Related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBNu6WMfR1k
i def want that!!!
yess please
Surprised it took this long lol
Needs size, color and firmness sliders
That would be SO Weird Science!
oh man someone better port this over!! lol
oh damn! I want it! :O
damn, why my wife is there? lol
Very nice!
nice!! a cool thing to do is that if you shake it too hard, her boob do pop out!! hehehe
You know ... this illustrates a great opportunity that could seize some momentum back to the WM side of the force, should anyone have the wherewithal...
There is huge demand for this and apps like it, however Apple is pulling a "Betamax" and restricting certain types of applications. That is the one big flaw in the App Store paradigm and one that could be exploited to WM's (or other OS') benefit.
It's up to us as advocates to point out this flaw, and up to talented programmer to provide the apps which we could point to and say, hey check it out. WM doesn't have any company deciding what you should and shouldn't be able to run on your device.
Bump!!!!!!!!
+1
hahahaha this would probably sit in my favorites for a long time
i bump this thread with a pelvic thrust.
dr g said:
You know ... this illustrates a great opportunity that could seize some momentum back to the WM side of the force, should anyone have the wherewithal...
There is huge demand for this and apps like it, however Apple is pulling a "Betamax" and restricting certain types of applications. That is the one big flaw in the App Store paradigm and one that could be exploited to WM's (or other OS') benefit.
It's up to us as advocates to point out this flaw, and up to talented programmer to provide the apps which we could point to and say, hey check it out. WM doesn't have any company deciding what you should and shouldn't be able to run on your device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has always been where WM shines... I dont want some hob nobs in Cupertino restricting content I want to see, use. I'm suprised they weren't bold enough to globally start banning "inappropriate" sites from Safari.
Everyone should support the dev of a universal WM marketplace where apps can be compiled and be easily managed.. WM apps are too scattered to find and should be sent through a "cab/beta sweep" to provide some consumer protections.. This market would be an optional portal for apps, not mandatory, but a point system tied to X-Box live could add some spice to luring users to install.
norkoastal said:
This has always been where WM shines... I dont want some hob nobs in Cupertino restricting content I want to see, use. I'm suprised they weren't bold enough to globally start banning "inappropriate" sites from Safari.
Everyone should support the dev of a universal WM marketplace where apps can be compiled and be easily managed.. WM apps are too scattered to find and should be sent through a "cab/beta sweep" to provide some consumer protections.. This market would be an optional portal for apps, not mandatory, but a point system tied to X-Box live could add some spice to luring users to install.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
look up gecko. the newest beta just came out theres only like 15 apps at the moment but hes trying to make it just like the appstore is
I do wonder, however, why WM doesn't seem to have the developer base to be proactively coming out with apps like this and others, whereas iPhone is fairly overflowing.
dr g said:
I do wonder, however, why WM doesn't seem to have the developer base to be proactively coming out with apps like this and others, whereas iPhone is fairly overflowing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because macs are perfect for moviemaking and boob shaking apps duh
lbhocky19 said:
because macs are perfect for moviemaking and boob shaking apps duh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hah
It is a honest question though. Why does one platform seem to have an excess of talented programmers working on cool -- if useless -- stuff, while another cannot seem to muster the manpower for cool.
dr g said:
Hah
It is a honest question though. Why does one platform seem to have an excess of talented programmers working on cool -- if useless -- stuff, while another cannot seem to muster the manpower for cool.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about the hardware... With Iphone its 1 piece of hardware to develop.. WM = hundreds of devices, so programs don't pass the grade for every model.. What would be good would be a marketplace that simply filters the programs based on the device. I hope gecko takes that approach as it expands into a full function platform.
hump....I mean bump
D3TH METAL said:
hump....I mean bump
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think bumping it up will help the software to get to the Touch Pro any time soon.
I browse the market every day and I see this guy putting apps that consistently get low reviews. His highest ranking app is 3 stars. He spams the market with apps that are overpriced photo galleries that show pics and play sounds of one specific thing. I think we should help him get the message that his high refund/low ranking rates are not giving him. Please reply if you agree that his apps need to stop spamming the market. If you have not tried one yet, look here. I am not doing this to be mean, but he needs to be told not to quit his day job.
Where's the option for "No. I dislike spam apps, but I hate censorship more." ?
So if his apps were malicious would you vote to have them removed? Do you feel spam filters on email are censorship? They fill your box with junk in hopes of making a few dollars off of you. I am against censorship but his apps are rediculous.
So if his apps were malicious would you vote to have them removed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are rules in place for the Market in regards to malicious apps. There would be no need to vote because the gatekeepers of the Market have already said malicious apps would be removed.
Do you feel spam filters on email are censorship?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course not. The key difference is who gets to decide what is removed. With a spam filter, each user gets to decide whether he wants to see content or not. Any system that removes apps from the Market (that aren't infringing the basic rules as stated above) without your knowledge and consent is basically censorship, whether the decision is made by ten people at Google or a hundred people on xda-dev.
Not if your email provider passes your email through spamhaus you dont. Also I would ****LOVE**** to have a configureable filter but I doubt we will. As an acceptable alternative, I would like for consistantly low rated and highly returned items to be removed. Guess what walmart does if a product gets returned 80% of the time it is sold. Do they ask you?
Also, I am not trying to start a fight with anyone, just stating my view on the subject.
Darkrift said:
Also, I am not trying to start a fight with anyone, just stating my view on the subject.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care to start a fight either; I'm just pointing out that what you are proposing is a path down a slippery slope, and it generally goes against the "open participation" ethos of Android. You should also keep in mind that one person's junk may be another mans treasure. Would I ever buy one of Khalid's lame $5 joke apps (literally, they're joke books!)? No probably not. That doesn't mean that someone else might not want it.
Edit: Just as an example, back in the early days of Market before developers could geotarget the regions for distribution, some Chinese developers put up some app whose interface was completely Chinese. I think it was a Chinese input method or a frontend for a Chinese website. Regardless, the ignorant fresh T-Mobile masses downloaded it, didn't understand what it was for, and then promptly uninstalled it and rated it zero stars. If you do a filtering system based on ratings, you are giving every uninformed ignoramus an equal say in whether an app is allowed to stay or go.
The Markets sucks! It needs the possibility for user to set their own filter
e.g.
dont show apps publiced by Khalid Shaikh! lower than 2stars, more expensive than x$ and so on..
only show apps of a specifig language (e.g. for traffic,taxi,bus,tv gadgets..)
sort for recently updated and so on .. that's what the market app really needs!
bassbox said:
The Markets sucks! It needs the possibility for user to set their own filter
e.g.
dont show apps publiced by Khalid Shaikh! lower than 2stars, more expensive than x$ and so on..
only show apps of a specifig language (e.g. for traffic,taxi,bus,tv gadgets..)
sort for recently updated and so on .. that's what the market app really needs!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, the market app needs customizable local (meaning on a user's own device) filters. That will partially solve the problem of crap apps littering the marketplace. However, I think overhauling Market client is low on the Google Android team's priority list. Unfortunately since it is a proprietary closed source app, there is no way for the dev community to take the matter into its own hands.
You would think that the king of searching would have some sort of decent searching on their own platform..
jashsu said:
Yes, the market app needs customizable local (meaning on a user's own device) filters. That will partially solve the problem of crap apps littering the marketplace. However, I think overhauling Market client is low on the Google Android team's priority list. Unfortunately since it is a proprietary closed source app, there is no way for the dev community to take the matter into its own hands.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am planning on developing an interface to the Market which allows for custom filters. I have a prototype Yahoo Pipe, which uses Cyrket to display Market data and allow simple filters. Basically, I can filter out apps that have certain words in the title, are from a certain developer (or more than one), or are below a certain rating threshold.
