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 Alternately, the app might be experimental, under development, or perhaps no longer maintained and offered by its developer.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

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

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

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      68 months ago

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

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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18 months ago

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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    278 months ago

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

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      48 months ago

      I’m in this boat. I really liked using Android and tinkering with it. If I do so now I cannot even use my banking app without doing aftercare each update

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 months ago

        I read through your tutorial. One thing it doesn’t mention(probably, ADHD means sometimes I skip a line or two and don’t realise) is if there’s a lower limit for iOS version. Does it assume the person following along has a device <X years old?

        • Avieshek
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

          Looks like you’re someone who doesn’t read but it uses DNS filters to use revoked certificates.

  • ☂️-
    link
    fedilink
    English
    458 months ago

    yup they are tightening their grip again

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    468 months ago

    I get most of my stuff via F-Droid or I could use Obtainium. My tablet is Google-free. This sounds like my phone should be Google-free as well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      208 months ago

      Yeah but banking apps are starting to check integritynet, and (in France, at least) they’re pretty much mandatory to do anything useful with your bank account/credit card online… I think Uber does too, I boycott them but others might follow suit…

      Currently running lineageos, but I think I’ll just give up and go for a Pixel for my next phone… Sucks to let google win but I like to do useful things with my phone…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        28 months ago

        You can still pass play integrity with a rooted phone/custom ROM. Mine is currently passing with strong while rooted.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          18 months ago

          What do you use? I rooted my phone precisely for this, but google pay and my bank still see I’m not on the stock ROM : (

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            28 months ago

            I’m currently using APatch, PIFork in script-only mode, and Tricky Store with a leaked keybox.

            If you need to spoof for apps you’ll need some other stuff. For APatch there’s a thing called Cherish Peekaboo, for KernelSU you can use Shamiko. These will do their best to hide the fact that you’re rooted from apps. There are some detector apps that can help you fix things that apps might see, but there not entirely needed.

            Also since you’re not on the stock ROM, you’ll need to spoof your props so just use the regular Play Integrity fix.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        I use a hardware TAN generator though I also have a banking app as a fallback on my Lineage OS phone. If I ever buy a Pixel it’s only to install Graphene OS on it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

          Sadly most French banks use a custom validation process which requires you to use their app to validate a transaction. And my main bank’s app has warned me that it will “soon” stop working on custom ROMs…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          68 months ago

          You can’t in some countries. Like if you want to wire something, or setup a payment you have to use the app. It’s mandatory. If you go through the website it ask to open the app to confirm it’s you.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 months ago

            So people that only have a computer and not a smart phone can’t do those things at all?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              48 months ago

              Unfortunately it will, if I want to add a new transfer recipient or make a payment on a 3D secure website, the app is mandatory, even on desktop.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1138 months ago

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

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      148 months ago

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        218 months ago

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          278 months ago

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

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

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            98 months ago

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

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

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              68 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      338 months ago

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

  • chiisana
    link
    fedilink
    English
    58 months ago

    App developers need ways to know the app has not been modified in unsanctioned manner, glad to see Android finally catching up on security with integrity checks.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      168 months ago

      Why do you think apps should verify their integrity in the first place? In the case of banking apps or other online apps, the APIs they use should be secure in the first place so a user can’t achieve anything meaningful by modifying API calls. In the case of offline games with monetization, a hacker who makes a pirated APK will also remove the restriction so legitimate players on non standart ROMs will get screwed. In the case of messaging apps with a “delete messages” or “one time view” function ie. Whatsapp, the sender shouldn’t take that their actions will be respected by other clients because modded apps exist and Whatsapp doesn’t care if you install it on a rooted device.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        This!

        APK signatures exist and they’re enough for making sure the file you got isn’t modified. Warning people when they use apks for stuff like banking, I get, but if they wanna take the risk, it’s on them.

        Blocking root makes no sense because I’d argue that if the person knows enough to root their phone and got past all those bricked phone/thermonuclear war warnings, the onus is on them to not get their keychain compromised by giving root to some random app. Again, a warning is fine.

        Aside from that, people need to understand: THE CLIENT IS NEVER SECURE. NO EXCEPTIONS.

        Any self respecting secure API is made under the assumption that all the calls are coming from some malicious state actor using curl until proven beyond doubt that it’s an actual user.

