Database Develop

[Q] Antivirus for Gtablet - Experiences/Preferences

I am aware that Android being Linux based doesn't suffer from all the malware of other devices but with so much personal information being kept in our smart devices it is only a matter of time before less than savory individuals attempt ways to separate us from ourselves so..
I am interested in your experiences with FREE antivirus products. Personal opinions.. ones you have tried.. how secure you think they are. I am only interested in the anti-virus portion of these apps. Not really interested in the backup portions. Perhaps if they offer free secure remote data wipe that would be of interest in the future.
I currently use Lookout Mobile Security but not totally secure with it due to such a limited amount of threats. It is why I am asking for personal opinions and personal preferences so more of us can make better choices to protect our favorite toy.
Of interest would be NetQin due to their experience and experience with other phones.. mostly Symbian.
AVG's version due to their experiences with anti-virus but I have heard of issues where their desktop version failed to identify virus or malware.
And also BluePoint Antivirus and their entry into protecting Android OS. BluePoint seems to be a solid antivirus provider but the reviews for the android device have been less than favorable.
There is also Dr.Web and MyMobile Protection of which I have no clue
Antivirus Free by creative apps appears to have built and designed by an individual an not a company so I am not sure of the trustworthiness of this app although alot have downloaded it.
I would expect them all to scan as apps are downloaded and installed. Most seem to be cloud based scanners.
Your opinion is appreciated..
Thanks

Amazing - 254 views
254 views and no opinions or preferences.. surely someone is using antivirus software on their gtablets?

There are no know viruses for Linux in the wild. So what would it be scanning for? You really should be more worried about the permissions that are given when you install an app. If you rooted your device (and who hasn't), this would provide access for any malware.

wasserkapf said:
There are no know viruses for Linux in the wild. So what would it be scanning for? You really should be more worried about the permissions that are given when you install an app. If you rooted your device (and who hasn't), this would provide access for any malware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One of the things I like most about it the android platform is the permissions it presents when installing apps. There has been malware reported that exploits sms sending your bill threw the roof and lining the pockets of some foreign company. There is also reports of a Trojan that is designed for Android. It collects personal info on the phone and sends to remote servers. I completely understand that the threat is very limited but with the opportunity to collect personal data I believe it is only a matter of time before the threats increase. I am only trying to stay ahead of the curve. While most threats at the moment require a user to allow they will get more sophisticated with time. Thanks for your reply!

i second your worry but i think mainly we must watch on apps. maybe a sandboxing app would be nice?

I use DroidWall on my G Tablet. That way I can whitelist what apps have internet access and what one's don't. Best way I've found for protecting my information and malware. I've used it with pershoots kernal on vegan and on BitTrix's CM7.
For virus scan's I've used both AVG's pro version and Lookout for my tablet and my phone. AVG's did detect some settings, like it warned when it detected root, warned on some programs that use root access, and on my phone would flag some SMS's. But the tracking on AVG is pretty worthless. On my phone setting it at lost would start it tracking, but every time I tried it it would be somewhere around 5-6 miles from where I actually was. The phone lock and wipe don't work either, at least with moto droid.
Lookout's scanning only seems to report based on the permissions. The tracking on lookout is much better. The couple times I've tried reporting lost on my phone it would have a very accurate reading in a matter of 3-4 minutes.
But can't say how well they work in virus's or malware as I've never ran into any yet.