I will have to agree though on the statement about censorship. While it is true that his apps may be without any true merit, I do not believe that they are (or he is) breaking any of the Market rules or developer agreements. Unfortunately, as we've seen in the the "free" market and the iPhone AppStore, people are willing to download and even spend money on useless apps. I think as long as there is a market for this type of app we will continue to see them. Now, unfortunately that means we all have to deal with him, his apps, and others like him and his apps until either the Market allows for better filtering/sorting or a developer creates this for the community... It is much needed nonetheless.
nEx.Software said:
I am planning on developing an interface to the Market which allows for custom filters. I have a prototype Yahoo Pipe, which uses Cyrket to display Market data and allow simple filters. Basically, I can filter out apps that have certain words in the title, are from a certain developer (or more than one), or are below a certain rating threshold.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats awesome. if its anything like BarTor its going to be good
nEx.Software said:
I am planning on developing an interface to the Market which allows for custom filters. I have a prototype Yahoo Pipe, which uses Cyrket to display Market data and allow simple filters. Basically, I can filter out apps that have certain words in the title, are from a certain developer (or more than one), or are below a certain rating threshold.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's good to hear. What I meant is that the actual Market App itself cannot be modified to work the way we want it to. While being able to display Market data with filtering on a PC is nice, the bulk majority of users are still going to be suffering the standard Market app interface.
Unfortunately, as we've seen in the the "free" market and the iPhone AppStore, people are willing to download and even spend money on useless apps. I think as long as there is a market for this type of app we will continue to see them. Now, unfortunately that means we all have to deal with him, his apps, and others like him
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There will be more, that much I can assure you. As the Android platform grows, there will be more opportunist developers seeking to make a quick buck. It really is like spam. You throw a line out and because digital publishing is free, anything you get back is profit. There is basically no monetary risk involved in creating and distributing crapware. Atleast we won't have to suffer iPhone's idiotic ninety-nine cent "custom" name dialers. Although the number of soundboards posted daily is reaching dangerous limits...
I intend to make it an Android app. While it won't be a permanent fix,it might be what is needed to get Google moving on updates to the official Market app.
Anyway, on another note. I haven't looked at any one of the apps in question but I would venture a guess that they are in violation of copyright laws and as we have seen with the Tetris clones, Google does take action on matters of copyright. Maybe the best recourse then is to inform this developer of the copyright issues either directly or through Google.
?
Frankly i can't agree with having a dev (does this word really apply in this case) removed from the market for producing crap. However i am completely in favour of spamming his inbox with as much crap as i can possibly manage just to see how he likes it. Free porn search here i come!
Anyone wants to help it's --EMAIL REMOVED-- Yes this is a very childish response but i'm pissed with having to sift through his crap every morning, i think it's only fair!
Ideally google can resolve this issue by allowing to create a list of blocked developers. And the ability to block any apps containing the word soundboard would make my day
nEx.Software an app that was basically cryket.com for the android would be awesome. What would really be sweet was if it had an independant comment system that was filterable as well. So we could ban commenters based on their username, words, etc... Filtering by ratings, developer, keywords, etc.. I love it already. Just link the products to their entries in the market. Basically, cryket for the android with comments... I CAN HAZ IT NOW PLZ K?
Also, I'd love to add IndiaNIC, LLC to the filter list. I'm sure *someone* out there likes that they're putting out 300 e-books about India a day, but I'm sure tired of scrolling past them.
The last thing I'd want is to see rigorous policing on the Android Market. He's spreading expensive crapware but I'm sure people are buying it and I'm sure some actually enjoyed it. I don't think removing his apps from the market is the best solution, keep the market as free from censorship as possible if you ask me.
I think the best solution is market search filters as discussed above.
I agree, the ability to "ignore" certain developers would be nice. The new developer I would instantly add to this list would be IndiaNIC, LLC. or whatever the hell they are called. They have about 40 apps on the market, and I don't think a single one has a comment.
/if anyone affiliated with IndiaNIC, LLC reads this, no offense, but please get the message when nobody is buying what you're selling
The more I think about it, the more I realize a filter would be a better idea than removing junk from the market. While I do not agree that anyone will find his apps useful, I do see the point in letting them choose. But at the same time we should be able to choose not to see his crap. As for IndiaNIC, I disagree with placing them in the same category. They have products with good ratings and seem to be making at least SOME useful apps. While I agree they put out too many at once, they seem to have a market for their apps unlike Khalid Shaikh.
Still, a filter would be better for all. I wish I could edit the poll now to add that as an option
ryan75 said:
/if anyone affiliated with IndiaNIC, LLC reads this, no offense, but please get the message when nobody is buying what you're selling
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Spammers don't need to "get the message"! They know exactly what they are selling (junk). The whole point is they are trying to make a quick buck. And in the immortal words of P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute."
Nevermind the fact that all of those texts can be downloaded for free from manybooks or feedbooks and then read on FBReaderJ...
I'm just getting started with CM7 and the Nook Color, but I have some general security concerns that perhaps you could help me with?
1. Viruses. I understand that these are real in Android. I've temporarily disabled non-Market apps, but I believe viruses and/or spyware have shown up in Market Apps too. Are there decent AntiVirus apps and what do you recommend?
2. Firewall. What services are open by default? Are there good software firewalls available?
3. Adware. Is it always clear which Market apps are ad-supported? Have apps crossed the line into malicious or near-malicious spyware? (Taking over browsers, redirecting home pages or searches, infecting other apps, etc.)
4. Apparently Google does not require password-confirmation for Market purchases, and no real solution exists, since available apps complicate things and don't address the root issue. Do they have any plans to change that?
5. Where are application and web site passwords, WiFi keys, and the like stored, and are they encrypted?
6. Is there a multi-user / multi-profile facility to allow different users to log in to different desktops and/or applications? (Or is that best accomplished with dual booting.)
7. What major applications are known to "phone home" or otherwise divulge more information than might be expected? I was quite surprised that CM7 itself phones home to CyanogenMod by default, and even with that turned off the ROM Manager still reports usage statistics to Google?
8. Is anyone independently reviewing CyanogenMod itself for privacy and security implications? Right now many of us are relying on a hodgepodge of hacker contributions and the good will of those creating them. I'm sure that anything malicious would eventually come to light, but is anyone proactively checking out the release CM7 distribution, the GApps distribution, and the various installers and packagers? Right now the only verifiable "web of trust" that seems to exist is the good intentions of every contributor, and the general availability of the source code (which should make the review possible, if not particularly easy!).
9. Are there any "best practices" as a user? For example, I've set up a new GMail ID for use with the NC, and haven't yet linked any credit card or payment data. Meanwhile, for the B&N side I've had to submit a credit card number to get access to their market (even to get their "Free" offerings).
10. Any implications for configuring e-mail and/or contacts, etc.? Mass remailing trojans certainly exist on the Windows side.
11. Do the application specific permission settings compare favorably to those of the BlackBerry, and are they easily adjustable after you've already granted permissions to an app?
12. Is there any concept of sandboxing a new app to prevent it from possibly adversely affecting other applications or files?
13. Is there a best practice for how to manage files on both the eMMC and SD card storage, particularly when booting between the two? Can one be locked out from the other?
Okay, that's a baker's dozen. I'll stop now.
Thanks much for any input.
Really? Nobody has an opinion to share on this?
rooting /cm7 / and the purpose behind it may just not be for you. I don't think your going to get an answer your looking for. Also not trying to be rude, but you pretty much wrote a book in your first post. Just ask a question dude.
Thanks for the response, but I asked roughly 13 questions -- would you prefer I "just asked a question" by starting 13 different threads? I certainly wouldn't.
And your first sentence makes it sound as if there's no one here who gives a damn about their own data and that everyone views the Nook Color as a toy -- and I seriously doubt that.
xdabr said:
I'm just getting started with CM7 and the Nook Color, but I have some general security concerns that perhaps you could help me with?
1. Viruses. I understand that these are real in Android. I've temporarily disabled non-Market apps, but I believe viruses and/or spyware have shown up in Market Apps too. Are there decent AntiVirus apps and what do you recommend?
2. Firewall. What services are open by default? Are there good software firewalls available?
3. Adware. Is it always clear which Market apps are ad-supported? Have apps crossed the line into malicious or near-malicious spyware? (Taking over browsers, redirecting home pages or searches, infecting other apps, etc.)
