after all, my phone is the most privately used device. I think am not a paranoid type but I am not O.K. with somebody out there accessing my location and contacts. I am actually surprised we don't have big scandals with rough apps spreading all kind of private data all over the internet.

m_mueller 13y ago
Exactly. Allowing users to deny apps access at runtime rather than install time is the better approach, since apps will usually still do something useful even if you deny them access to your address book or location. Only the dialog and maybe the granularity itself could be improved.

rcthompson 13y ago

I you have root in your Android device, there's a nice app called LBE Privacy Guard, which lets you selectively deny specific permissions to specific apps.

emmelaich 13y ago

Some flashlight apps come with the phone and are system -- uninstallable, start at boot, access to everything.

Crito 13y ago
Are there any that abuse that position, and if so, who is selling these phones?
- andymcsherry 13y ago
  If they are included on the device, they're usually meant to enhance the experience of the phone. Also, as of Android 4.0, you can disable system apps if you choose. If the hardware maker really wants to spy on you, I'm sure they could do it without including a flashlight app.

samweinberg 13y ago

There are laws against this, right?

static_typed 13y ago

My old Nokia phones had a flashlight mode built in, very quick to activate and use, not as a separate app. Even if it does need to be an app on Android, at least include it in the base or core, as it is such a popular and useful thing to have.

phyalow 13y ago
Because Goog wouldnt want to be responsible for burning out a users camera flash. Old school Nokia phones are GOAT and had special tested LED's that obviously wouldn't expire after 20mins of run time.

andymcsherry 13y ago

This is really the status quo when it comes to free Android utility apps. Most users skip quickly past the permission when installing, and as a result, you can generally stuff anything you want in there. To compliment this, the app is ad supported and ad networks will pay a premium to target on that. The number of users that notice, care and don't install is insignificant compared to the increase in revenue they see by passing this extra information along. iOS may be better about notifying users when it comes to accessing location and contact information, but Android has a much more robust system of permissions. Users can see nearly every component of the system the device wants to interact with, determine whether that is satisfactory and choose to install the software or not. Unfortunately most users are more concerned about finding their keys in the dark or hanging a picture straight to care.

eknkc 13y ago
I think iOS' way is much superior. - It shows up the alert when the app actually tries to use a resource. - It lets me use the app without specific permissions. This is something great. I don't grant location permissions to social apps to avoid sharing my location unintentionally. They work just fine. - The long list of permissions on Google Play store does not really help when the app just wants to be able to pause something when phone rings and that requires absolute access to phone services. That causes a scary list for legitimate apps almost always. To be fair, Android's way of having them listed makes it possible to assess an app's intention before installing it. That's great and all for me and you, but did not help 50+ million users in this case.
- krisgenre 13y ago
  hmm.. wasn't the iOS app QuizUp in the spotlight only recently for having security bugs that exposes personal information to random users?
  - jdminhbg 13y ago
    QuizUp had legitimate user info needed to manage the game (you need a person's FB account and/or email to contact and identify them), the problem is they were transmitting it unencrypted. So permissions didn't make a difference there.

casca 13y ago

For those on a jailbroken iPhone, firewallIP[1] is the best way to control apps' access to the network. Every time a network connection is requested, you get a system popup that controls access to individual destinations, wildcards, whatever. As long as there's nothing equivalent for Android (after Whispercore was shelved), I'm stuck on IOS. [1] http://yllier.webs.com/firewall.html http://yllier.webs.com/firewall.html

shrikant 13y ago
Android Firewall doesn't do what you want? https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jtschohl.androidfirewall https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jtschohl.a...
- casca 13y ago
  Sadly not. For example, for an individual app I might want to block access to the analytics services like Flurry but allow access to necessary services.

ricg 13y ago

I always wonder what is going on when the YouTube app wants to access the microphone while I'm browsing videos.

CalRobert 13y ago

TANSTAAFL

jgalt212 13y ago

This is why, from the consumer perspective html5 apps must win, but from the producer perspective they won't. For example, it's much easier for a company to spam your entire address book using a native app than using a web interface.

JoeAltmaier 13y ago

SO, their penalty is, promise to not do it again? That's it? Not, for instance, erase all the data and pay a fine?

twobits 13y ago

The whole permissions thing in android is just smoke screen. A talking point about giving power to users, respecting them, etc.

Pxtl 13y ago

Dear play store: let me search by permissions. Or to sort by low-permissions. When I want a flashlight app, I want to be able to search for things that only use the camera system. I appreciate that Android lets developers and users do what they want and lets Users know what the applications have permission to do, but if you have to snoop at every application's specific details to find this out, it's not really good for those of us who care about such things. A big problem is some of the permissions have terrible names - stuff like "read phone state and identity" - what freaking user is going to know what that means?

judk 13y ago
Teaching you to care about permissions would ruin Android's ad supported business model.

amouat 13y ago

"But this flashlight app left them in the dark about how their information was going to be used" Is the joke intentional?!

wankerrific 13y ago

Look - its just a crappy permissions system in the OS. I'm looking at my app and we have all these scary-sounding perms: android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE ==> needed to write images to external storage android.permission.ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE ==> pretty much anything that needs to have a working internet connection android.permission.READ_PHONE_STATE ==> link tracking android.permission.GET_TASKS ==> crash reporting android.permission.READ_LOGS ==> also crash reporting but probably doesn't work in 4.3 android.permission.GET_ACCOUNTS ==> Google Cloud Messaging...seriously android.permission.WAKE_LOCK ==> also GCM etc. And when you add ad networks it gets worse. And, they also pay more for gender, location, and age so thats why everyone wants you to sign in with Facebook, etc, because otherwise you can't pay the bills. I don't know why this is a big deal. Isn't Google already vacuuming up this information from their Android users anyways via "Google Play Services".

salem 13y ago

So apparently there was no fine. Amazing. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/12/06/ftc-flashlight-app/3889949/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/12/06/ftc-flashlight...

xyver 13y ago

nothing to hide, please find me i may be lost!!