Thanks for the input.. what I was curious about.. which ones are actually looking for malware and which ones are just scanning permissions. Off to search for droidwall.. thanks!

lordgodgeneral said:
I use DroidWall on my G Tablet. That way I can whitelist what apps have internet access and what one's don't. Best way I've found for protecting my information and malware. I've used it with pershoots kernal on vegan and on BitTrix's CM7.
For virus scan's I've used both AVG's pro version and Lookout for my tablet and my phone. AVG's did detect some settings, like it warned when it detected root, warned on some programs that use root access, and on my phone would flag some SMS's. But the tracking on AVG is pretty worthless. On my phone setting it at lost would start it tracking, but every time I tried it it would be somewhere around 5-6 miles from where I actually was. The phone lock and wipe don't work either, at least with moto droid.
Lookout's scanning only seems to report based on the permissions. The tracking on lookout is much better. The couple times I've tried reporting lost on my phone it would have a very accurate reading in a matter of 3-4 minutes.
But can't say how well they work in virus's or malware as I've never ran into any yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unable to use Droidwall with TnT ver4.2 due to an error I receive "can't initialize iptables table 'filter': Table does not exist (do you need to insmod?) Perhaps iptables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.
This error message unfortunately means that your kernel does not support iptables/netfilter, so DroidWall will not work.
There is nothing I can do on DroidWall to make it work, and the only possible solution is to flash a customized ROM with netfilter support."
Kind of a disappointment - was looking forward to it

Do you think WP8 should be WindowsRT feature wise ??

How many of you think in such a way. I mean the freedom we get in Windows RT is actually what an average user want with security. Heard WP Blue will share winRT APIs and other codes. So does that mean we will see freedom and app like file explorer limited to personal files, ability to have 3rd party audio and video players with full media api access ?? In short the sandbox model if Windows RT in WP...
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Vishwal said:
How many of you think in such a way. I mean the freedom we get in Windows RT is actually what an average user want with security. Heard WP Blue will share winRT APIs and other codes. So does that mean we will see freedom and app like file explorer limited to personal files, ability to have 3rd party audio and video players with full media api access ?? In short the sandbox model if Windows RT in WP...
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It might be possible.
The plan is to get it there, I am not sure if Blue will bridge the platforms completely or just some APIs.

mcosmin222 said:
It might be possible.
The plan is to get it there, I am not sure if Blue will bridge the platforms completely or just some APIs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope it's former part of your last sentence. I want to operate my smart phone, not vise versa...
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

It would be nice. I don't wholly agree with Microsoft's approach to RT, either, mind you. I think that restricting things like Testsigning mode and kernel debugging and third-party drivers is harmful to the platform from a developer standpoint without providing any benefit to either Microsoft or the users. I think the restriction around desktop apps is silly and should be optional, even if the option is well hidden and/or contains dire warnings. I'll put up with those restrictions in return for Microsoft's current laissez-faire attitude about the "jailbreak", but even then I find the "secure boot" lockdown insulting; we bought the hardware and the software it comes with, and should be able to run whatever other software we want to on it.
With all that said, the RT world is miles ahead of the WP world. I'm not suggesting they should bring the desktop to WP - it's actually possible, and while it would be hard to click things the specs and resolution on the higher-end phones are more than sufficient - but some kind of file manager (or even the ability to write our own), some kind of scripting environment (closer to powershell than TouchDevelop), and some of the core utilities and features of Windows (ability to back up any and all files automatically, or to set per-app and per-sound device volume controls, or to create symbolic links in the filesystem) would be really nice, and full access to the registry would be fantastic.
The issue of security does become relevant here - I don't want any arbitrary app to have such registry access, for example - but I wish they would put in some way to do such things, even if only through a built-in special-privileges settings app. Besides, eventually we will find a way into the OS, and there's a decent chance that the exploit used will be something that *any* app could use. At that point, we might very well find malware exploiting those holes. Historically, the biggest breaks in device lockdown have come neither from malicious attackers nor from those who wish to pirate apps/games/whatever, but from those who simply want to use their own devices without BS restrictions getting in the way. The most famous example in recent histroy is probably the PS3, which was broken wide open after Sony seriously (and foolishly) pissed off some people by retroactively removing device features such as the ability to boot Linux. However, the same act plays out regularly on iOS (where the goal is control, but once the hacks are demonstrated they get used for both malware and piracy) and has also already been seen on RT.
If you want to make something secure, don't give the most talented people (who only rarely work for the blackhats or the pirates) an excellent reason to break its security wide open. This means the security has to stay out of those users' way, instead of constantly impeding them.