4. Apparently Google does not require password-confirmation for Market purchases, and no real solution exists, since available apps complicate things and don't address the root issue. Do they have any plans to change that?
5. Where are application and web site passwords, WiFi keys, and the like stored, and are they encrypted?
6. Is there a multi-user / multi-profile facility to allow different users to log in to different desktops and/or applications? (Or is that best accomplished with dual booting.)
7. What major applications are known to "phone home" or otherwise divulge more information than might be expected? I was quite surprised that CM7 itself phones home to CyanogenMod by default, and even with that turned off the ROM Manager still reports usage statistics to Google?
8. Is anyone independently reviewing CyanogenMod itself for privacy and security implications? Right now many of us are relying on a hodgepodge of hacker contributions and the good will of those creating them. I'm sure that anything malicious would eventually come to light, but is anyone proactively checking out the release CM7 distribution, the GApps distribution, and the various installers and packagers? Right now the only verifiable "web of trust" that seems to exist is the good intentions of every contributor, and the general availability of the source code (which should make the review possible, if not particularly easy!).
9. Are there any "best practices" as a user? For example, I've set up a new GMail ID for use with the NC, and haven't yet linked any credit card or payment data. Meanwhile, for the B&N side I've had to submit a credit card number to get access to their market (even to get their "Free" offerings).
10. Any implications for configuring e-mail and/or contacts, etc.? Mass remailing trojans certainly exist on the Windows side.
11. Do the application specific permission settings compare favorably to those of the BlackBerry, and are they easily adjustable after you've already granted permissions to an app?
12. Is there any concept of sandboxing a new app to prevent it from possibly adversely affecting other applications or files?
13. Is there a best practice for how to manage files on both the eMMC and SD card storage, particularly when booting between the two? Can one be locked out from the other?
Okay, that's a baker's dozen. I'll stop now.
Thanks much for any input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to admit, you come off as rather paranoid, and i am not sure why you are so.
Yes, there have been a couple of problem apps recently, but Google took care of them, and i would not worry. The best security you can have, is looking at what you are installing. The application cannot hide what permissions it needs, so if you have something asking for way more than you think it should need, take that as your first red flag.
Currently, Virus Scans on Android are a joke, and simply unneeded. Don't even waste you time. Firewalls are just about the same, and again, not worth the effort. One thing to keep in mind, that this is a linux system, and is not as prone to the Windows based attacks that you are used to. Things like email spam bots and such are not a problem.
As for Cyannogen - no code is added to the repository without being peer reviewed; and every code submission is available in public records. Frankly, they did not make it to CM7 by stealing people's data, nor is it simply a hodge podge of devs.
Frankly, I think right now more research is in order for ya. Most of what you ask is already discussed in many places, or is never discussed, because it simply isn't a worry...
Thank you, Divine_Madcat, for the advice and explanation. By hodgepodge I was more referring to the multiple installer methods and packages that newbies like me are relying upon to get everything installed easily. There are a lot of them, from a lot of nice people, from preconfigured SD card images to installation methods with modified boot loaders to interface and performance hacks. Even if Cyanogen itself is well maintained it would be pretty easy for someone to include a little trojan in one of those third-party "distributions".
It's not exactly paranoia, I've just seen this happen so often. Trojan horses are certainly not limited to Windows. Worms and other compromises have affected thousands of Unix and Linux machines in the past. Web sites and PHP and Perl scripts and databases and web frameworks regularly see vulnerabilities discovered and/or exploited. So since this device will be used in part by children with access to my credit card, I wanted to know what we're dealing with.
No, I was not familiar with Cyanogen's review practice (which is one reason I asked), so thanks for that reassurance! I will try to learn more as I go.
I do apologize for the length of the OP though -- I was trying to brainstorm and get everything down in one place that related to possible security concerns. It's not as if I'm worried sick about every little point.
One of the apps I install on all my installs is 'Lookout'. This app scans all my programs I install and update and I have heard very good reviews of it.
I did see that Eric Lundcrest did an article today:
http://web.eweek.com/t?r=2&c=38783&l=64&ctl=11B38843F5D4C728CF30E9F23F9E91BB51617&
You can check them out. I haven't tried them all myself and I noticed that he didn't include the app that I recommended above (and I use it on both my Nook and my HTC EVO)
You Should Also be Aware..
that one of the joys of Android (and of course Unix/Linux) is that everything is "sandboxed" unlike Windoze - there are not many apps that interfere with others - that's why it's so easy to install and uninstall from Android. Compare the uninstalling of even a large Android app with that of uninstalling from Windows.
I would not worry about interfering apps
Thanks, doc. I'm moderately familiar with the Unix security model, but not so much with Android. Is sandboxing really accurate? In Linux processes run with particular user rights, much as in Windows but more flexible -- that is, it's just much more common to have different daemons running as different users. Still, I don't think they're really isolated from one another as they might be with a "chroot jails" kind of function...
I don't think electronics are for you, I suggest books and a cabin in the woods.
No virus really exist yet, a few flaws in the code have been found but they are patched quick.
No real firewall, doesn't work quit that way with android.
Yes, it will say in the permissions of the app in the market.
You sign into the market when you first use it, making sure your devise has a lockscreen PW is how you keep it safe.
/data
no
Some apps phone home, check permissions before you install.
All CM code can be seen in the github, you can compile it yourself if you wish.
Use smart internet credit card practices such as only attaching a low limit card to accounts etc.
If the google email server was hacked maybe but all that stuff is stored encrypted on googles end.
Permissions need to be approved of by you if they change.
Android sandboxes all apps.
Dono, I have CM7 on internal and books etc stored on the SD card.
Nanan00, your actual answers were great, but "I don't think electronics are for you, I suggest books and a cabin in the woods." and the similar dismissive post above are exactly the kind of BS condescension that gives some open source communities a bad name. Stop it. Little by little it devalues the entire community and its projects.
Thanks for the substance of your response.
Truthfully... My parents practice pretty much all of the stuff you have said, they're very careful with credit cards and anything that could be used as personal information.
And yet... Someone got ahold of their credit card numbers and bought something for almost 3k last year...
I have no virus software or even firewall software on this computer, it has not received a virus in over 5 years (I know... it needs an upgrade) and I'm running Windows XP SP2.
If you're prone to viruses then go ahead and install some antivirus software. If you're scared about your kids + your credit card + the nook, then have them make all transactions on the computer.
The reason no one is taking this seriously is because Android is to new for there really to be anything worthwhile on the market. People are just now learning how to develop and code for it. So there aren't a bajillion(give or take one or two) viruses or trojans running around the google market.
On top of that, so long as your legally buying your apps from the google market, you have even less to worry about. As google has shown in the past that they'll go ahead and delete it the second they find it.
As far as permissions go, don't get to hung up on it. Everybody trust Pandora and yet it requires more permissions then some of googles own apps. =\
Thank you, Gin1212. I don't use an AntiVirus on my own Windows machines either -- it's more trouble than it's worth when you know what you're doing. (On Android I don't know what I'm doing, yet.)
And yeah, I already made sure to use a disposable credit card number ("ShopSafe") with a limit when setting up the Nook for the young'un. Google Market, thankfully, doesn't require a credit card unless you buy something, so I'll be checking out the free apps for a while (so that's part of why I asked about adware/spyware).
I was approaching the thing as I would any new (to me) full fledged operating system and computer, fully aware it's not the "safe" and dictatorially controlled little world of iOS or, to some extent, BlackBerry OS.
So thanks for the real world advice!
xdabr said:
Nanan00, your actual answers were great, but "I don't think electronics are for you, I suggest books and a cabin in the woods." and the similar dismissive post above are exactly the kind of BS condescension that gives some open source communities a bad name. Stop it. Little by little it devalues the entire community and its projects.
Thanks for the substance of your response.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Suffice it to say that Android's and Microsoft's, and even Linux's app model is vastly different. Google does not just act as a repository, as in Linux. From my understanding, Google is rather guarded about it's app market and if anything heretofor is found, the app is yanked from the market immediately.
