Leon LinhartFeb 21
Neil Brown

People should be able to write software for Android, and distribute it outside Google's Play store, without having to:

* pay Google
* give government ID to Google
* agree to Google terms and conditions

People should be able to install the software they want on their phone, from sources other than Google's Play store, without having to jump through Google-imposed hoops.

e.g. via F-Droid.

We've got until September this year to stop Google squeezing the open Android ecosystem.

https://keepandroidopen.org/

Keep Android Open

Advocating for Android as a free, open platform for everyone to build apps on.

Feb 17 at 5:44pmWeb
Show threadBen HardillFeb 17
@neil missing "id" from second bullet point?
Show threadKeith JudgeFeb 17
@neil I'm sure you're already aware Epic Games have an ongoing legal battle with Google/Apple about putting their own store on Android/iOS based on the same principles.
Show threadMortenFeb 18
@KeefJudge @neil Epic still wants 12% of everything on that store though.
Show threadKeith JudgeFeb 18
@drgroftehauge @neil True, but the point is people ought to be able to choose which store they have on their phone, not just the Google Play one.
Show threadHans-Christoph SteinerFeb 18
@KeefJudge @neil It is important to remember that Epic Games is a corporation focused on maximizing profit, not free software or user freedom. Also, Epic v. Google is a lawsuit between two private parties. Epic and Google are working on a business deal right now, this is highly likely to undermine any potential benefits that lawsuit could have for the rest of us. To the point: that lawsuit is useful but not enough.
Show threadKeith JudgeFeb 18
@eighthave @neil No argument here - was just pointing out the two are quite related.
Show threadmozzriboFeb 17

@neil

@GrapheneOS Do you have plans or announcements regarding this?

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 17
@illumniscate @neil It doesn't directly impact GrapheneOS. It won't have this enforcement. We'd have to go out of the way to make integration with an opt-in toggle for it and aren't interested in it rather than other approaches to verifying app authenticity/trustworthiness.
Show threadJeroen Feb 17
@GrapheneOS @illumniscate @neil Thank you for confirming that. I assume it's the same then for Murena? @gael
Show threadXtreixFeb 17

@j2 @GrapheneOS @illumniscate @neil @gael Please note that Murena is a scam, this is not an honest project and it's dangerous to use it.

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private

Old blog by a LineageOS dev, the issues with /e/a are not news : https://ewwlo.void.partidopirata.com.ar/

In this discussion on Hacker News, a user who has used Murena products confirms that /e/OS completely breaks Android's security model, signed with Google's test keys with an unlocked bootloader that cannot be locked, which would have been pointless since these test keys are not intended for production. Of course, users duped by Murena's misleading marketing will claim that this is not important and assert that the GrapheneOS project is toxic, but correcting misinformation has never been toxic behavior.

There are many other problems with /e/. Gael Duval is a scammer, and he, his team, and his community are involved in spreading misinformation about GrapheneOS and its users. In fact, the people in this Hacker News thread who are attacking GrapheneOS for things it doesn't do are users of /e/.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47046979

Devices lacking standard privacy/security patches and protections aren't private - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum

GrapheneOS discussion forum

GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 17

@j2 @illumniscate @neil Gaël Duval has extensively spread misinformation about GrapheneOS and /e/ to falsely market his products for his for-profit company. He has engaged in extensive libel and harassment towards our team. Here's an example of him linking to harassment content based on fabrications on a blatant neo-nazi conspiracy website, which he has done repeatedly:

https://archive.is/SWXPJ
https://archive.is/n4yTO

Please don't mention him in replies to us or otherwise involve him.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 17
@j2 @illumniscate @neil /e/ has poor privacy and extraordinarily bad security. It lacks basic privacy and security patches/protections. It isn't a safe option but rather is a grift not fit for purpose. Strongly recommend reading https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private and the linked sources. /e/ and Murena services are not safe and do not respect user privacy. They heavily mislead users about what's provided including relentlessly lying about highly important missing privacy/security patches/protections.
Devices lacking standard privacy/security patches and protections aren't private - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum

GrapheneOS discussion forum

GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 17
@j2 @illumniscate @neil /e/ is a fork of LineageOS, which is far less bad but not a privacy/security hardened OS. LineageOS is based on AOSP like GrapheneOS. AOSP isn't impacted by Google Play enforced restrictions on app installations, but it has been announced those can be turned off or bypassed by power users at least initially anyway. Some people integrate Google Play with privileged access into other operating systems like LineageOS where it may be relevant but they could bypass it.
Show threadMatt PanaroFeb 17
@GrapheneOS @illumniscate @neil are you guys going to be adversely impacted by the updated semi-annual release schedule for AOSP, assuming Google's still planning that change?
Show threadXtreixFeb 17
@eigen @GrapheneOS @illumniscate @neil GrapheneOS is not affected by update issues, and thanks to their collaboration with a major Android OEM since June 2025, GrapheneOS can offer security preview releases. https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/27068-grapheneos-security-preview-releases
GrapheneOS security preview releases - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum

GrapheneOS discussion forum

GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 17
@eigen @illumniscate @neil We don't know if that's still planned and we'll be fine either way.
Show threadLaurensFeb 17
@neil "You will ride a unicycle, wear a pink dress and clown shoes while developing your app!"
Show threadGabriel NFeb 17

@neil I remember when Apple launched the Apple Store and how I felt about it:

“Wait, what?!: do they own my device and my relationship with the people that make the software?!”

“Didn’t I pay for this thing?”

Show threadGerardFeb 17

@neil During the last five years, I spent a fairly significant amount of time developing an android app. I got a developer account and had an alpha release on the play store.
Unfortunately, personal circumstances took my focus away from it for some time, and by the time I got back to it, my account had been deleted after I hadn't responded to one of their requests.

I found the sign up process unpleasant and intrusive, so the idea of going through it again is not appealing. Naturally, I thought about putting my app on another store. The idea of that company being in control of what I can provide to other people to run on their devices was enough to make me quit. I won't be releasing my work as long as this restriction is being held over us.

Show threadGerardFeb 17

@neil I should add: even having said all that, I can at least acknowledge that there is a case for IDs being checked before permitting apps to ship via their own store. I wish it wasn't the same company that's harvesting so much other personal data, but I do think it is preferable that apps are not published with no verified responsible person.

Once again, I'd be a lot more comfortable if identity verification could be done by a provider of my choice with only a token being passed to the store.

Show threadМейкпостFeb 18
@GerardThornley @neil One reason I release small apps as free software, not to Google, is that I want to let anyone interested continue when I switch to working on something else. Proprietary apps are forced dead when the initial developer prioritizes life. Companies behind Netscape and StarOffice realized it in time for their apps to survive. I think any company soon to close should mimic them. At least so that oligopolies forcing them out of the market don't get away with it for free.
Show threadGerardFeb 18
@makepost @neil I agree, and if I do release my app commercially, I hope that I will follow suit in releasing the source when I no longer need the income.
Show threadirelephantFeb 17
Don't you have to agree to like 20 pages of terms and conditions before installing the sdks for android?
Show threadKeith WansbroughFeb 17
@neil thanks; the CMA form for reporting this in the UK was simple and easy, like most of the gov.uk sites. Done.
Show threadTrimTab 🇺🇦Feb 17

@neil
Not saying i agree with Google. But how is the OS community going to fight the forces of evil trying to hijack our code?

Between malware labs, ai slop and slop powered malware labs, i am worried. The idea of making sure real accountable humans are writing honest code seems appealing....

Show threadEpic NullFeb 18
@TrimTab @neil I would say the OS community can offer tools, but it is up to the app store operators to decide what they can host, and we certainly should not be putting the final say for other app stores in the hands of a company that does not successfully manage their own.
Show threadSteve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺Feb 18
@TrimTab @neil But are apps served through Google's walled garden any less likely to be malware or ai slop?
Show threadTrimTab 🇺🇦Feb 18

@steve @neil
Compared to a wild west anything goes lord of the flies app repo? Probably.

I yearn for the day when OSS can provide a trustworthy app ecosystem that can also let devs earn a living - something easy and consolidated yet safe from enshitification. But in my 15 years as a linux user and oss enthusiast, things have just gotten more fragmented. Seems this is now androids future too...

