5 ms·

This is a major issue Google needs to deal with in Android IMO. I'm surprised that this feature ever existed in Android because of how coupled permissions are w

This is a major issue Google needs to deal with in Android IMO. I'm surprised that this feature ever existed in Android because of how coupled permissions are with applications. Since applications request all permissions on install I imagine most developers don't have much conditional code for their failure, unlike iOS where you have to because there's a possibility a user may deny access to a single specific thing, like location data. I'd really prefer to see Android go more towards that. When you look at the permissions an application like Facebook requests on install it's just insane.

jxf 13y ago
That's partially because developers are somewhat incentivized to "front-load" their permissions. If you think there's even a chance you might use a permission, even if your app doesn't currently use it, ask for it on the first install. Then, later, when you actually do want to use it, your app update won't say that you need any new permissions.
- exodust 13y ago
  This doesn't sound right to me. I don't think developers are doing this.
  - jxf 13y ago
    I don't think developers should do it, but there's no question that they're doing it. For example, Facebook requests almost every permission under the sun. But if you look at the average user's permission profile for their Facebook app, they'll only show a tiny fraction of the overall permissions that Facebook originally requested.
    - SmileyKeith 13y ago
      And that's the really scary part. Is that so many applications do this for just unreasonable permissions. Then you get one of the bad applications that's actually using that data for something nefarious and it destroys trust in the process. For me at least.
  - kevb 13y ago
    I've done this. Not for sneaky/malicious purposes but just to provide a better experience. Also batching features around adding permissions, I'd rather release one update with two new permissions than two different updates each requesting a new permission. Nova Launcher has had the "Set Wallpaper" permission from the start, most launchers have it and use it, but Nova didn't actually needed it initially as the set wallpaper functionality was just calling other apps that held the permission themselves. But I knew Nova would at some point require it (and indeed it does now) and users completely expect the launcher to be able to set the wallpaper, but users still get confused or annoyed by the new permission screen. "Google Play License Check" is another permission I've requested but not used. It's a reasonable permission for a paid app to have and not one that users email me asking about, but when I first added it to WidgetLocker I did get users asking about new permissions (The "Android Market" at that time didn't specifically point out which permissions were new, so people would just ask about any permission they didn't realize the app had all along). In a future update I ended up disabling license checking because it was proving to be more trouble than it was worth, but I didn't remove the permission because if I ever wanted to turn it back on I didn't want users to be prompted about the permission again. Requesting something like Read Contacts without actually using it would probably upset users, as some will ask about those kinds of permissions and expect a reasonable answer. Saying it's just for future use would seem a bit suspicious.
- SmileyKeith 13y ago
  I definitely get that. With automatic updates I bet that a lot of applications sit in that update queue on people's devices since they actually have to confirm the new permissions.

jxf 13y ago

That's partially because developers are somewhat incentivized to "front-load" their permissions. If you think there's even a chance you might use a permission, even if your app doesn't currently use it, ask for it on the first install. Then, later, when you actually do want to use it, your app update won't say that you need any new permissions.

exodust 13y ago
This doesn't sound right to me. I don't think developers are doing this.
- jxf 13y ago
  I don't think developers should do it, but there's no question that they're doing it. For example, Facebook requests almost every permission under the sun. But if you look at the average user's permission profile for their Facebook app, they'll only show a tiny fraction of the overall permissions that Facebook originally requested.
  - SmileyKeith 13y ago
    And that's the really scary part. Is that so many applications do this for just unreasonable permissions. Then you get one of the bad applications that's actually using that data for something nefarious and it destroys trust in the process. For me at least.
- kevb 13y ago
  I've done this. Not for sneaky/malicious purposes but just to provide a better experience. Also batching features around adding permissions, I'd rather release one update with two new permissions than two different updates each requesting a new permission. Nova Launcher has had the "Set Wallpaper" permission from the start, most launchers have it and use it, but Nova didn't actually needed it initially as the set wallpaper functionality was just calling other apps that held the permission themselves. But I knew Nova would at some point require it (and indeed it does now) and users completely expect the launcher to be able to set the wallpaper, but users still get confused or annoyed by the new permission screen. "Google Play License Check" is another permission I've requested but not used. It's a reasonable permission for a paid app to have and not one that users email me asking about, but when I first added it to WidgetLocker I did get users asking about new permissions (The "Android Market" at that time didn't specifically point out which permissions were new, so people would just ask about any permission they didn't realize the app had all along). In a future update I ended up disabling license checking because it was proving to be more trouble than it was worth, but I didn't remove the permission because if I ever wanted to turn it back on I didn't want users to be prompted about the permission again. Requesting something like Read Contacts without actually using it would probably upset users, as some will ask about those kinds of permissions and expect a reasonable answer. Saying it's just for future use would seem a bit suspicious.
SmileyKeith 13y ago
I definitely get that. With automatic updates I bet that a lot of applications sit in that update queue on people's devices since they actually have to confirm the new permissions.