I agree that website security is more an issue that needs to be looked at, but the lion's share of websites that have virii and adware are aimed at infecting windows machines, but your concerns are noted.
As to the intent of the Devs here, I think you need to understand that these roms, mods and apps are their children, and their passion of the moment. No one goes through all the crap they do just to foment adware. This is their meat and drink and trust me, if there were a dev whose morality came into question, they would police themselves and it would be all here for us to read. There are no secrets here. These aren't script kiddies looking to wreak havoc.
I agree that security is a good thing, but the twin natures of Android are openness and isolation. Each app, at least from my understanding is an island unto itself with rare exception. So I think that while your concerns in themselves are noble, they are unwarranted, and at some points even seem absurd. No offense intended here.
We aren't just drinking the kool-aid here, everyone knows the risks of adopting an unknown and untested ROM, everyone takes the responsibility to themselves when they violate their warranty in search of a better tablet experience. The average person who roots their nook is not your average idiot windows user. We are here because we want more and better than our legacy alientation by microsoft and those who can't think outside of their security model.
Well, there is my Android manifesto. Sorry for rambling.
migrax
No, I appreciate the manifesto -- thanks. Again, I tried to brainstorm and throw the kitchen sink into the original post so as to get everything down in one place. I was hoping it could serve as a general security discussion thread. Not everything there is a huge concern of mine, and sorry if it made things seem absurd.
I appreciate your points about the intentions of the developers and the operation of Google's market (although of course a big selling point is we are NOT limited to that market... conversely, I suppose anything I chose off-market would be something I had by definition come to trust independently).
xdabr said:
Nanan00... "I don't think electronics are for you, I suggest books and a cabin in the woods." and the similar dismissive post above are exactly the kind of BS condescension that gives some open source communities a bad name. Stop it. Little by little it devalues the entire community and its projects.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your overreacting a wee bit too much. I can't speak for Nanan00 but the first sentence of his post feels like a joke. He took the time to write out the answers of OP's question...
Also since you were referring to my post at the top..... I was just being candid with OP.
I read his post, I could see that he was a bit paranoid (IMO) and told him my honest opinion. Which is: Hacking your nook, or any device for that matter, may not be for you. The reasons being that when you hack your device, you inevitably increase its chances of being exposed (even if the increase is small, its there.) I don't feel that I am being arrogant, and I didn't catch that drift from Nanan00. But I wanted to address this since you obviously feel strong that this type of behavior is "devaluing the entire community and its projects."
Anyways to the OP:
Sorry if my post came off rude. I should of taken the time to give you my explanation.
colbur87 said:
I think your overreacting a wee bit too much. I can't speak for Nanan00 but the first sentence of his post feels like a joke. He took the time to write out the answers of OP's question...
Also since you were referring to my post at the top..... I was just being candid with OP.
I read his post, I could see that he was a bit paranoid (IMO) and told him my honest opinion. Which is: Hacking your nook, or any device for that matter, may not be for you. The reasons being that when you hack your device, you inevitably increase its chances of being exposed (even if the increase is small, its there.) I don't feel that I am being arrogant, and I didn't catch that drift from Nanan00. But I wanted to address this since you obviously feel strong that this type of behavior is "devaluing the entire community and its projects."
Anyways to the OP:
Sorry if my post came off rude. I should of taken the time to give you my explanation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, colbur87, "OP" and I are the same person.
Asking questions is one way we learn. As an Android newbie many of my questions would apply to any Android device, hacked/rooted or not. If they're not appropriate for this forum, or if no one here thinks they're valid or worth a response, that would be okay. But to say in effect "your concerns are stupid and you don't belong here" is not only insulting, but factually wrong. Just because some people are content to not consider security implications doesn't mean they're not real.
Blithe unquestioning acceptance and faith is more of an Apple iFanboy trait, I would have thought.
And much as with Linux as a whole, positioning "hacked" Android as something not amenable to ordinary consumers is counterproductive.
(By the way, I'm not an ordinary consumer.)
Anyway, I do appreciate the answers people have given.
Wasn't lookig at the names so my bad on the mix up.
Anyways if you still think im being rude even after my previous post then so be it.
im out
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA Premium App
Divine_Madcat said:
The application cannot hide what permissions it needs, so if you have something asking for way more than you think it should need, take that as your first red flag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, that isn't true. There are holes in Android Market, so if app makers really wanted to, they can hide certain permissions even if your app calls out that permission through androidmanifest, which is how the permission is given in the first place. It was shown that even big name developers had exploited this one time or another. Of course this has nothing to do with CM7. Even stock Android phones are vulnerable to this. However, in general, if you download a popular app, you should be able to trust the permissions listed. Unless your the first person to download an app, you'll usually hear back from initial users if there's something funky going on.
Me and my friend, (who is a budding app developer for android) ran into discussion about "Android JB vs WP8", and after many aspects, we came to "developer benefits", there I said that Android is not good for developers bcoz people SIDELOAD app and nothing can detect a pirated app. That's the sad truth.
But on WP8 there's no way to SIDELOAD app, so No piracy of apps on WP8.
My friend said there are WP8 custom ROMS available and WP8 can also be rooted. So there maybe ways when people use Pirated apps on WP8 also.
So who is correct Me or my friend? Are there ways on WP8.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda app-developers app
Apourv said:
Me and my friend, (who is a budding app developer for android) ran into discussion about "Android JB vs WP8", and after many aspects, we came to "developer benefits", there I said that Android is not good for developers bcoz people SIDELOAD app and nothing can detect a pirated app. That's the sad truth.
But on WP8 there's no way to SIDELOAD app, so No piracy of apps on WP8.
My friend said there are WP8 custom ROMS available and WP8 can also be rooted. So there maybe ways when people use Pirated apps on WP8 also.
So who is correct Me or my friend? Are there ways on WP8.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're correct, can't root and you can only sideload apps if you're a developer. No custom roms, no root, your friend's a fandroid who's insecure about their OS.
I think disabling Sideloading is better. Because Wallet services are coming to mobile so chances are high that someone might make app which will hack mobile payment passwords and accounts, using app which people sideload. This might make android insecure, when making NFC payments.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda app-developers app
Disable sideloading? And then how are dev supposed to test their apps on their phones ? - the emulator is not a good choice in some cases.
Also, there are no custom roms YET, but I am pretty sure there will be. There's nothing in this world that can be protected from hacking
timotei21 said:
Disable sideloading? And then how are dev supposed to test their apps on their phones ? - the emulator is not a good choice in some cases.
Also, there are no custom roms YET, but I am pretty sure there will be. There's nothing in this world that can be protected from hacking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Developers can unlock their phones. Others can't.
Apourv said:
Me and my friend, (who is a budding app developer for android) ran into discussion about "Android JB vs WP8", and after many aspects, we came to "developer benefits", there I said that Android is not good for developers bcoz people SIDELOAD app and nothing can detect a pirated app. That's the sad truth.
But on WP8 there's no way to SIDELOAD app, so No piracy of apps on WP8.
My friend said there are WP8 custom ROMS available and WP8 can also be rooted. So there maybe ways when people use Pirated apps on WP8 also.
So who is correct Me or my friend? Are there ways on WP8.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blocking load of apps is a huge OVERKILL.
Say I wand to write an app, and distribute it freely, and do not want to put it on the market ?
What then ?
Besides that - if the IPhone with all it's locks and vaults can be set to load apps outside the Apple market,
it is safe to say that WinPhone will have the same crack.
Locking the device and limiting the user is a bad thing, and besides alienating your user base it will not do much.
Alienating your user base is never a good tactic, they will leave.
(People who plan to get WinPhone are most likely people who used WinMo - that was totally open to customization and apps from wherever)
Some developers looked into breaking the security on Nokia's WP7 phones and decided it would be to hard but of course there might be ways to do it anyway and allow custom ROMs. Aside from that Marketplace XAPs originally could be modified to be sideloaded on WP7 but this has changed several months ago, when Microsoft started to encrypt the XAP files.