I actually would like to have the desktop available on WP as well but not necessarily if you are using it as a phone. But imagine connecting it via HDMI and having RT Applications + Desktop available. The hardware power is there, given that current WP8 devices run the same Qualcomm SoC that Dell uses in the XPS10.
API-wise I expect them to bring a lot more of WinRT over to WinPRT (especially on the managed side). I'm not sure if they will extend it to system-level concepts like a shared file-system - my feeling is that they won't do that but we'll have to wait and see how the APIs to access the SD card are progressing.

While I agree, the downside of doing that is that it greatly increases the install footprint. Windows RT has a much larger install footprint than other "mobile" OSes, and it has hurt platform adoption somewhat as well as increasing the manufacturing price of the tablets it runs on (because they need more storage; 16GB wouldn't really cut it). WP8 is even more space-sensitive; there are already WP8 devices with very little internal storage, and many phone lack any kind of expansion port. Adding the desktop and all of the desktop utilities (management console and all its snap-ins, all the little utilities like paint and wordpad and so on, plus all the libraries needed to support them) would add up to probably at least another few hundred megs; trivial on a PC, acceptable on a tablet, problematic on a phone.

Windows phone security- is there one and if so, how does it work?

Hi,
So, Android has a permission system which albeit somewhat flawed (malware can gain permissions not intended for it) and not very suitable for laymen (non rooted phones have to either accept all permissions or be denied from the app. In many programs people don't have the luxury of not using them) theoretically has merit. IOS has...well actually I'm not sure how it works security wise but I pressume it creates sandboxes for each app, layman wise it is reasonable since you (theoretically) can deny access for all programs to certain components (no need to jailbreak).
How does WP works?
Thank you.

Security is different, apps can't do as much as on android. But iOS is better in this, because capabilities are like in Android: you can see what the apps want prior to installing them, but blocking some of them isn't possible.

I am very saddened to hear this.
Is there an ability in place similar to Androids rooting?
Also, what do you mean by "apps can't do as much as on android"?
Thank you!

@th0mas96's post is technically *mostly* accurate but very confusing and doesn't actually answer your question at all.
The short version is that WP apps use a capability-and-sandbox system much like iOS and Android, with each app getting a sandbox that gives it read-only access to the app-specific install directory and the global system directory, read/write access to the app-specific data directory, and access to whatever other stuff is specified in the capabilities. Capabilities are currently all-or-nothing; you can't reject or disable any capability except by just not installing the app.
I could go into the technical implementation of the system a bit, but the short version is that WP8 apps use fairly standard NT (as in the NT kernel that is at the core of PC Windows versions) security features: each app has a unique token (rather than inheriting the token of the process that crated it, the way it normally works on PC but very much like how Windows Store apps work on Win8) which contains the app-specific Security IDentifier (SID) that gives access to the app directories, plus the SIDs of the various capabilities that the app has.
What @th0mas96 was talking about is that WP capabilities usable by third-party developers are much more restrictive than they are on Android. For example, Android allows an app have full read-write access to your contacts or to send SMS directly. WP8 doesn't allow that unless you use capabilities that are normally neither allowed on the store nor allowed in sideloaded apps (Microsoft's code can have them, of course - that's how the built-in SMS app works - but not Joe Random Dev). The downside of this is obvious; some app behaviors (like a full replacement for the SMS app or phone dialer) are not possible. The upside is that apps are *way* more limited in how malicious they can be; the most common way that Android malware makes money (remember, the vast majority of malware is for profit) is by sending SMS to "premium" numbers. On WP8, an app could *compose* such a message, but it couldn't *send* it for you (unless it had a capability that third-party apps normally can't have) so you'd have a chance to see what the app was doing and decide not to send that message after all.
This means that the ability to disable capabilities is much less important on WP8 than on Android.

