You might sideload an Android app, or manually install its APK package, if you’re using a custom version of Android that doesn’t include Google’s Play Store. Alternately, the app might be experimental, under development, or perhaps no longer maintained and offered by its developer. Until now, the existence of sideload-ready APKs on the web was something that seemed to be tolerated, if warned against, by Google.

This quiet standstill is being shaken up by a new feature in Google’s Play Integrity API. As reported by Android Authority, developer tools to push “remediation” dialogs during sideloading debuted at Google’s I/O conference in May, have begun showing up on users’ phones. Sideloaders of apps from the British shop Tesco, fandom app BeyBlade X, and ChatGPT have reported “Get this app from Play” prompts, which cannot be worked around. An Android gaming handheld user encountered a similarly worded prompt from Diablo Immortal on their device three months ago.

Google’s Play Integrity API is how apps have previously blocked access when loaded onto phones that are in some way modified from a stock OS with all Google Play integrations intact. Recently, a popular two-factor authentication app blocked access on rooted phones, including the security-minded GrapheneOS. Apps can call the Play Integrity API and get back an “integrity verdict,” relaying if the phone has a “trustworthy” software environment, has Google Play Protect enabled, and passes other software checks.

Graphene has questioned the veracity of Google’s Integrity API and SafetyNet Attestation systems, recommending instead standard Android hardware attestation. Rahman notes that apps do not have to take an all-or-nothing approach to integrity checking. Rather than block installation entirely, apps could call on the API only during sensitive actions, issuing a warning there. But not having a Play Store connection can also deprive developers of metrics, allow for installation on incompatible devices (and resulting bad reviews), and, of course, open the door to paid app piracy.

  • Lightsong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    I’m pretty new to this sort of stuff. I was planning to buy Google Pixel 8 sometime in November when they usually have sales. And install GrapheneOS. I never used this type of stuff before.

    So will I have some trouble installing some stuff like some of mobile games, banking app, emails, etc? I’m in Canada if this help.

  • Nikls94@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    This explains why I couldn’t install retroarch on the GalaxyS24 Ultra of a friend via apk or google play store. Would not work, but somehow the Galaxy store version worked….

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I hate having to be on the side of “Defending” google… but this is the app makers fault, They are the ones using whats provided and installing the artificial limitations.

      Google just provided the capability to do it. The app makers are executing it.

  • FireWire400@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    They’re still pissed that people won’t put up with their shitty YouTube app and use Revanced instead, eh?

    • ngwoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s not on Google Play so it doesn’t affect it. I honestly don’t know what the point of this is.

      • FireWire400@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        Oh I see, so it only affects modded apks… They probably want to crack down on all those slightly-shady “spotify premium free”-apks.

        • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          No, it only affects vanilla apks where the dev implemented the check. For some reason the dev might forbid to run the app to users that side loaded the app instead of getting it from play store

          Patched/modded apks are unaffected because the check is patched out

  • 5cr33ch3r@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    The only reason I’m still sticking with Android is the ability to sideload

    I have no reason to use an android if this is the road Google wants to follow and expect my next phone to be an iPhone SE

  • Riley@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 days ago

    If the Play Store becomes required like that then Android’s already-shaky status as an open source base platform is going to go out the window. I’m glad there are non-Google distros of Android but there really needs to be more of a push to make a completely FOSS phone platform.

    • IllNess@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      There are Linux phones available. I,m going to guess popularity of those devices to increase soon.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        That was the hope with Android, too.

        The problem is that as the OS is “free” that means it costs less functionally for the device manufacturer to get an OS on the device, so now they can pour more money into bloatware.

        Android was supposed to stop bloatware but all it did was enable it.

        Even without a forced “store” Linux is prey to the same issue of piecemeal support from various vendors all with in-house solutions that all stink.

        • doctortran@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          At this point, even that would be preferable.

          Your right, any open platform will be bastardized eventually, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t still a need for “resets”.

          There is no perfect platform for escaping it, because the market forces will always adapt and assimilate. The only true escape is to keep moving.

          That’s why it’s important for users to be hermit crabs, and move to the next thing, no matter how janky, because they will at least be able to influence it positively and have a relatively open platform for a number of years. Then the cycle repeats.

          If propping up Linux phones will get us the open platform we need, even if only temporarily, we should do it.

          The issue I think is that the current trends in all consumer software are increasingly user hostile, and the major platforms are creating ecosystems to support this. It’s become the norm now to be able to directly control the usage of the software on consumer devices. Apple has normalized this, Google and Microsoft followed.

          At what point will developers refuse to even create software for a system that doesn’t allow them that control?

          Look at how many developers out there absolutely jerk themselves raw at the idea they should be able to compel users to update to continue using their software. Look at how many believe the modern security culture fallacy that handcuffing users and throwing away the key is the only way to protect them.