As for modified firmware Microsoft is using Secure Boot to tackle the problem at a much lower level than Android and iOS devices do. Due to that it might be quite some time before anyone figures out a way to do it. And even phones like the HTC One X have not yet been broken (at least the versions that use Nvidias Tegra 3). It was similar with several Sony devices.
But in the end to enable this on a WP8 device it would mean HSPL, CustomROM and modified XAP-Files to allow for pirated Apps. Comparing this to Android where you only modify the APK and allow sideloading using a Checkbox I believe we will a lot more pirated Apps on Android than on WP.
As for: I want to provide my App for free without using the Marketplace - ähm... what would be the benefit to the user? Aside from Hacks they benefit from the fact that Apps are tested for stability, to be Malware-Free and that you can discover them without too much effort right from your phone.
The only thing I believe you're right is that actually lots of people will go for an OS where they can pirate Apps easily. There are enough threads around here were people tell you upfront that they believe that having paid several 100 $ for a device entitles them to get the software for free.
StevieBallz said:
....
As for: I want to provide my App for free without using the Marketplace - ähm... what would be the benefit to the user? Aside from Hacks they benefit from the fact that Apps are tested for stability, to be Malware-Free and that you can discover them without too much effort right from your phone.
....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, right.
Like we saw on apple store, and the android market.
(you must be either kidding, or naive)
And as for users thinking paying few 100$ for a device and thinking it entitles them for free apps - well -
people became used to having free programs, and there are many good free programs.
Besides that - I do not support software piracy, but I do believe that you should have the freedom to do whatever you want with the device you payed a lot of good money for, and that the manufacturer should not put you behind bars and in chains, just so they can make more profit from you.
And dont think otherwise - they lock the device for the sole reason of taking some percentage of the money you pay for the apps,
and no other reason.
So every app would have to pass through their, and only their checkout point, and bring them more money.
Android market has no certification process while Apple's and Microsoft's does.
I didn't try to imply that you would want it for the reason of pirating Apps but for most people this is the reason they desire that feature.
But in the end we're talking about the rationale for developers and that is where your (paid) Apps are a lot better protected on WP or iOS than on Android. If this actually benefits you in the case of WP is a different discussion due to the fact that your potential market is smaller. But given that even though Android has a much bigger marketshare than iOS by now developers make a lot more money on iOS it seems the closed marketplaces actually benefit developers in that regard.
StevieBallz said:
Android market has no certification process while Apple's and Microsoft's does.
I didn't try to imply that you would want it for the reason of pirating Apps but for most people this is the reason they desire that feature.
But in the end we're talking about the rationale for developers and that is where your (paid) Apps are a lot better protected on WP or iOS than on Android. If this actually benefits you in the case of WP is a different discussion due to the fact that your potential market is smaller. But given that even though Android has a much bigger marketshare than iOS by now developers make a lot more money on iOS it seems the closed marketplaces actually benefit developers in that regard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The same goes for PC apps.
And people still develop apps for PCs.
This is, in my opinion, some kind of propaganda (not to say brainwash) from the manufacturers,
who's only intent is to make more profit for themselves, and want to recruit the developers for their own goal.
Software piracy have been here since forever, and the software industry has always been growing.
I still hold my opinion that the manufacturer must not have me in chains and behind bars.
I believe the manufacturer must let me do whatever I want with my device.
Let me load whatever apps i want, from any source, and not limit me or force me to pay them more and more money over the life of the device.
I'm not saying that it is not a valid desire to be able to do those things - I said it benefits developers if they are not possible. They don't have to care about piracy that much. And instead of putting together a sophisticated scheme to protect their applications (like they have been doing on the PC for more then a decade) they can concentrate on the actual content.
Do you believe PC games that came on floppy discs asked you about keys from the manual just for fun or to avoid copies? Do you believe the industry moved to CDs only because of the additional space or because they could not be easily copied for quite some time? Does Diablo 3 require an online connection because they could not implement a game that could run on the PC only?
Providing those protections in the OS itself takes a big burden off most developers. The 30 % cut Apple or Microsoft take is a big part of what big companies would earn with their software, given that they already have payment solutions in place and might be able to provide storage and bandwidth cheaper. For Indie developers it would be a lot harder to organize all this.
But instead of answering the question on pirac that thread was about y you're completely missing the point and going on a crusade (and your points from a users perspective definitely are valid).
Apourv said:
Me and my friend, (who is a budding app developer for android) ran into discussion about "Android JB vs WP8", and after many aspects, we came to "developer benefits", there I said that Android is not good for developers bcoz people SIDELOAD app and nothing can detect a pirated app. That's the sad truth.
But on WP8 there's no way to SIDELOAD app, so No piracy of apps on WP8.
My friend said there are WP8 custom ROMS available and WP8 can also be rooted. So there maybe ways when people use Pirated apps on WP8 also.
So who is correct Me or my friend? Are there ways on WP8.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are no WP8 custom ROMs, only WP7, and only for select devices. As far as I know, app piracy was effectively killed off even for a fully "rooted" WP7 device now that the apps come in an encrypted package. WP8 devices with an SD card can sideload apps, but it's a feature, not an illegal act. You get the encrypted package straight from windowsphone.com, and when you sideload it via SD card, it checks with the marketplace to see if you already own this app and if you have purchased it- otherwise you get the trial.
So android is significantly less secure in this area, your friend is wrong.
StevieBallz said:
I'm not saying that it is not a valid desire to be able to do those things - I said it benefits developers if they are not possible. They don't have to care about piracy that much. And instead of putting together a sophisticated scheme to protect their applications (like they have been doing on the PC for more then a decade) they can concentrate on the actual content.
Do you believe PC games that came on floppy discs asked you about keys from the manual just for fun or to avoid copies? Do you believe the industry moved to CDs only because of the additional space or because they could not be easily copied for quite some time? Does Diablo 3 require an online connection because they could not implement a game that could run on the PC only?
Providing those protections in the OS itself takes a big burden off most developers. The 30 % cut Apple or Microsoft take is a big part of what big companies would earn with their software, given that they already have payment solutions in place and might be able to provide storage and bandwidth cheaper. For Indie developers it would be a lot harder to organize all this.
But instead of answering the question on pirac that thread was about y you're completely missing the point and going on a crusade (and your points from a users perspective definitely are valid).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty much this.
As a developer, I love the fact that the WP marketplace protects my app from almost anything a hacker can throw at it, because it protects several aspects I invested in the app:
1) Time. A lot of time. I don't like it when people use what I invested months of research and coding for free, just because they are too lazy to search the marketplace, but are devious enough to google the app and download it from some obscure location (the irony).
2) My intellectual property: I've made the app, therefore I should have complete control over who can download it. How would you feel if you invested a lot in a car, and some random people of the street simply gets in and drives your car away?
3)Coding and researching is certainly not an easy task. If it were, then everyone would be a developer. Pirating my app is like asking me to give away my talents for nothing in return.
Although it is extremely easy for outsiders to judge my app and say it is not worth the money, they really have no idea how much time and effort was put into it. It is a service I provide for you, and as with any service you need to pay for it...upfront or by staring at adds.
Considering that without the OEM I would not be able to create the app at all, and you would not be able to use it either, it is only natural for them to ask a percentage of the profit from the app. It is how business works.
mcosmin222 said:
Pretty much this.
As a developer, I love the fact that the WP marketplace protects my app from almost anything a hacker can throw at it, because it protects several aspects I invested in the app:
1) Time. A lot of time. I don't like it when people use what I invested months of research and coding for free, just because they are too lazy to search the marketplace, but are devious enough to google the app and download it from some obscure location (the irony).
2) My intellectual property: I've made the app, therefore I should have complete control over who can download it. How would you feel if you invested a lot in a car, and some random people of the street simply gets in and drives your car away?
3)Coding and researching is certainly not an easy task. If it were, then everyone would be a developer. Pirating my app is like asking me to give away my talents for nothing in return.