Oh, then those restrictions are actually good news.
Aside from from your typical run-of-the-mill malware my main concern was actually privacy. I have a huge displeasure from apps like Whatsapp which on android takes a whole plethora of liberties and was hoping that perhaps some other system may contain their user data voracity and their ability to control the divice their on.
Is there any link in which I could see the full list of those restrictions?
I'm still downhearted from not having a more fine grained control of the system but maybe it still has it uses in some scenarios...
Also, thank you very much for your comprehensive explanation!

i found a tiny file stored inside some of the unbranded htc accord RUUs. its call disablewriteprotect.test. the only thing the file contains is a sentence stating write protection will be disabled until this file is removed. followed by a music note and some other symbol. so there you go thats how you make your entire htc 8x read and write. one file less than 1kb in size. ROOT!
but how can we flash this file. im still working on it. this file is located within the efi partition which also houses the ffuloader.efi, and severl other efi executables. check this post http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=53687985#post53687985
you wont find that on google search.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app

Window phone Security Issues
Your Windows Phone is secure by design. Many security features are turned on by default. For example, apps you download from the Windows Phone Store are tested by Microsoft and encrypted to make sure you don't accidentally install malicious software on your Windows phone.
Set a password
Setting up Kid's Corner
If you've ever handed your smartphone to a child, you know that they can quickly get into all sorts of apps and settings they shouldn't. No such worries with Kid's Corner, a place on your phone where your child can play with the games, apps, music and videos
Use the free Find My Phone service
Say yes to updates . check out more at Master Software Solutions - Windows Phone Update

grilledcheesesandwich said:
i found a tiny file stored inside some of the unbranded htc accord RUUs. its call disablewriteprotect.test. the only thing the file contains is a sentence stating write protection will be disabled until this file is removed. followed by a music note and some other symbol. so there you go thats how you make your entire htc 8x read and write. one file less than 1kb in size. ROOT!
but how can we flash this file. im still working on it. this file is located within the efi partition which also houses the ffuloader.efi, and severl other efi executables. check this post http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=53687985#post53687985
you wont find that on google search.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds interesting.
Not something I'd try )) but interesting.
Aman Raien said:
Your Windows Phone is secure by design. Many security features are turned on by default. For example, apps you download from the Windows Phone Store are tested by Microsoft and encrypted to make sure you don't accidentally install malicious software on your Windows phone.
Set a password
Setting up Kid's Corner
If you've ever handed your smartphone to a child, you know that they can quickly get into all sorts of apps and settings they shouldn't. No such worries with Kid's Corner, a place on your phone where your child can play with the games, apps, music and videos
Use the free Find My Phone service
Say yes to updates . check out more at Master Software Solutions - Windows Phone Update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I pressume this is an advert for Master Software Solutions, but nevertheless I did google the term you suggested and got nil results. I also browsed the main site of the company itself but haven't found anything related, nor did I find anything on their facebook page.
Regardless, I checked out this Kids corner thing, it's cute but not really security related...
Thx anyway.

Configure privacy settings equivalent to IOS?

Assuming I was an expert user who knew every single Note 9 device option, samsung account setting, and google account setting.... If I were to configure EVERY single one of them to limit the data it collects, set every app permission to be in its most restricted state, disable every usage access setting, and configured my google and samsung accounts to be the most limited data collection accounts as possible, .... it is even possible to get to IOS level privacy on my Note 9? Is Android just sending everything it can back to google's servers as possible, such as when i turn the phone on, when i walk, move, open an app, browse the web, or whatever? I know some have already setup network analyzers to see the traffic going out, but I can never tell what configuration they do that with. I want to know if getting the privacy to IOS levels is impossible, or is it just a matter of very careful configuration....?

It's impossible. I'm not a fan of Apple devices, but I applaud them from a business perspective and that trickles down from the fundamental ideals of Steve Jobs.
Numerous studies show that Google sucks up information 10x as much as Apple which relies in differential data that doesn't exactly pinpoint the person, but more so the general interests of the person. Google identifies the person and their location. Unless you're walking around with your phone off or granting no permissions to every app, you can't match the security of an Apple device. The doesn't only include Google. Remember we have to deal with our specific manufacturers that are collecting data on us as well since Android is open source. So we just have to hope Googles intentions are good or move to an Apple device.

brainysmurf said:
Assuming I was an expert user who knew every single Note 9 device option, samsung account setting, and google account setting.... If I were to configure EVERY single one of them to limit the data it collects, set every app permission to be in its most restricted state, disable every usage access setting, and configured my google and samsung accounts to be the most limited data collection accounts as possible, .... it is even possible to get to IOS level privacy on my Note 9? Is Android just sending everything it can back to google's servers as possible, such as when i turn the phone on, when i walk, move, open an app, browse the web, or whatever? I know some have already setup network analyzers to see the traffic going out, but I can never tell what configuration they do that with. I want to know if getting the privacy to IOS levels is impossible, or is it just a matter of very careful configuration....?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No fanboi of any company/mfg/OS,but,they all do virtually the same thing with your personal information/usage habits.
The differences are mere semantics & they collect/sell user information.
The following is a 2yr old article,but,I'm guessing the points they make still hold true:
https://decentralize.today/apple-vs...company-handles-your-data-better-a7022bd452b1
Arguably,Android users can control their sharing of personal data usage,but,that has its caveats,such as limited functionality on some apps/etc...
Best advice I can give is the following:
1) Carefully comb through every setting on the phone,most are self-explanatory.
2) Go to every apps internal settings & the phone's setting under SETTINGS > APPLICATIONS & fine tune as best as possible.
Even after all of that,Google/Samsung (or most other mfgs) have settings that are inaccessible or cannot change (greyed-out),so,you're still not in the clear as far as total control/privacy.
This is one of the major attractions to rooting/ROMs for your Android device.
A rooted &/or ROM'd Samsung device is the ideal for gaining control of privacy/permission control,but,it breaks KNOX & Samsung Pay,no going back once rooted,even if restored to a stock state.
You gain more granular control of such permissions & if you want to go all-in on privacy, a ROM such as Lineage gives you the best you can hope for in personal security/privacy. A brief summary,but,that's the gist.
Outside of root/ROMs,If privacy/security is of utmost importance,I'd dare say a Blackberry would be a decent choice. I myself only briefly owned a Blackberry (Android device),so,I can't attest to how private/secure you personal usage/data is,but,I've rarely,if ever,heard of any major concerns in the matter w/Blackberry.
@brainysmurf
Another step you can take to regain some control of your Samsung device is using a package disabler app & the nice thing about these is no root access is required (AppFreeze/Package Disabler Pro/Adhell3).
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wakasoftware.appfreezer&hl=en_US
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.powermanager.batteryaddon&hl=en
https://amp.reddit.com/r/GalaxyS8/comments/8nmrfq/how_to_install_adhell_3_a_video_guide/
Use the XDA site search feature or Google for more info on the above mentioned disabler apps.
You can also use ADB Commands to disable apps as well,but,please read the following link carefully before proceeding:
https://www.xda-developers.com/uninstall-carrier-oem-bloatware-without-root-access/

I have never had an apple device, But I would like to say that android as a system is opensource and the google apps that are put on top are non opensource and are probably where you lose your privacy but as a system it is transparent which attracts devs and rooting (i.e. getting access to the system partitions) is what makes android so customizable. Versus apple which you have to blind trust ios and trust that these options are 100% do what they say..
Yes it is more secure because it is closed source but at the same time For actual privacy you never know. Saying that how do you get your privacy with android needs some setup which koliosis did good explaining. But the difference between the two OSs I believe is because of (opensource)ness of android the amout of customizablity with android is really deep. To which I believe if you invest good time researching, you can get a way better state than iOS. Again not an expert but putting my opinion
For the rest
Koliosis said it all.