          It’s a development culture issue. Respecting user control of their own device is no longer in vogue.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Linux isn’t even popular on desktop. No way a mobile version becomes popular without some massive shifts in Linux ideology and culture.

      • MrLLM@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        I,m going to guess popularity of those devices to increase soon.

        I don’t want to be pessimistic about it, however I think it’s gonna be like Windows: enshittification will happen, but inconvenience is “too small” for people that they’ll rather check for a workaround than leave the platform.

        My guess is that we need something more appealing like the Steam Deck to make people take the step.

        • IllNess@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          My guess is that we need something more appealing like the Steam Deck to make people take the step.

          Hear me out! The Steam Phone®!

          • 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            Steam’s UI is tolerable, but inconsistent. In a SteamDeck, OK, but in a phone? Idk.

            I get that this isn’t meant that seriously.

      • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Sadly the only people who would switch over to an actual Linux phone would be the people like the stereotypical Linux using Lemmy user. The average android user would just continue on like nothing happened because they’re not tech literate enough to know what’s going on or why they should care.

  • odelik@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    This seems like a brilliant feature to roll out as they’re getting investigated by the DOJ for being a monopoly.

    • over_clox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Also, didn’t the EU declare that Apple needs to allow other app stores on their devices?

      This seems like a bonehead move all around…

        • over_clox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Yes, I know. The point is that people seeking privacy eventually won’t be able to use their banking apps and other online financial accounts unless they’re signed into Google Play to ‘authenticate’ the app.

          AKA force you into letting them steal more of your private info…

          • dan@upvote.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            I kinda understand it from the bank’s perspective… They need to reduce risk which is why a lot of banking apps check if the phone is rooted (if it’s rooted, how can you be sure that a malicious app with root access isn’t patching the app in memory and redirecting transfers to a different account?)

            Having said that, I really don’t think they need to restrict it such that the app can only be installed through the Play store, as long as the app is properly signed and uses certificate pinning to prevent MitM attacks.

            • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              Fidelity apps doesn’t require any of this shite?

              But some shiti cash-app does?

              I wonder why 🤔

      • micka190@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        In this case, it seems like it’s the app makers themselves who are requiring the Play Store, though. Unless I’m misreading this, the developers are using the Integrity API to determine if the app was installed through “official channels” (in this case, the Play Store). Feels like people should be upset at the companies behind the apps, here.

    • philodendron@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      I unironically think so. It offloads the blame onto individual app developers. Google can turn around and say oh well it’s what the market wants

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      This has almost nothing to do with Google, it’s a feature that has to be enabled by the app developer. Meaning they want to exclude users getting the APK for their app from elsewhere.

      • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        Kinda. It might be 3rd parties using it but it is 100% an API designed by Google to keep apps on Google Play.

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          For all we know it could have been requested years ago by developers who have apps that get pirated but there was no mechanism in place to implement it at the time, and wasn’t a priority.

          Just because it’s beneficial to Google maintaining more direct control now, that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the origin.

          • Madis@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            Well, there is a separate system for pirating prevention, the Google Play license check. That has existed for years.

    • SlothMama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Yes, that’s the implication, and it’s certainly intentional for you to think of it like that.

      • doctortran@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        The fact that an entire generation thinks the only proper way to install software is through an app store is absolutely terrible. Talk about a boon for the gatekeepers, Apple and Google did a bang up job training them to trust no one else.

        • ceiphas@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          As a long time linux user i find it normal to only install apps through a package manager (essentially the same) but you have a defined API for package sources and can add sources as you like. that would be the best solution. manually installing apps IS risky, and opens the door for malware and incompatible packages, but if you have a trustworthy package source that your packa manager can varify its packages against it gets way better.

          • xavier666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            A package manager and app-store, which looks very similar from the outside, operates very differently with respect to security and privacy.

        • quant@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Schools and universities in principle should be the place where they’re introduced to what really means to own a computer. The trend however seems to give out everyone a locked down e-waste with proprietary restrictions all over the place.

        • SlothMama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 days ago

          Microsoft saw Google and Apple do this with phones, and Steam do this with games, and that’s why they made the Windows store a thing starting with 8.

          They wanted to go the same direction.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’ve had people clueless about tech tell me that:

      using Linux and not buying Windows I rob MS’s developers,

      not doing things the way big corporations want I deprive them of profits and thus rob their workers,

      using your own device the way you want it is a crime if you have to bypass what the vendor does,

      GPL and BSD licenses are not real sovereign citizen stuff, and if I’m not paying someone for software, I’m robbing the working class,

      repairing things yourself in your house is robbing people working in those trades,

      reading things in the Web is robbing university professors and book store workers and publishers,

      having to learn a particular technology while doing my task at work means I’m a fraud and rob my employer or our clients, because apparently I have to keep all the today’s tech in my head before needing any of it,

      if I don’t know some single thing another person knows, they are obviously better qualified than me (say, that other person can write Windows device drivers, while the job is about systems integration),

      and I don’t remember more stupid shit from those people and I don’t want to, but generally being not a dumb ape in today’s world is considered suspicious apparently.