Although it is extremely easy for outsiders to judge my app and say it is not worth the money, they really have no idea how much time and effort was put into it. It is a service I provide for you, and as with any service you need to pay for it...upfront or by staring at adds.
Considering that without the OEM I would not be able to create the app at all, and you would not be able to use it either, it is only natural for them to ask a percentage of the profit from the app. It is how business works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing an App to a car is totally inappropriate.
If someone drove away in your car, you do not have this car anymore.
If someone installed an app you wrote - well, you still have another copy, and can produce a million more copies.
Som30ne said:
Comparing an App to a car is totally inappropriate.
If someone drove away in your car, you do not have this car anymore.
If someone installed an app you wrote - well, you still have another copy, and can produce a million more copies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He has a very simplistic view on piracy, which is what most people who think they're losing something have. It's hard for them to wrap their heads around new concepts like "pirated does not equal lost sales". It's mostly the RIAA's fault that the practice of sharing is deemed amoral and gave it the misnomer: "piracy". Actual sales lost because of piracy are negligible. I'm not saying it's ok for people to just take without paying, I'm saying you need to realize what is actually happening. Most "pirates" are poor students with no money to spare, kids who have no money of their own, and the most numerous "pirate" of all: those who cannot access a store to legally buy the product.
Sent from my Windows 8 device using Board Express Pro
Som30ne said:
The same goes for PC apps.
And people still develop apps for PCs.
This is, in my opinion, some kind of propaganda (not to say brainwash) from the manufacturers,
who's only intent is to make more profit for themselves, and want to recruit the developers for their own goal.
Software piracy have been here since forever, and the software industry has always been growing.
I still hold my opinion that the manufacturer must not have me in chains and behind bars.
I believe the manufacturer must let me do whatever I want with my device.
Let me load whatever apps i want, from any source, and not limit me or force me to pay them more and more money over the life of the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. And Also, Poecifer, your just the Fandroid, since the discussion was brought ou with no intention to accuse each other party and start a flame war as usual, so just stfu if you don't have anything useful to say.
As a wp developer, i'd like to say that not beeing able to sideload apps freely at times is just a pain in the a**...personally I own a Sony Xperia J and a Lumia 710...my friend is an Android Dev and doesn't have all this kind of limitation...
Anti-Piracy Service/"Project Guard" [UPDATED W/ LINK TO DISABLE IT VIA XPOSED 8/16]
If you use any of the following apps:
(List Updated 8/14)
-- Freedom
-- Lucky Patcher
-- Black Mart
-- All in one Downloader
-- Get APK Market
-- CreeHack
-- Game Hacker
Either do not flash any of the ROMs in the list below which have a trojan "Anti-Piracy" Service implemented or use one_minus_one's Xposed module (link above) to disable it.
(List Updated 8/14)
-- AICP (Confirmed)
-- Exodus (Confirmed)
-- Broken OS 3.0
-- OrionLP V1.3
The devs of AICP and custom ROMs such as exodus (a new ROM based on Cyanogen from the vanir devs, that is available for klte and kltespr) and others are implementing what is effectively an Anti-Piracy trojan in their ROMs that they call "Project Guard".
Project Guard is a service that runs in the background and literally blocks you from installing the APKs associated with these apps. And it doesn't stop there. Apparently Project Guard was having talk of banning both Aptoide and XPOSED in these ROMs. Thankfully, this was voted down but Aptoide was still on the table as far as I heard last. The fact that even the idea of banning Xposed from AOSP ROMs in order to stop it's users from pirating was even discussed, is frankly surreal to me and out of control. It's shameful. Not sure why the developers felt the need to implement this trivial and easily bypassed "feature" but it goes against everything I thought the AOSP stood for. While it is easy enough to bypass this service using third party apps or a hex editor, I do not wish to support any developers that would stoop to this level of greed. If you want money for your code, I totally understand, but this is AOSP not apple and there is a time and place for everything. Please, don't take out your misplaced aggression at software pirates on the AOSP. Because, although this may be just a little bit of code to you, to me it is the beginning of the end of AOSP. If you compromise your integrity now, it's a short trip from here to bloatware with a monthly subscription fee. In a modern internet climate that is becoming increasingly controlled and corporatized, AOSP is a beacon of hope to me. A reminder that technology belongs to the many and not the few. This decision spits in the face of that hope. People will say i'm being dramatic but this is a huge deal to me and if you care about having the freedom to do what you want with your phone, which i'm pretty sure most of you do, then this should be a big deal to you too. I thought I could trust AOSP developers to do the right thing but apparently they feel that it's their place to decide which apps I can and cannot install. If you care about having the freedom to do why you wish with your phone, I urge you not to flash this ROM, or any ROM that would compromise its integrity by adding code that is meant to control its users. This is the kind of thing that made us choose AOSP in the first place. It doesn't even make logical sense to implement things like this in an open source ROM, as inevitably new versions of the ROM will be released with this ridiculous code removed. I am seriously disappointed as AICP was one of my favorite ROMs. The developers of AICP and the other affected ROMs have the right to do whatever they want(within legal boundaries) with their code as creators of intellectual property but as an AOSP user you have the right to flash a ROM with a little more integrity.
*Update 8/14*
This is directly from the Project Guard Official Github Page:
"NOTE: Please report new piracy markets and malware to me or any of the others involved with this project. Pull requests are also welcome. For ROM developers interested in using this it makes more sense to track this project directly and then bridge into an existing package with correct perms (like settings). This way any changes made here to the blacklisted packages and improvements will reach out to everyone."
This "note", written in huge font right on the Project Guard Github main page, begs the question;
So what exactly is the criteria for a "Piracy Market"?
Any market that contains software that will help or allow you to pirate software? That's my best guess at the projects aim, HOWEVER, they have provided, as far as I can tell, ZERO criteria for what constitutes a "Piracy Market". A "Piracy Market" may include Aptoide but it could also include the Google Playstore. You see the problem here? This is much too arbitrary and relative to be efficient in stopping piracy and much more likely to hurt developers, especially seeing as anyone who knows how to pirate, can also learn to bypass this service with a quick Google search. I did. What is going to happen is, legitimate software, or software that gives a user access to legitimate software, will end up being banned in these ROMs. This is a very dangerous mindset they have here. This could turn into a witch hunt or full blown technological McCarthyism.
Make no mistakes about it, as a user named "Bikas" pointed out on the OPO forums here, this is indeed a trojan.
According to wikipedia a computer trojan is defined as "any malicious computer program which misrepresent itself as useful, routine, or interesting in order to persuade a victim to install it". When someone downloads a custom ROM, especially AOSP, they assume they are gaining more freedom but in this case they are having it taken away. People trust AOSP devs and won't expect this to happen. Nobody expects to be controlled like this by a backround service in an AOSP custom ROM, therefore the entire ROM can be considered a trojan.
Wikipedia also states that if the trojan is "installed or run with elevated privileges a Trojan will generally have unlimited access. What it does with this power depends on the motives of the attacker." This also fits these ROMs. The ROMs DO have unlimited access to your phone and blocking you from installing a whole category of APKs is very malicious. In this case the "motives of the attacker" are to stop or curb piracy.
It is very clear that they,
A. Have unlimited access to your phone
B. Have clear motives
C. Are using this access without your permission to prevent you from installing apps that they have deemed "pirate markets", which is consistent with these motives.
Now ask yourself, are you okay with your ROM including a Trojan entirely based on the ROM developer's personal motives and political ideology, at the cost of your technological freedom to install whatever the hell you want? Software, especially AOSP ROMs, should be free of it's creator's bias and motives.
One more thing. It is of my opinion that the underlying reason for the creation of these "Anti-Piracy" ROMs is just money, or simply put, greed. I understand it can be frusterating when you put your blood, sweat and tears into an app or ROM and not only does nobody donate but they remove your advertisement's with an app like lucky patcher or complain that you aren't releasing nightlys often enough. I really do get that. But at the end of the day this thing is about money as virtually all "Anti-Piracy" groups, laws and efforts are. This is about forcing people to pay. I'm not saying they shouldn't pay, BUT THIS IS THE WRONG WAY TO ENFORCE IT.