      • chiisana
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        API are secure only if you can secure the authentication details. A modified app (be it as something modified and distributed on a unsanctioned channel, or custom injected by another malicious actor/app) can easily siphon out your authentication tokens to a third party unbeknownst to you the user. However, if the app verifies it came from the approved source and have not been tempered with, then it is much easier to lean on ASLR and other OS level security to make it harder to extract the authentication info.

        Multiplayer game operators have obligation to curb modified clients so their actual paying clients have a levelled playing field. By ensuring their apps are only distributed via approved channels and unmodified by malicious players, this improves their odds at warding off cheaters creating a bad time for those that actually pay them to play fairly.

        These are just simple cases where this kind of security is beneficial. I am glad Android is finally catching up in this regard.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          08 months ago

          be it as something modified and distributed on a unsanctioned channel

          Downloading APKs from reputable sources and signature checking can help with this one. Android will refuse to upgrade an app if APK has a different signature anyways.

          custom injected by another malicious actor/app

          If this is possible there are bigger problems.

          Multiplayer game operators have obligation to curb modified clients so their actual paying clients have a levelled playing field.

          There isn’t much I can say for that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      48 months ago

      Yup, this is important for certain apps with a high security bar. Surprised at all the downvotes.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        88 months ago

        They can check their own integrity without Play services. And even then, ME AS A USER, doesn’t want the app to decide this for me.

      • chiisana
        link
        fedilink
        English
        68 months ago

        This is Lemmy. If you’re not advocating for FOSS, or piracy to spite the corporations, you’re gonna get downvoted. I don’t care. We need better security standards whether these kids like it or not.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          138 months ago

          This does jack-all for security, it’s just monopolization in disguise and you’re buying into it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          178 months ago

          Security by default is fine, but not if its being forced.

          If I go out of my way to root my phone or sideload an app, I have a reason for that. I’m fine with an app going “Hey! This phone is rooted / this app is not from an official source! Wait 10s before you can click ‘I understand and take full responsibikity in case of a security breach’”.

          I’m not OK with an app going “I will not work on this device because yiur environment is non-standard, period”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        188 months ago

        certain apps with a high security bar

        like the McDonalds app, which already requires workarounds to work on rooted devices?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          48 months ago

          You want affordable food, you WILL pay them with your data. Always on location please! Oh and precise as well, thank you.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

          Of course not, sometimes it really is just corpo bs, don’t use their app if it’s such an issue for you.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Slippery slope. Soon it wil be for all fucking mundane apps because they don’t want you running a modded version…which is my fucking choice to do

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      178 months ago

      It’s my phone. If I’m specifically going out of my way to do that, they have no right to force me to do it their way.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Personally, it’s not Google’s place to dictate how an app verification ecosystem works. If a company has developed an app, they need to be the ones to make sure it’s secure in the first place, not trusting a monopolist tech company that has almost all control with how someone uses their phone.

      Google has rules yes, but Android is open-source and should be open with a free & open market for apps. After all, we paid for the device.

    • Natanael
      link
      fedilink
      English
      388 months ago

      No, this will only lead people without access to Google Play to be forced to get it from somebody who has modified the app to fake the check.

      • Chozo
        link
        fedilink
        78 months ago

        If they don’t have access to Play, then the developer of that app specifically does not want to service them as a user. Developers have to enable this feature in their own apps for it to do anything. If that developer wanted to support de-Googled users, they wouldn’t enable this in the first place.

      • Praise Idleness
        link
        fedilink
        English
        58 months ago

        Which obviously sucks but also is exactly what developers want or just don’t care

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1468 months ago

    Just the term “side loading” instantly frames installing software on a device you own as something shady.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      408 months ago

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        108 months ago

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

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

        • sunzu2
          link
          fedilink
          18 months ago

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

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

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

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            “This shit” was said in the context of a society exactly opposite to anglosphere, where being “poor” is an indulgence for violating every moral rule, every promise, every obligation and every law.

            More than that, it was said about the exact people who are, relatively speaking, not poor, rather almost privileged, but are hateful and envious of everyone actually doing useful work, and consider corruption good because in their opinion a bureaucracy worker stealing something entrusted to them is “a respected in the society person collecting rent from their position” or something like that.