that_same_guy said:
Yes it is more secure because it is closed source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have to correct that one. That is a myth spread by some big companies in order try to gain some customers over from the cheaper/free competition. In reality, open vs. closed source has no other effect on how secure the result is than with open source there can be more eyes looking at the code (for both good and bad intentions). As an example, simply compare a decent linux distro (from which only similar applications are installed that would come with corresponding Windows installation) to M$ Windows. Open source (and free at that) wins many times over in overall security (while neither is free from issues).
The biggest effect on the code quality (thus often also how secure it is) is on how many (real) experts work on it, and this in turn depends on popularity (open source) and/or money (company's/organization's income and policies/ideals). For the last part 'policies/ideals' just compare M$ and Apple, both have the money to throw at development if they choose to do so; former makes mostly insecure crap, latter makes half-decent stuff. (And note, I'm not a fanboy of either, or pretty much of any company, except one little local camera shop, so do read the previous with some weight on that "half-" before the "decent".)
As for small input on the privacy squeezing on Samsung devices:
I have so far managed to avoid to use a samsung-account, and that might help a tiny bit, although some features of the phone are then not working, but mostly useless features. Though there are some seemingly useful features that require Samsung-account for some weird reason, but I've manage to live without them. Like the "protected folder" (or whatever it is in English), why on earth would that need an account or anything external for that matter?!?
(Well, technically, I do have a Samsung-account, as that was required to get the phone cheaper, but after that order, I've not used that account anywhere.)

ErebusRaze said:
It's impossible. I'm not a fan of Apple devices, but I applaud them from a business perspective and that trickles down from the fundamental ideals of Steve Jobs.
Numerous studies show that Google sucks up information 10x as much as Apple which relies in differential data that doesn't exactly pinpoint the person, but more so the general interests of the person. Google identifies the person and their location. Unless you're walking around with your phone off or granting no permissions to every app, you can't match the security of an Apple device. The doesn't only include Google. Remember we have to deal with our specific manufacturers that are collecting data on us as well since Android is open source. So we just have to hope Googles intentions are good or move to an Apple device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This actually goes to my point... If indeed I did remove all permissions from all apps, does this mean Android tracking would be completely disabled? Or if I removed google play services, or disabled it, or removed all permissions from it? Technically, would that give it an IOS level of privacy? I'm just wondering if the OS itself is prone to just phoning home and letting it know everything I'm doing, or if it's possible at all to tame it....
Thanks for your repsonse.

ErebusRaze said:
It's impossible. I'm not a fan of Apple devices, but I applaud them from a business perspective and that trickles down from the fundamental ideals of Steve Jobs.
Numerous studies show that Google sucks up information 10x as much as Apple which relies in differential data that doesn't exactly pinpoint the person, but more so the general interests of the person. Google identifies the person and their location. Unless you're walking around with your phone off or granting no permissions to every app, you can't match the security of an Apple device. The doesn't only include Google. Remember we have to deal with our specific manufacturers that are collecting data on us as well since Android is open source. So we just have to hope Googles intentions are good or move to an Apple device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I saw those same studies. And they never seem to provide specific configuration data. For instance, the study showing that android gathers as much as 10x more data specifically mentioned that Chrome was constantly phoning home sending data. However, what if the user didn't log into their chrome account? I think it's much more limited in that case... Or what if the user disabled chrome, and perhaps all google apps? Is it android doing the privacy damage, or google apps/play services? If I disabled those, or removed all permissions from those, would it be equivalent to IOS? I'm an engineer in the business working at a major silicon valley company, and even with high expertise in the design of these things I'm finding it impossible to get basic understanding of what it actually going on. It is either trying to read through legalize of privacy agreements, or reading blogs and studies with claims such as 10x more data, while not providing specifics...

I wouldn't be in such a hurry for "Q"

https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-storage-access-framework-scoped-storage/
... Looks like porting old pie roms to new phones is going to become a thing

According to what I've read, it would be very easy to build a workaround for it, especially considering Google already has a workaround in place until Q apps are enforced in Google Play.

