Hacker News Reader

Comment by gruez | Hacker News Reader

>Starting in Android Q, apps must have the READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE signature permission in order to access the device's non-resettable identifiers, which include both IMEI and serial number.

While I welcome this improvement, I can't help but think that app developers will respond by refusing access to the app unless the user grants the permission. Both android and ios need to be able to "silently deny" permissions.

View on HN

> I can't help but think that app developers will respond by refusing access to the app unless the user grants the permission. Both android and ios need to be able to "silently deny" permissions.

iOS doesn't need this because Apple rejects apps that demand access unnecessarily.

> Apps must respect the user’s permission settings and not attempt to manipulate, trick, or force people to consent to unnecessary data access. For example, apps that include the ability to post photos to a social network must not also require microphone access before allowing the user to upload photos. Where possible, provide alternative solutions for users who don’t grant consent. For example, if a user declines to share Location, offer the ability to manually enter an address.

— https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#pri...

>iOS doesn't need this because Apple rejects apps that demand access unnecessarily.

In my experience, that doesn't seem to be working. I've so far encountered a food pickup app that refuses to let me order without location permission (their website works fine without location, however), and a finance app that refuses to process a transaction unless I give them access to location for "fraud prevention".

Those accesses can be more or less justified. Accessing IMEI "just because" isn't a good enough reason.

I can't think of any issues in revoking app permissions on Android, going back to Android 4.something at least.

I think google is carefully saying "non-resettable identifiers", because App developers will still be able to access the Google Advertising ID, for example, which is resettable. My guess is 99.9% or more of users never actually reset it, though. I just reset mine for the first time recently (Settings -> Google -> Ads -> Reset advertising ID).

App developers can't access that ID. The closest they can get is the ad-exchange id which resets automatically every 30 days.

So they just need to store the old one and poll it every time the app is opened or so, and if it changed, they know the old and new one?

Not sure Apple allows this kind of thing, but changing it regularly, I'm not sure it helps much by itself.

That won't happen because 3rd party apps cannot have the READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE permission.

Correct: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/...

The permission is signature|privileged. Only apps signed with the same keys as the OS itself or pre-installed in /system/priv-app can get the permission at all.

In iOS you can't access any hardware identifier AFAIK.

Apps can only access an app installation UUID.

On Android there's a great Xposed module called XPrivacy that can do this - produce an empty contact list, block network connections, zero out location, etc.

Cryptographically strong, secure identification coming from the ProtectedAPIs are a double edged sword. On one hand, these APIs let you build critical real world apps like ones required to remote control a medical assistance device or act as a electoral vote casting machine, but on the other hand provide very strong tracking cookie to data hungry ecosystems (Mac addresses could be spoofed but not these).

I have been thinking a Linux/Desktop fork similar to elementaryOS needs to exist for Android. ChromeheadOS was close enough, may be e.foundation would be that, may be Daniel Micay will restart his crusade again.

Serial number is useless on half the devices I've seen anyways. A crapload of devices just report 12345678ADBCDEF for a serial number.

Unless I screwed up and it's deliberately feeding me garbage because I asked the wrong permission.

IIRC, signature permission means that 3p apps can't request it at all. They have to be signed with the same key as the OS, so practically only your handset manufacturer can use it.

Of course. Google's own apps already do something similar by popping up warnings. Why do I need location, Mic, and camera preferences to use gmail or other Google play services apps that shouldn't be using any of those features? That's obviously a rhetorical question when talking about Google.

Gmail does not require location, mic, or camera access. In fact, the Gmail app does not even request any of those permissions, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Turn off those preferences in Google play services and see how annoying the errors are for yourself when using Gmail.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com