-- Tipsy
-- SlimLP
-- SlimSaber
-- MinimalOS
-- CyanogenMod 12.1
-- Euphoria
-- Slimremix
-- Cmremix
-- Resurrection Remix
Don't take my word for it,
READ UP!
The apps you mention these ROM developers are trying to block are all to bypass google licensing.
In effect "getting paid apps for free"...
These ROM developers may also develop apps which could require payment/donation to use..
Why should they take out their anti piracy measures? I haven't looked into these roms personally, but i'd be happy to use them if they have info messages before installation to warn of such measures.
Just my two pennies
I support Anti-piracy where time and effort has been put into apps, and these guys are just asking for small donations to use their apps
EDIT: I disagree with banning the use of xposed within their ROMS, but i agree if they just do not want to support this.
Aptoide I partially disagree due to the fact some coutries do not have access to the Google Playstore, it is down to Aptoide ti implement anti piracy measures within their store app.
Regards
f0xy said:
The apps you mention these ROM developers are trying to block are all to bypass google licensing.
In effect "getting paid apps for free"...
These ROM developers may also develop apps which could require payment/donation to use..
Why should they take out their anti piracy measures? I haven't looked into these roms personally, but i'd be happy to use them if they have info messages before installation to warn of such measures.
Just my two pennies
I support Anti-piracy where time and effort has been put into apps, and these guys are just asking for small donations to use their apps
EDIT: I disagree with banning the use of xposed within their ROMS, but i agree if they just do not want to support this.
Aptoide I partially disagree due to the fact some coutries do not have access to the Google Playstore, it is down to Aptoide ti implement anti piracy measures within their store app.
Regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The biggest problem is they have no designated criteria for what apps are to be banned and what apps aren't. They just ask the general public to go and snitch on apps that they think are "pirate markets".
I also am concerned that if we compromise and allow this to be the norm then we have just set out on a path ruin. If things like this are allowed next time it WILL be closed.
As I stated above, they have the right to do whatever they want with their ROM but I have the right to not flash it and to encourage others not to in order to protect AOSP from becoming something like touchwiz.
jujijoog said:
The biggest problem is they have no designated criteria for what apps are to be banned and what apps aren't. They just ask the general public to go and snitch on apps that they think are "pirate markets".
I also am concerned that if we compromise and allow this to be the norm then we have just set out on a path ruin. If things like this are allowed next time it WILL be closed.
As I stated above, they have the right to do whatever they want with their ROM but I have the right to not flash it and to encourage others not to in order to protect AOSP from becoming something like touchwiz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Without fully reading into this(no time at moment, at work! )
I can agree with your comments. Project Guard should not have the right to disallow users of roms to not run specific apps. I can understand what they are trying to do but they are going around it all the wrong ways.
I am now following the movement Anti - Contentguard
f0xy said:
The apps you mention these ROM developers are trying to block are all to bypass google licensing.
In effect "getting paid apps for free"...
These ROM developers may also develop apps which could require payment/donation to use..
Why should they take out their anti piracy measures? I haven't looked into these roms personally, but i'd be happy to use them if they have info messages before installation to warn of such measures.
Just my two pennies
I support Anti-piracy where time and effort has been put into apps, and these guys are just asking for small donations to use their apps
EDIT: I disagree with banning the use of xposed within their ROMS, but i agree if they just do not want to support this.
Aptoide I partially disagree due to the fact some coutries do not have access to the Google Playstore, it is down to Aptoide ti implement anti piracy measures within their store app.
Regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
f0xy said:
Without fully reading into this(no time at moment, at work! )
I can agree with your comments. Project Guard should not have the right to disallow users of roms to not run specific apps. I can understand what they are trying to do but they are going around it all the wrong ways.
I am now following the movement Anti - Contentguard
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I am not speaking out against Anti-Piracy, to do so would be to speak out against a persons right to intellectual property and capitalism as a whole really. I am speaking out against the intrusive method and implementation of Project Guard.
The main thing that concerns me on this matter is the fact that I like to try apps before I buy them. If the app is crap then I just uninstall it and don't worry with it after that. Some apps in the app store, and I have had problems with this, do not allow refunds once purchased. It is frustrating some times to just have nothing but screen shots that look awesome and a video that looks great, but you are the first one that sees the app and you buy it to only find out that it is nothing like described. I do personal ROM development from time to time and I would never allow anything like this in anything I do. It takes away from everything that is Linux. And yes android is Linux/UNIX based, so therefore should not be restricted as such. That is why Google implemented software that checks for pirated apps and won't allow you to use them if it sees certain checks that not even lucky patcher can bypass. My personal opinion on this matter is that there might be other reasons behind this code. If you analyze the code to be implemented, you will notice it connects to a server for verification of new apps added that are considered to be piracy apps and also to confirm the currently installed database. I know that some hackers use this type of ploy to gain access to your personal information because any time that you connect to a server with an app with full access to your device it can essentially get all the information saved on your device regardless of how secure you think it is. So keep that on mind. Take a look at their code on github and see for yourself.
Sent from my klte using Tapatalk
How will this effect folks in countries that crack down on the free flow of information like here in the US? Think it's more about control than it is money...ooopps, my bad, no such thing as money just notes. Imagine being paid in debt instruments for your labor, oh wait we already do and we love it; suckers!!
Prison Planet peace out!
This is epic!
The time you have spent to make this post was more than enough to learn how to compile rom from source and build it without this so called Trojan that helps the app devs.
And if we added a Trojan, you wouldn't even know it
@jujijoog
You are totaly right. How can the devs only dare, trying to protect us against breaking the laws rules.
What those piracy apps does is simply stealing.
You are taking someones right for money.
This is simply an anti-thief prevention.
Now ask yourself. Is it okay to steal things. Is it okay to steal money?
You say, they have clear motives.
So you have.
When your "freedom" is about stealing, i hope you end up in jail.
Sincerely,
mono
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=62363666
no more and no less
HGT - S5 G900F - ONEPLUS ONE - TESLA TTL7 - Windows 10
---------- Post added at 15:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:00 ----------
A page for thieves, nice.
HGT - S5 G900F - ONEPLUS ONE - TESLA TTL7 - Windows 10
Again in plain text
Tell me an app which does not have full access to my phone,
1, SuperSU and all Google Apps, then Facebook, Whatsapp, Viber and so on.
Each shi... app has access if they want to. Your argument is not an argument.
I'm more afraid of Google + + + and stolen apps as of the Anti Piracy code.
many Problems come from Google
http://blog.exodusintel.com/2015/08/13/stagefright-mission-accomplished/
LorD ClockaN said:
The time you have spent to make this post was more than enough to learn how to compile rom from source and build it without this so called Trojan that helps the app devs.
And if we added a Trojan, you wouldn't even know it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well if you read my post you would understand that I'm not concerned about bypassing content guard. In fact i made it painfully obvious when I stated how easy it is to do just that, in the first paragraph....
What I am concerned about is compromising the integrity of AOSP.
One thing you cannot argue is that this is a precedent and I fear that this precedent has "awakened a sleeping giant" and could be the catalyst for something much worse. I'm not going to re-explain myself because you were either too lazy to read my whole post or too ignorant to comprehend it.
monochro100 said:
@jujijoog
You are totaly right. How can the devs only dare, trying to protect us against breaking the laws rules.
What those piracy apps does is simply stealing.
You are taking someones right for money.
This is simply an anti-thief prevention.
Now ask yourself. Is it okay to steal things. Is it okay to steal money?
You say, they have clear motives.
So you have.
When your "freedom" is about stealing, i hope you end up in jail.
Sincerely,
mono
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You hope I end up in jail because I have a philosophical disagreement about what open source ROM content should be? Calm down bro.
And you are god damn right I have clear motives.
Talk about stating the obvious, LOL.
It's not like I pretended this was an unbiased research post.
My freedom is not about stealing, its about not having code in my ROM that does nothing for me but control me.
Content guard has the potential to stop much more than pirating.
It is already blocking access to legitimate apps and apps that provide access to legitimate apps.
I HAVE STATED BEFORE THAT I AM NOT OPPOSING ANTI-PIRACY MEASURES AS A WHOLE I AM PROTESTING THIS PARTICULAR METHOD OF ANTI-PIRACY IMPLEMENTATION AS I THINK IT IS DANGEROUS.
HorstiG said:
Again in plain text
Tell me an app which does not have full access to my phone,
1, SuperSU and all Google Apps, then Facebook, Whatsapp, Viber and so on.
Each shi... app has access if they want to. Your argument is not an argument.
I'm more afraid of Google + + + and stolen apps as of the Anti Piracy code.
many Problems come from Google
http://blog.exodusintel.com/2015/08/13/stagefright-mission-accomplished/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a ridiculous argument because although those apps have full access to your phone, NONE OF THEM DO ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE TO AS MALICIOUS AS CONTENT GUARD! Super SU simply gives the user privileges while Content Guard takes them away. To compare them in this way is frankly hilarious as they are actually great examples of a polar opposites.
Wow this is the best you Pro Content-Guard types got?
Can someone who has actually graduated from high school please come at me?
@jujijoog
You're a pompous ass and an instigator to theft, no more and no less.
I hope the post is closed here
HorstiG said:
@jujijoog
You're a pompous ass and an instigator to theft, no more and no less.
I hope the post is closed here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How am I an instigator to theft because I oppose the implementation of some code that I believe could cause AOSP to lose integrity and worsen? How many times do I have to say that I am not defending pirating software nor am I helping to do so. I may be helping to throw up road blocks to measures against it but even that I doubt as there was an exposed module made completely independent of my influence as well as several methods developed for bypassing content guard before I even knew it existed. What im getting at is that regardless of what I say or do content guard would have been made useless. Its the unintended side effects I'm worried about. The people behind this project were discussing banning xposed as a way of stopping a bypass. If they are willing to do something that damaging to the xda community then they are a problem. Do you not agree?
Do you think xposed should be banned? Really? Did you even read my post? What are you even reacting to, what you are saying makes no sense in the context of my post. I think by "you are a pompous ass", what you really meant was "I don't understand your post because I'm ignorant and that makes me insecure, scared and upset". Why would my post be b&? What possible reason would a mod find to b& my post. As far as I know XDA isn't in the business of censorship. I'm sure you would love to be though. You're the one that's more likely to get banned for name calling. Grow up.
What's up with all the name calling? If you don't agree with me then explain why as any intelligent, respectable adult would, this isn't a YouTube comment section.
LorD ClockaN said:
The time you have spent to make this post was more than enough to learn how to compile rom from source and build it without this so called Trojan that helps the app devs.
And if we added a Trojan, you wouldn't even know it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By the way, I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth? When did I say this was helping app devs? Although its irresponsible of the app devs to agree to implement this I am not under the illusion that content guard was created by them. Its clear who is ultimately behind this and its not the app devs. However any app dev that allows this becomes, in their passivity, an agent of negative change to the whole Android dev scene. And I didn't know you added this until it blocked my install. All Trojans become apparent after they execute their malicious intent, with the exception of like a data mining trojan so I'm not sure what you mean?
P.S Funny you should mention I actually am working on a ROM right now. When I drop it I'll shoot you a link.
People just aren't wanting to listen. They aren't realizing the full affect this is going to have on the community. The devs working on getting xposed to work well with 5.1 are busting their butts to make it work and then someone comes along and tries to restrict the use of our ROMs. No where has anyone said that they are supporting piracy. You don't need apps like blackmart alpha, aptoid or anything of such to get free apps. If someone were to support piracy, then it is up to that individual. Like we say in the military, to each his own. Like I have said before, since this connects to a server for checks, we don't know what all it is capable of. And none of this " well facebook and other apps do the same thing and could do more damage! ". Yes we all know this, but there is a catch to that argument ..... We choose to install that software and understand the risk. They are not forced upon us or hidden like a piece of Turkey jerky mixed with beef. And from my understanding this code is going to be hidden in settings as well.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk
What difference is this privacy guard going to make. People will just Google apks instead. I can't see where this is going. And this xposed module is made.
This is exactly the like of the story of the BPI. Greedy people trying to monopolise the market. What happened to AOSP's freedom. Well people have gone round the privacy measures.
Let's say Google Play doesn't allow an app for instance Adaway. Where am I going to get it officially? From their site or a market he uploads it to. There are genuine apps on there which are because of Google's terms. Most of them are pirated (which I don't condom at all).
With these new rules go ahead and block Google Play. There are unmonitored apps on there which can allow you to download music. Why can't you? Oh yeah, the greed.
I'm pretty sure this is a evasion of the users privacy. Even Windows 10 allowed you to change default settings and stop feedback; this change would be illegal which is why Windows 7 came with a browser choice update to allow other browser vendors.
Yup roms with this content guard BREAKS THE GPL. You cannot upload roms on XDA which break GPL [emoji12]
XDA_h3n said:
What difference is this privacy guard going to make. People will just Google apks instead. I can't see where this is going. And this xposed module is made.
This is exactly the like of the story of the BPI. Greedy people trying to monopolise the market. What happened to AOSP's freedom. Well people have gone round the privacy measures.
Let's say Google Play doesn't allow an app for instance Adaway. Where am I going to get it officially? From their site or a market he uploads it to. There are genuine apps on there which are because of Google's terms. Most of them are pirated (which I don't condom at all).
With these new rules go ahead and block Google Play. There are unmonitored apps on there which can allow you to download music. Why can't you? Oh yeah, the greed.
I'm pretty sure this is a evasion of the users privacy. Even Windows 10 allowed you to change default settings and stop feedback; this change would be illegal which is why Windows 7 came with a browser choice update to allow other browser vendors.
Yup roms with this content guard BREAKS THE GPL. You cannot upload roms on XDA which break GPL [emoji12]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said my friend. People don't really think about that kind of stuff usually though. That's how privacy guard came about. Lol
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk
XDA_h3n said:
What difference is this privacy guard going to make. People will just Google apks instead. I can't see where this is going. And this xposed module is made.
This is exactly the like of the story of the BPI. Greedy people trying to monopolise the market. What happened to AOSP's freedom. Well people have gone round the privacy measures.
Let's say Google Play doesn't allow an app for instance Adaway. Where am I going to get it officially? From their site or a market he uploads it to. There are genuine apps on there which are because of Google's terms. Most of them are pirated (which I don't condom at all).
With these new rules go ahead and block Google Play. There are unmonitored apps on there which can allow you to download music. Why can't you? Oh yeah, the greed.
I'm pretty sure this is a evasion of the users privacy. Even Windows 10 allowed you to change default settings and stop feedback; this change would be illegal which is why Windows 7 came with a browser choice update to allow other browser vendors.
Yup roms with this content guard BREAKS THE GPL. You cannot upload roms on XDA which break GPL [emoji12]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well its definitely an invasion of privacy as far as im concerned but what constitutes an invasion of privacy is a matter of perspective. Do you think it is possible that content guard technically breaks any of googles TOS or possibly even privacy laws? Im not too familiar with legislation like this if it does exist. Much of the post 9/11 legislation has been aimed at making things like content guard more legal unfortunately. Several people I mentioned this to on another forum I frequent pointed out the windows 10 connection. Everyone agreed that content guard is a much more malicious implementation of Anti-Piracy code. You are right, people will just google or torrent apks, that is until Content Guard 2.0 blocks the installation of sideloaded apps, xposed and Installation of all apks via ADB (Just Kidding).
Edit: I just notice the last line about GPL. I had missed that. Is that true or are you just being facetious?
lunerceli said:
Well said my friend. People don't really think about that kind of stuff usually though. That's how privacy guard came about. Lol
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im honestly kind of shocked that more people dont see, or at least care about the possible negative implications of something like this. I figured on a forum like XDA, support for an anti content guard movement would be mostly unanimous but it seems to be pretty well devided which actually makes things a little more interesting.