      After that wonderful experience I might be silent about my views with people usually, but really I’ll never stop being anarchist (whatever kind of anarchism that is).

      • bad_alloc@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Out of curiosity, where and in which social groups did you hear this? I have never heard such thoughts here in Germany, and we tend to be idiots.

        Keep fighting the good fight, we have to keep the lights on in free soft- and hardware to provide a harbor for people who want to escape this shit.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Angle sphere got a special relationship with the “poors” theybare dirty, stupid and they deserve to get fucked.

          Hearing this shit being said in earnest with that class bravado is so fucking cringe

          Usually biggest bootlicker is himself 3 pay checks from being homeless too lol

      • quant@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        I bet they’ll say staying healthy without getting sick equals robbing from hospitals and pharmaceutical companies.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Their views were in general along the lines that there are poor people and there are rich people. Poor people owe nobody nothing (including respect to property rights, personal space, privacy and so on), and are owed everything. Rich people vice versa, it’s them paying with rights for their asocial riches.

          Now who’s poor is not absolute, it’s who owns less than deserved, and what’s deserved is big for their friends and similar-minded people. And who’s rich is the same, but owning more than deserved, and if they don’t like you, you deserve less.

          It’s the kind of people who love Stalin.

  • T156@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    What is a “trustworthy software environment”?

    Does that mean that it will get mad and fail you for having Developer options enabled? Having F-Droid installed? Having it plugged into a computer?

    • whats_all_this_then@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      There’s a bank here that refuses to let you log into their app if you have developer options enabled. Their service was getting much better until that point, but I dropped them completely after that.

      I use developer options to get better screen density on my large ass screen, and to you know…develop apps 🤷‍♂️

      FUCK THESE ASSHOLES WHO THINK THEY CAN TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT DO WITH MY PHONE

      • doctortran@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        People seriously need to start pushing back on the word “secure” being used as a blanket excuse for every restriction.

        It feels like every time that word is used, no one is willing to call out the fact that user freedom is equally as important and it’s a lazy, disrespectful developer who won’t take that into account by finding ways to maintain both.

    • FierySpectre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      According to the dumbfucks making the government application of Belgium (to read official communication) trustworthy means having developer mode disabled.

  • heavy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Androids best advantage used to be full control of the device… Those were the days. Then it started with saying they know better than you, then locking you out. Now I’m waiting on a new, better solution.

    Honestly it’s not like native Linux is too far fetched, but there would have to be a big open source common ground device collaboration.

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      So the EU’s been forcing Apple to allow sideloading and Google goes Nah, it’ll be fine?

      • Plopp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Google still allows sideloading, it’s the app developers that can prevent you from installing their app from other sources than Google Play. Sideloading an app works fine on Android if the app’s developer allows it. Apple didn’t allow that even if the app devs wanted it.

        • diffusive@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          You are technically (and possibly legally) correct… But the spirit of the law is allowing customers to install what they want on their devices.

          This move defuses the responsibility to the developers but EU showed in the past that what they care is the spirit of the law and not the law itself…and they are happy to change the laws to make them more adherent to the spirit

          • Plopp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            I would be really happy if you’re right, but I sadly think Google’s fine here. As far as I understand it, this particular regulation is to prevent a powerful actor (Google, Apple) to use their monopolistic powers to shut alternative stores down. It’s not about allowing customers to install whatever and however. Google doesn’t shut anyone down with this, so they should be fine. They give the option for app developers to choose if they want to run only on an attested platform - which they sell as a completely optional security feature that nobody has to use.

            My guess is if the EU is going to take this further it would have to be regarding a potential monopoly on the attested platforms on the device. Google only offering their own platform as trusted could potentially be seen as another monopolistic behavior. If we’re lucky.

            • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              The problem is though that the attested platform only accepts Google play as a store, for this to be truly fair you’d need a way to set a default store setting up and then the attestation API checks that store, but as things currently are it’s giving Google play store an unfair advantage.

    • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Man I really hate how they stripped your permissions to access the internal and external storage, files can no longer access data from other apps even if you say allow all file access. Also if your phone supports SD cards, you might notice that you don’t have write access to it for some reason on later versions of android. (I really struggled with this with my Galaxy S9 on Lineage), had to use apps that remounted my SD card and what not

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    What’s the point of having an android phone then? I fucking hate android so much, but I only use it, not iOS, because of sideloading. Of If they take that away from us then why not just get an iPhone then? Our only hope is Linux phones picking up a little.

    • Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      One reason would be that with an iPhone, you’re paying two to five times the price of an Android phone with comparable hardware.