            The profession of a schoolteacher in Russia pays shit, which is why 3 kinds of people want that - those who are too dumb for other work, those who are idealistic, and those who want to feel that they are important and powerful (power over children) even more than to be paid well.

            There are more people of the 2nd kind than you think, but those were of the 3rd undoubtedly. 1st kind is almost extinct - it’s not hard to find a job that pays better, if you don’t want power over children.

            I think it’s clear how the 3rd kind intersects with sympathies to sociopathic behavior, and sympathies for corruption and organized crime.

            EDIT: Oh, I just realized you thought they were bootlickers and hateful of poor people in this memory of mine. No, they considered that BS to be good for poor people. Basically hateful of capitalism most when it’s many small businesses honestly competing, but thinking oligopoly and state capitalism would be better. They considered me to be on the side of some “rich” people who hurt the poor. While big company owners and such were not, because they are apparently doing lots of charity etc and are respected people. So the “rich” they’d hate would be the “middle class”, not the “boss class”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        8 months ago

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

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

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

          It’s the kind of people who love Stalin.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      688 months ago

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53
        edit-2
        8 months ago

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          78 months ago

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

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 months ago

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          198 months ago

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

          • sunzu2
            link
            fedilink
            18 months ago

            I don’t think you appreciate the real reason for “schooling”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          68 months ago

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

          They wanted to go the same direction.

          • sunzu2
            link
            fedilink
            28 months ago

            Put steam with the rest of these parasites ain’t fair… For now

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    378 months ago

    Was always inching closer, but looks like android has fully outstayed its welcome. The revolving door of executives hit its last person with any integrity on the ass on their way out the door.

    • Angry_Autist (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      88 months ago

      Custom ROM or just go back to a flip phone.

      It’s only going to get worse with the big players from this point on.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        38 months ago

        I honestly think I’ll be getting a feature phone next time. I’ll keep an old smartphone just for Android Auto and that’s it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          18 months ago

          Some time ago, I looked at kaios devices, and they looked really cool. I only didn’t get one because I need to use some banking apps only available for android

  • cheers_queers
    link
    fedilink
    English
    108 months ago

    i JUST started enjoying adfree YouTube via revanced, now it could go away?! fuck lol

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    208 months ago

    which cannot be worked around.

    Well, at least not without root lol

    Root detecting apps to Side loading detecting apps:

    First time?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      “root access is used to bypass security measures!!! We will make it harder to root your phones to keep your data safe” – Google

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I installed FakeStore and set the app’s relevant /data/system/packages.xml properties from Aurora Store to FakeStore (installer="com.android.vending" packageSource="0" installInitiator="com.android.vending", the same as Google Play Store) and rebooted, which was enough to fool the public transport app I’m using. Is this the workaround you’re talking about, or does it require MicroG too?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        Yea that sounds about right, really hiding root is straight up magic as is (even though it’s a cat and mouse game lol) and achieving that is 98% of the hard work of hiding the fact an app has been sideloaded. Short of a complete overhaul from Google where they actually try that is.

        Which, if I’m being honest, doesn’t seem like they are. It seems like a rather simple system all things considered. There’s no Playstore specific keys or signatures or file checks or hashs as far as I can tell. Its just a flag and checking if Playstore exists on the device at all

    • sweetpotato
      link
      fedilink
      English
      38 months ago

      Google and apple you can let us worry about our security ourselves, thank you, though I’m sure you have our best interests in mind and only that

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      …as I upvote you from my Pixel. ☹️ I give the sad face because Google isn’t who they once were and I’m just going to have to deal with that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        158 months ago

        Never ask a company to pick between the right thing and profit. It was all a matter of time till Google needed to stop growing and start producing profit for investors.

        To make it worse the Pixel 9 starts at $800 just like iPhone. So if you’re buying Android you don’t really save money over an iPhone like you used to.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          118 months ago

          Never ask a company to pick between the right thing and profit.

          It’s fundamentally impossible for a publicly traded company not to choose profit over ‘The Right Thing’, fullstop. Shareholders feel that have a fundamental right to growth, and if Google’s CEO were to choose ‘The Right Thing’ over profit, the shareholders can oust them in favor of a CEO willing to choose profits.

          Enshittification is where every public company ends up, because the line MUST go up, no other alternative is acceptable.