this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026

396 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

83295 readers

4345 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

396

From F-Droid to emulators, here's who's hit hardest by Android's new verification rules (www.androidauthority.com)

submitted 1 week ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@lemmy.world

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(page 2) 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 6 days ago

Nobody (for now),/as it can be easil, bypassed

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 119 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can't see this move by Google as anything but a power grab to reduce competition. If someone wants to bear the "risk" of installing software that hasn't been vetted by Google, why does Google insist on being a nanny that makes it more difficult? Money, that's why. Google is acting to try to enforce its monopoly over android apps. GrapheneOS, which is more secure than android, doesn't make a fuss over this issue. No, this is only an issue with the company that hoovers up all your data in breach of your privacy.

load more comments (1 replies)

[+] greencoil@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz -12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Saving you a click:

Read the fine print carefully, and Google’s new app-loading processes aren’t as invasive as they could have been. For many users, nothing will change. Even for users exploring apps outside Google’s walled garden, the process is usually a one-time setup with a few simple steps and a short wait, keeping the experience virtually the same as it is today.

We have phone manufacturers who offer unlocked boot loaders as a feature, but require two weeks or more of device ownership, registration using personally identifiable info for an online account, and many times don't even allow you to relock the boot loader. Despite all this hassle, these devices still get updated third party OS's with Lineage and eOS.

Anyone who was publishing to FDroid already is not going to ~~be annoyed~~ give up over the 24 hour scare screen for users. The most inconvenient aspect is that they can't use the same signing keys as a Google Play release, which they should never have been doing anyway. Its absurd that developers were using the same signing keys across all different distribution methods in the first place.

EDIT: Phrasing. Everything about Android is annoying.

[–] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 44 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The APK installation process is already more inconvenient than it should be, and now it will be getting even worse. There should be no difference in installing an APK via Google Play versus any other method.

The fact that the process will still have a 'security' warning each and every time after the 24 hour wait period shows that even for "advanced users" they want to make it as inconvenient as possible while claiming to still be keeping Android open.

[–] ThomasWilliams@lemmy.world -3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The APK installation process is already more inconvenient than it should be,

You what. All you have to do is download the apk and then run it on the phone. HTF could it be any easier ?

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] greencoil@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I agree. I do not want to come off as defending Google here. Things will get worse as they always have, and the sooner we got off Googles corporate platform, the better. Google has no business forcing themselves as a "trusted central source", especially with all the evidence showing that the Play Store is a more common and successful attack vector than third party apks. Third party offerings should be as easy and accessible as Googles.

I guess I'm just really annoyed at the public response because it continues to be doom and gloom; as if open source app development was going to die overnight due to this one change. I'm pointing out that there is already more restrictive things on the Android platform, and big projects still exist despite that. As hostile as a development platform Android has been, a new one time, 24 hour scare screen is likely not going to be the final straw for developers.

[–] yardratianSoma@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

I agree, this is not going to be the final straw for most developers, but I, and others, will never use android again after this.

I moved away from Microsoft because I don't need a digital overseer policing my usage of the system. Android is moving in that direction, and so will I move, towards freedom.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Anyone who was publishing to FDroid already is not going to be annoyed about the 24 hour scare screen for users.

Bullshit.

It's hard enough to get people to step outside the Play Store ecosystem. Any additional friction will greatly reduce the number who do, and the combination of a reboot and a long waiting period is a lot of friction for the average person.

[–] greencoil@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz -1 points 1 week ago

I specifically said publishing. Publishers/developers are not the average person. And the people installing third party apps on the user hostile platform of Android are also already dealing with friction. I'm more concerned with developers giving up because they need to do unacceptable ID verification, or are outright banned from development APKs entirely, than users giving up because "this takes too long..." Frankly, you ignoring the context of my post comes off as you just wanting to be angry.

I read the headline, I read the article, and I answered the rage bait presented in said headline. The impact of this change is "fuck all and nothing". I've got plenty of web sites that are inaccessible without getting around geoblocks with a VPN. Been in communities shut down by corporate media throwing money and legal teams at denying their right to exist. Feels like everyone wants a federal ID to use an online service these days, and Google wont be that far behind doing their own version of it. But this update changes literally nothing for power users right now. Sorry that I'm not as upset because the slippery slope isn't as steep as everyone else says it is.

If you really want something worth being mad at, get mad at the hardware manufactures who release hardware with proprietary firmware that only runs on Android. Wouldn't be having this discussion at all if users were allowed to run completely custom software from boot. If there was an open standard for a battery powered device that could run a modern compliant web browser, and take SMS/phone calls, we could tell Google to kick sand. Instead we have an ocean of built-to-expire mobile phones that end up being "obsolete" within 2 years. I'm pretty sure the mobile carriers/ISPs have more control over what hardware is allowed to exist though. I should probably do more research on that.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments