Android developer verification: Balancing openness and choice with safety

News and insights on the Android platform, developer tools, and events.

Android Developers Blog

This is going to hurt legitimate sideloading way more than actually necessary to reduce scams:

- Must enable developer mode -- some apps (e.g., banking apps) will refuse to operate and such when developer mode is on, and so if you depend on such apps, I guess you just can't sideload?

- One-day (day!!!) waiting period to activate (one-time) -- the vast majority of people who need to sideload something will probably not be willing to wait a day, and will thus just not sideload unless they really have no choice for what they need. This kills the pathway for new users to sideload apps that have similar functionality to those on the Play Store.

The rest -- restarting, confirming you aren't being coached, and per-install warnings -- would be just as effective alone to "protect users," but with those prior two points, it's clear that this is just simply intended to make sideloading so inconvenient that many won't bother or can't (dev mode req.).

The one-day waiting period is so arbitrary. Have they demonstrated any supporting data? We know google loves to flaunt data.

Something like Github's approach of forcing users to type the name of the repo they wish to delete would seem to be more than sufficient to protect technically disinclined users while still allowing technically aware users to do what they please with their own device.

> The one-day waiting period is so arbitrary.

Scammers aren't going to wait on the phone for a day with your elderly parent.

I think the more important aspect is that people will have 24h to slow down, think, and realize that they are being scammed. Urgency and pressure is one of the top tactics used by scammers.

Scammers will definitely call back the next day to continue. But it is quite possible that by then the victim has realized, or talked to someone who helped them realize that they are being scammed.

There's been some reporting recently where I live about a case of some woman being scammed.

She went to a bank to transfer the scammer money. They told her no. She came back the next day. The police got involved and explained everything to her. Then she came back the next day. After that, she apparently found another location which let her transfer the money.

There's basically zero chance a 24 hour (or any amount of a) cool off period will help these people.

Just because you have one example of someone who would not realize doesn't mean that the number of people who would realize is zero.

It's not one example. The scammers purposefully target people like these. That's their business.

Like, I'm sure there's a small amount of people who normally wouldn't get scammed but fall for it in a panic. But, is that really such a big concern for Google that they absolutely must continue stripping user freedoms from us? Is the current 30s popup which needs 3 confirmations not enough? Will the new one really work?

Yes the most likely to fall are going to be targeted, but if you make that group of people 90% smaller with a delay that is still beneficial.

Whether the feature is beneficial overall is a different story. But helping some people is great even if it doesn't help everyone.

> helping some people is great even if it doesn't help everyone

It's kind of funny, but I very much agree with this. It's just in this case, it's hurting everyone (in ways most don't even realize) so that you can help a few people.

It's like putting everyone in prison, because some people might commit a crime and this would save some victims. A bit of an overreaction, no?