When Google first announced sideloading restrictions, somebody told “but we have ADB”, and who disagreed with them was criticized harshly.
Now, I’m waiting for a workaround to enable ADB, so sideloading can be handled now, too.
Android is not more open that iOS for a very long time now. The trend will continue.
Again, this is not a technical problem (the mindset of Google), so technological solutions won’t help.
Android became a lost cause the second they introduced hardware remote attestation.
Even if there was a way to install your own software, there's no point in doing so. You're "tampering" with the device. Fail attestation and you're untrusted. You get banned from everything. If you hack, you're ostracized from digital society. You're a second class citizen. Can't communicate. Can't bank. Can't stream. Can't play video games. Can't do pretty much anything.
That's the future of Android. GrapheneOS is quite literally the last hope for Android, and only because by some miracle there are companies out there who started trusting Graphene's attestation keys. If that hope ever dies then we might as well buy iPhones.
Agreed, GrapheneOS is underrated.
> Again, this is not a technical problem (the mindset of Google)
This is not even Google's mindset, the control strings of this mindset stretch far beyond its management and board of directors.
That's the OBEY from the timeless Carpenter's classic.
[flagged]
> which is the intended use
"Intended use" (as understood by Google) for my smartphone is apparently providing them with data, consuming their advertisements and overpaying for apps that display ads and where you need in-app purchases to unlock basic functionality.
> not as a hack for escalating privileges
Hack for "escalating privileges" on my own device so I can do nefarious actions like uninstalling bloatware, denying apps internet access, recording calls (legally).. how could that be?
>like uninstalling bloatware, denying apps internet access
All of these can be done with a computer.
>recording calls (legally)..
A second phone does the same thing.
>Hack for "escalating privileges" on my own device so I can do nefarious actions
Whether it's a "hack" is orthogonal to whether you control the device or not. I don't think anyone disputes that you "own" your linux PC, but using the well known `docker run --privileged ...`[1] method to get root on your machine is still a hack.
[1] random result: https://github.com/Volodishlav/Docker-Privilege-Escalation
> All of these can be done with a computer.
Can you permanently apply chain3 (FIREWALL_CHAIN_OEM_DENY_3) firewall rules, so that when the device reboots these are still applied? I see no persistence. And if I'm forced to install some crappy app on-the-go, the solution you propose is to always carry a computer with me, right?
> A second phone does the same thing.
So does a Phonograph from 1877, right?
> Whether it's a "hack" is orthogonal to whether you control the device or not.
I didn't object to it being called a hack, I just pointed out how evil and malicious that privilege escalation on my own device is. Google must block it immediately, it endangers the mankind.
>Can you permanently apply chain3 (FIREWALL_CHAIN_OEM_DENY_3) firewall rules, so that when the device reboots these are still applied?
Just use firewall VPN apps + VPN lockdown mode (ie. "block connections without VPN").
>So does a Phonograph from 1877, right?
I think it's fair to factor in what feature was lost because wireless-adb-on-localhost was removed. If some critical accessibility feature was lost, that would be far more important than something that's merely a mild annoyance, like needing a second device to run `adb install`.
>I just pointed out how evil and malicious that privilege escalation on my own device is. Google must block it immediately, it endangers the mankind.
Right, but going back to the docker root analogy, would you think it's unreasonable if people threw a hissy fit of linux kernel/docker developers added some security feature that blocked it?