Show threadThales_CuriositiesFeb 17
@neil keepandroidopen has to create a standard email to send to.
Show threadHans-Christoph SteinerFeb 18
@Thales_Curiosities @neil This is a small volunteer effort so far, we need help to make it a success. Get involved! Could you set up this email that you are thinking about?
Show thread𝔸𝕟𝕔𝕚𝕖𝕟𝕥 𝕊𝕠𝕦𝕟𝕕𝕤 🔉Feb 17
@neil
You're in the legal biz Neil (I think?): is this a question on which the Competition & Markets Authority have some jurisdiction? I guess, bcs Apple, it's not strictly creating a monopoly, but it's definitely restricting the market.
Show threadDave MasonFeb 17

@neil

Can Android be saved?
I say no--it's too late.

https://mastodon.social/@DaveMasonDotMe/116077995885754163

Show threadyoung man yells at the cloudFeb 18
@neil Any idea whether this would impact GrapheneOS users?
Show threadGray HairsFeb 18
@bamboombibbitybop
https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/32033-android-app-lockdown
@neil
Android app lockdown - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum

GrapheneOS discussion forum

GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
Show threadGregFeb 18

@neil
I'm with you on this. The list of disabled ('cos I can't uninstall) Google apps on my phone is impressively long and includes play services and play store. I rely on F-Droid and, heaven help me APKpure - which has both the additional apps I can't get from F-Droid but also the worlds biggest collection of UX anti patterns for flinging ads in every conceivable way and at all times. Hate it but still prefer it to Google.

I hate this new proposal from Google but don't know what to do. Polite suggestions welcome 😇

Show threadÆrionFeb 19

@gregalotl
You may want to look into #Obtainium instead of APKpure. For as long as that will still work, of course.

@neil

Show threadSarah, The Website TherapistFeb 18
@neil @jrdepriest for both Google and Apple, I’d really like their built in stores to be all about trust and uphold a guarantee that apps have been checked and conform to a level of safety privacy accessibility and reliability to reach the App Store. Give a choice of where to download from, but also make the App Store presence mean something
Show threadocdtrekkieFeb 18

@neil There is nothing to "keep" open. Android was never open. They astroturfed an entire "open alliance" to... force all participants to push their apps and prohibit any and all forks. Since like 2008!

Android was never open, and at least they're finally honest about it.

Show threadredtiFeb 18
@neil GrapheneOS!
Show threadIO 😇Feb 18
@neil @linuzifer wäre das nicht auch was für @lnp ? liebe den podcasf btw
Show threadJonasFeb 18
@neil You can always get a phone with SailfishOS from Jolla and run android apps from F-Droid. Google cannot prevent that.
Show threadRenard Feb 18
@neil We need to stop feeding this beast entirely, move away from iOS/Android, and not just put it on a diet.
Show threadCharlie_HouseFeb 18
@neil f-droid and aurora shop 🍀
Show threadHans-Christoph SteinerFeb 18
@Charlie_House @neil Google's Android Developer Verification gives them the possibility to prevent any app from running on all Android devices, no matter the source. That is why there is this campaign. Even if you get the app from F-Droid, Aurora, etc. etc. Google would still be able to prevent it from running
Show threadMayaFeb 18
@neil Highly unlikely anyone will be able to do anything to stop google. Best advice i can give is degoogle your phone, custom ROM. And just use that.
Show threadcorinne she|herFeb 19
@neil I have absolutely no idea what this might mean for the two devices I have that run custom Android installs with unique apps (Boox ereader and FiiO media player), but... ah... this doesn't sound good.
Show threadÆrionFeb 19

@neil
Hopefully this will give #FOSS devs an incentive to shift app development to #mobilelinux if Google pushes ahead with this.

There ARE alternatives. I'm fully aware that they are, for the most part, not prime time ready, but they DO exist, and they've come a long way.

Maybe Google doing this will be a blessing in disguise, as it may just be what's needed to give #linuxphones a push.

I, for one, will switch to one form of mobile Linux or another, if Obtainium/F-Droid/IzzyOnDroid are killed off by this.

#obtainium #izzyondroid #postmarketos #ubuntutouch #ubports #sailfishos #phosh #gnomemobile #plasmamobile

Show threadDaniël de KokFeb 20

@aerion @neil Most Linux phone OSes have *far worse* security than Android.

Why not just use an AOSP-based OS like @GrapheneOS ? You get all of the upsides and very few to none of the downsides.

Even if you do not like Google's decisions, just ditching the engineering marvel that is AOSP does not make much sense at all.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 20
@danieldk Android is mobile Linux. Linux doesn't mean glibc, systemd and GNOME. The desktop Linux software stack has atrocious privacy and security compared to the Android Open Source Project. There's a large and far better open source mobile app ecosystem for AOSP alongside the rest of the Android app ecosystem. Google's announced changes don't have any direct impact on an AOSP-based OS that's not licensing Google Mobile Services. The changes only amount to added UI friction for a GMS OS.
Show threadDaniël de KokFeb 20

@GrapheneOS fair, but a lot of people mean SailfishOS, Plasma, Ubuntu Touch when they refer to 'mobile Linux', like (I assume) the person I was reacting to.