Also looks like it might be a pain in the ass

I cannot believe what I just read. I wasn't aware this was coming and I couldn't despise the decision more.
Proper access to the file system was for me one of the main advantages Android offered over iOS.
Way to go, Google...

I think this is the best move Google made for security thus far. Too many apps ask for full unfettered access to my storage. I will be happy when apps get a little bit more locked down in this aspect.

Scott said:
I think this is the best move Google made for security thus far. Too many apps ask for full unfettered access to my storage. I will be happy when apps get a little bit more locked down in this aspect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not even just storage, it's to everything these days. Why does the app for my Apex Fusion interface on my reef tank need access to contacts and text messages?
On topic, I agree 100% with you.

Those tears in my eyes... yeah not because of the blue light in the middle of the night here... because of what I read... agree +1

I personally think it's a good move. I don't use a lot of apps because of their required permissions.

Well if you can disable Q's "scooped storage" on per app basis with adb shell then it's easy to write a script that enables general storage for every app.
Sent from my OnePlus 6T through Tapatalk

hank81 said:
Well if you can disable Q's "scooped storage" on per app basis with adb shell then it's easy to write a script that enables general storage for every app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but I'm sure eventually, just like with most every other special permission these days, you will wind up having to enable it on every boot.
Yes, the entire bug report is atrocious, but let's not get our pitchforks just yet. Google effectively punted on this for Android Q, by making it possible to contribute business as usual. It's quite possible that these issues will be resolved by Android P, or even that the whole idea will be scrapped in favor of something else.
The fact of the matter is that storage permissions in Android are terrible, Trying to address that is not in and of itself a bad thing, in fact I would argue that part alone is a good thing.
Attempting to read the tea leaves a little, this whole project reeks of "new hotshot product manager with poor (at best) understanding of the technical complexities at play forces bad decision into product because he needs to make 'highly visible' changes to the product to demonstrate his worth or get himself promoted". Especially given that the general idea at play isn't the part people are complaining about, just the fact that it's currently technically unusable as a posix api replacement, but the fact that the current one they have is terrible/slow/etc I find the above scenario to be highly likely

partcyborg said:
Attempting to read the tea leaves a little, this whole project reeks of "new hotshot product manager with poor (at best) understanding of the technical complexities at play forces bad decision into product because he needs to make 'highly visible' changes to the product to demonstrate his worth or get himself promoted". Especially given that the general idea at play isn't the part people are complaining about, just the fact that it's currently technically unusable as a posix api replacement, but the fact that the current one they have is terrible/slow/etc I find the above scenario to be highly likely
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats deep!

Scott said:
Thats deep!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lots of adult beverages to come up with this ?

Ayahuasca ?

Scott said:
I think this is the best move Google made for security thus far. Too many apps ask for full unfettered access to my storage. I will be happy when apps get a little bit more locked down in this aspect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't get this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you already disable specific permission for every app through system settings? Unless something like a wallpaper app refuses to work without access to your phone's contacts or something. Do you get what I'm saying?

roaduardo said:
I don't get this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you already disable specific permission for every app through system settings? Unless something like a wallpaper app refuses to work without access to your phone's contacts or something. Do you get what I'm saying?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not exactly. Storage access in the current world is a binary yes/no decision (well, 2 binary yes/no decisions if your device has a SD card slot), either "yes here is access to all of /sdcard" or "no you can't read or write to anything outside your specific app data folder". Using something like the API gives you the ability to do much more fine grained access like "give Poweramp access to my normal music collection in /sdcard/Music, but not my keepassxc password file.", Or "let photos index all the pics it finds on my machine, except for the ones in a 'certain' telegram folder".
The cause for pitchforks in the bug report isn't that people are in love with the posix apis for file access, just that the current Android API implementation is something like 50x slower in Android Q, making it essentially useless for file manager apps that need to do things like directory listings and maintain indexes of all shared storage, etc.