Keep Android open!

Brave is joining the @eff, the @torproject, and 40+ other organizations in opposing Google's proposed Android developer registry.

Here's why we're taking this stand...

Starting September 2026, Android app devs must register with Google and upload government-issued ID, even if they don't use the Google Play Store.

This decision undermines Android's user-first ecosystem, presents massive privacy risks, and deepens Google’s surveillance economy.

Android is an open platform that lets users install apps outside Google Play. For example, they can download Brave via F-Droid to avoid Google's restrictions and tracking.

However, by forcing developers to register, Google makes itself the gatekeeper. https://brave.com/blog/keep-android-open/

Why Brave is opposing Google’s Android developer registry | Brave

Brave joins the EFF, the Tor Project, and others in calling on Google to withdraw its plan to require government ID from all Android developers, regardless of how they distribute their apps.

Brave

Mandatory developer registration is a serious privacy risk.

A single corporation would create a database of extensive information on every person who writes Android software.

This could cause creators of privacy-preserving apps to leave Android.

Google has a history of proposing mechanisms that expand its control over users and developers. Manifest V2 deprecation, the AMP Project and Privacy Sandbox are just a few recent examples.

We opposed each of these proposals and we oppose this developer registry as well.

The open letter we signed asks Google to:

1. Rescind the mandatory registration
2. Engage transparently on security improvements that respect Android's openness
3. Commit to platform neutrality

Privacy should be easy for users and developers alike! https://keepandroidopen.org/open-letter/

An Open Letter to Google regarding Mandatory Developer Registration for Android App Distribution

Open Letter to Google Regarding Mandatory Developer Registration for Third-Party App Distribution

@brave the appropriate alternative class of open technologies is #digitalProvenance and I don't get why everyone in #privsec isn't working hard on it.