I completely agree with your criticism of the security and privacy of the desktop Linux stack. I have been trying to shout that off the rooftops for years, but it's an uphill battle.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 20
@danieldk People mainly use the term that way because they're misinformed about Android. Many people wrongly believe Android requires a special variant of the Linux kernel with downstream patches when that hasn't been the case for years. It works with the kernel.org mainline and LTS kernels. Most distributions maintain their own LTS branches as Android does with the GKI branches. Unlike certain distributions such as Ubuntu, Android always bases downstream LTS branch on upstream LTS branches.
Show threadÆrionFeb 22

@danieldk
I would, if it wasn't for the fact that it only runs on Pixel phones.

That makes GrapheneOS even more of a niche operating system than the various mobile Linux options, as at least they run on more than one brand of hardware.

I very deliberately opted for a #Fairphone, a device that, apart from its ethical and sustainability benefits, can run several alternative OSs.

I severely dislike what Android has grown into: an increasingly more restrictive OS, with artificially imposed limitations that we would not accept in our desktop OSs. It has enabled hardware manufacturers to lock users into a purely profit driven perpetual upgrade cycle.

Why can I install Linux on 15+ years old hardware, with ease, and use it with modern software, yet I cannot do the same with a mobile phone or tablet? It fuels an ever growing pile of electronic waste.

What I ultimately want from my mobile devices is the exact same freedom I have on my desktop.

@neil @GrapheneOS

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22

@aerion @danieldk @neil Fairphones have very poor updates, privacy and security regardless of OS choice.

Fairphone doesn't provide proper updates from day 1. Fairphone 5 launched September 2023 and already has an end-of-life 5.4 kernel branch with no plan to upgrade. They weren't providing the kernel updates when they were available themselves but another OS could have done it and now it's impractical. Fairphone similarly doesn't keep the drivers, firmware and other components properly updated.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22
@aerion @danieldk @neil Pixels are the only smartphones with competitive hardware, firmware and software security with iPhones. They're the only non-iOS devices providing reasonably good long term updates and support. Fairphone markets their devices as providing it but they don't actually do it. They're lagging a year or more behind on OS updates, skipping non-yearly updates entirely and a month or two behind on the bare minimum Android schedule for patches which are available to ship earlier.
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22
@aerion @danieldk @neil The vast majority of smartphones either don't allow installing another OS or have extremely poor support for it including crippling the security of the device if people do it. In general, people who want to use another OS on a smartphone need to buy a device with it in mind. Supporting more models wouldn't change much especially a device like the Fairphone with far less distribution than Pixels. What would be the purpose of supporting an insecure device with bad updates?
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22
@aerion @danieldk @neil Fairphones are missing important hardware-based security features. They use largely the same components as other phones but it's quite outdated hardware for overly high prices. Buying newly produced outdated hardware with poor updates is hardly sustainable. The reality is more resources are likely used to produce each than an iPhone due to the efficiency of scale. iPhones have far better updates, also provide long term parts/repairs and much better privacy + security.
Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22

@aerion @danieldk @neil GrapheneOS is a privacy and security hardened OS and has hardware requirements based on it. The only laptops/desktops meeting similar requirements are from Apple but it's unclear how much of the security features could be used elsewhere.

GrapheneOS and the Android Open Source Project are Linux distros. It's not glibc, systemd and GNOME which make it Linux. Most of the software you're calling Linux isn't even Linux specific but rather also works on FreeBSD, Hurd, etc.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22

@aerion @danieldk @neil GrapheneOS has a large and rapidly growing userbase. Many people care about privacy and security who aren't misled into believing operating systems and hardware far worse at both than an iPhone are the answer.

Instead of supporting devices not meeting bare minimum privacy and security standards, we're working on proper devices meeting our full requirements with an OEM partner. They're one of the largest smartphone companies and are announcing our partnership next month.

Show threadGrapheneOSFeb 22
@aerion @danieldk @neil Many people want a genuinely highly private and secure device with many years of proper updates. They can get that with an iPhone and they can get it with GrapheneOS as an open source alternative. GrapheneOS is succeeding and becoming increasingly mainstream. It's far more usable and suited for production use than any of the alternatives. The fact that we won't take the shortcut of using insecure devices is why a major OEM is actively working on making what we need.
Show threadCliff'sEsportCornerFeb 22
@GrapheneOS @aerion @danieldk @neil just hope they include PWM & flicker free options for people like me that can't use Pixel or other models with PWM.