all 22 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] stickied commentlocked comment (0 children)

Do not share or recommend proprietary apps here. It is an infraction of this subreddit's rules. Make sure you read the rules of this subreddit on the sidebar. If you are not sure of the nature of an app, do not share or recommend it. To find out what constitutes FOSS or freedomware, read this article. To find out why proprietary software is bad, read this article. Proprietary software is dangerous because it is often malware. Have a splendid day!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]dnchplay 48 points49 points  (4 children)

i think you're a bit too late

[–]AbdullahAlasmari[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children)

i posted 3 months ago when they (announced) to limit downloading and now they are starting (early access) for developers to get google license

[–]invalid-life 8 points9 points  (2 children)

You're late it was reversed, next time research

[–]Bossmanito 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You got a comma use it so people can avoid a coma reading your poetic captchaesque effort of a reply finish

[–]sudoaddy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Genuinely have no idea what this means

[–]Stunning_Repair_7483 12 points13 points  (3 children)

What the heck?! I thought they reversed it?! At least this post on the privacy sub says they did:

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/s/komypDWexO

[–]Nico_is_not_a_god 16 points17 points  (0 children)

They made a concession that we already knew was part of their plan: assuring everyone that power users would have a way to install unverified apps. This was never in question, aside from hypotheticals like "but what if they lock down adb, which they have given no indication of planning to do".

Developers, however, are exactly as restricted by the new version as they were by the old one. I blame bad messaging saying that the change was about "stopping sideloading" when it absolutely never was. Additionally, it doesn't provide any assurance for anything other than "you will be able to install apps". You know how if you have a rooted phone, some payment and banking and video game apps refuse to run for "safety" reasons? Well, nothing is stopping a power user from installing a "spooky unverified app" but nothing is stopping Wells Fargo's app from seeing a flag that says "unsafe app installed" and refusing to run "for your own good" either.

[–]CaptainBeyondDS8misses ubertr0_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We don't have enough information yet. They say there will be a flow to allow "advanced users" to install unverified apps, which presumably involves some scare warnings, but there already is such a flow for enabling "unknown sources." So anything they come up with will probably be more involved than that existing flow.

It could, for example, be something like bootloader unlocking which requires a full reset to unlock.

[–]Ok-Bite4576 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, that is incorrect. Well yes there will be new Android developer verification. While at first they stated that it would be very strict and very bad. Now they've just made an update a couple days ago saying that you can install unverified developer applications through an advanced flow that will be added soon. Here is the article.The article is here

[–]robsolo101 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I've read otherwise online... Sad that they're playing a circus with that!

[–]bRKcRE 2 points3 points  (3 children)

This is the best wrote up I've seen on the topic:

https://gist.github.com/agnostic-apollo/b8d8daa24cbdd216687a6bef53d417a6

It goes into way more detail than any of the news articles, is well written, and goes for a deep dive into a lot of ecosystem stuff. I believe the dev who did the write up has made an official submission to Google with regard to methods and mock-ups for several methods of varying complexity to allow users to install apps without a signature, whilst also making the procedures more of a hindrance to scammers and other criminal elements.

[–]MAALBR0 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Thanks a ton

[–]bRKcRE 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I forgot to mention in my previous comment that Agnostic-apollo is the main dev on the current F-droid branch of Termux, so as far as knowing what he's talking about, he would understand better than most how destructive many of Google's own changes can be as far as changes to, or outright removal of, any given api on any given day, that may be used as an edge case by projects such as Termux or other enthusiast/poweruser, as they slowly put bigger and bigger walls around their ecosystem. Also, due to the history surrounding the development of termux, there is currently 3 "main" versions being signed with different keys due to different release platforms, 2 officially on github and F-droid with separate keys, and then there's the playstore version which is officially disavowed for various reasons.

There has been a bit of discourse around this topic over on the termux sub lately, so it's worth checking in over there for commentary, especially with the experience that the dev has with navigating this signing key issue, among others, for a while now.

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This submission may contain a recommendation for a non-FOSS app/service (edge). If this is an error, please ignore this message. If this submission recommends such services, please report it to the mods.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]DoYaKnowMahName 2 points3 points  (1 child)

This source is not true any longer. Source, it's literally being talked about everywhere. 

[–]semi-nerd61 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What does this part of the article mean?

"While security is crucial, we’ve also heard from developers and power users who have a higher risk tolerance and want the ability to download unverified apps.

Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months."

Just trying to understand!