Hacker News Reader

Comment by devit | Hacker News Reader

Finally.

It's ridiculous that a supposedly sandboxed text editor would have access to all your photos, for instance.

Apps should only have access to their own private storage and to data that the user has explicitly picked from a file picker or similar UI, which is what this update does AFAICT.

It seems a serious mistake though to not affect apps installed on upgrade and to disallow access instead of just providing a virtual private copy of the external storage for each app (though the latter is not clear from the article).

View on HN

I use syncthing to sync files from several folders of my phone (internal app storage) to folders on my laptop (usually as a backup) and viceversa (usually because it's easier to download some files on my laptop, think about GPX tracks). This means that I need synchthing to access all those folders.

I also use an open source file manager app to access files on both internal and external storage. I need it to access all of it.

I understand I'm not the typical Google user as I'm logged in only in Google Play and Google Drive, which I use for work and not for backing up stuff. However if they turn Android into iOS maybe I could finally buy an iPhone SE when the last small factor Android phone dies. Not really, because that would leave me with a much more closed down environment. Alternatives? Maybe a Linux phone if there will be something around, but I'll have to keep using an Android anyway, so going around with two phones, which is worse.

What Google should do is give an option to lift all walls between applications (or root the phone). Void warranty and the likes, it's fine for me. I'm replacing all closed source apps from untrusted parties with open source ones anyway.

> This means that I need synchthing to access all those folders.

FWIW Google Photos does exactly this. It even scans your directories and pops up a prompt "Hey, I found a new folder with images, want me to back it up?". I really wonder how this will turn out...

They'll grant themselves an exception off course.

Unlikely, since I can't recall any instances of them granting one-off exceptions for their apps in the past.

Do you have any evidence that that's the approach they plan to take here, or is this just a lazy accusation backed by nothing but cynicism?

What else do you think their "PlaystoreFramework" is all about?

I'm pretty sure they don't hold themselves to their own app store policies (and neither Apple to theirs) and I remember there being a flagrant example but I can't find a reference quickly googling it.

Is there such thing as robot.txt for folders that could be implemented by programs/apps? There are plenty of things that create folders of thumbnails, ui/ux sprites, etc.

On Android, you can put a file called ".nomedia" in those folders to achieve this.

I remember when google staged previews on a web page, then asked if I wanted to sync 'that' folder. Near panic until I realized it was not shared.

Then make permissions more finely grained and don't give access to your photo folder. I for one want my text editor to have access to everything on the device. Same goes for file explorer.

It's ridiculous that we accept that every piece of software we install is malware. A flashlight sells our location data? A text editor scrapes our photos? It doesn't have to be this way.

I think you have nailed the core issue. We've normalized awful behavior on an awful platform and have justified an awful way of monetization.

I'm not a smartphone power user (RSS, email, light internet), so I was really hoping FirefoxOS or the Ubuntu phone would generate some traction.

Look into Purism Librem 5 with PureOS. They pushed release back to Q3 but it's a very interesting project.

That's what you get when you live in a world where most people aren't willing to shell out $1.99 for their apps. Developer time isn't free, and these apps are going to be monetized somehow.

On desktop, we have enormously complex software that's available for free. Why clang does not send all my passwords to shady servers and Blender does not lock my computer and demand ransom? Yet flashlight app which cost 1 man-hour to develop demands "$1.99 or all your private data".

Use F-Droid.

Clang and Blender are not the norm for desktop software.

Because Apple, Sony, Google, IBM, ARM, Microsoft,.... have other sources of revenue.

I bought Office Suite Pro for 14$ or something on a rooted Android phone. Having access to the private data folder of the app (/data/data/...), I could read the content of a sqlite database created by the app... in which there was reference of all the files from the userspace storage (/sdcard).

According to their privacy policy, they collect all the "data needed in order to improve their services and offering" and "can provide these data to third-party" for that purpose.

Paying for an app on android platform is no assurance the app actually respect your privacy.

Paid apps are turning to this as well.

By all means leave your house unlocked while you’re away, and then complain that human nature shouldn’t be what it is.

I assume that the cops don't respond to the regular break-ins where you live, and instead blame you for your locks being too weak.

Comparing two things doesn’t automatically make them the same.

If I wanted iOS, I'd buy an iPhone.

I would, if they wouldn't cost the same as a laptop and as most Europeans I don't do contracts.

In my understanding that is/should be the main difference between internal/external storage. Internal/scoped/private: An app can only read from/write to its own area. External/shared: Everyone can read/write everything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com