this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
837 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

59703 readers
5399 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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 Alternately, the app might be experimental, under development, or perhaps no longer maintained and offered by its developer.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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I just won't use any apps that do this. Simple.

[–] QuadratureSurfer 26 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Good luck when banking apps start doing this.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'll be real, I wouldn't trust a banking app from any third-party storefront to begin with. That's the sort of app I'd really want to be properly vetted and secured.

[–] Cris_Color 13 points 2 months ago

If you're using a custom de-googled rom you don't have the play store, so this would just gut that functionality :/ same for any other app that decides they need this, which if the past is anything to go on is going to be a ton of apps that really don't need it

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When did Google start verifying security on play?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Play Protect has been around for a few years now and will disable apps it detects that are abusing user data.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My point is, it doesn't do much, if anything.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

But, there's no difference in security between using a different storefront? The difference in security depends on the app itself, not where it was downloaded from.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Assuming the app is legitimate, sure. But unless you can verify the code, yourself, then you're having to trust that the source you download from hasn't altered the APK in some way. That's a pretty big risk for most people when it comes to finance apps.

[–] mrvictory1 2 points 2 months ago

APKs are signed, you can verify the integrity of an APK. If you have a previous version of an app installed, a new version with incorrect signature won't even install.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah but I mean if your bank would offer their app through F-Droid as an addition to Google Play, there is no reason to assume the app suddenly got less secure because of that.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Do we really need banking apps? Fuck it I'll use their website.

[–] QuadratureSurfer 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The features you miss out on would be direct deposit from checks and app notifications (usually there are a few that you want enabled but are only available through the app).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Most banks I've used allow SMS notifications for things like deposits and purchases.

The check things is true but I need to use it like less than once a year so eh.

[–] Landless2029 3 points 2 months ago

There's an app to make web apps icons. Or just use Firefox to add the bookmark to your homepage

Hermit - Lite apps browser

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Some places are ditching the website and going app-only. Stockpile as an example.

[–] ohwhatfollyisman 11 points 2 months ago

personally, i wouldn't trust a third-party created app with my banking details. what's more, i've removed all banking apps from my phone.

i don't need to allow access to my finances on the device which is most likely to get pinched out of everything i own. plus google and apple don't need to know which banks have accounts of mine.

imo that additional inconvenience to conduct all banking transactions from a browser is worth the candle.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Cash. No app part. Just cash.

[–] QuadratureSurfer 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah until the cops pull you over and take your cash under civil asset forfeiture because it's "suspicious that you have so much cash on hand".

https://ij.org/press-release/highway-robbery-in-reno-nevada-cops-use-civil-forfeiture-to-steal-a-veterans-life-savings/

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

I knew a dev once that absolutely refused to use banks. I'm a populated California city. With security cameras all over outside, everywhere. Buried cash in Mason jars. We lost touch but I always wondered how that worked out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There's no way my broke ass would ever have that much cash.

[–] over_clox 3 points 2 months ago
[–] owenfromcanada 5 points 2 months ago

I already have to do this. My office wants everyone to use the MS authenticator app, won't run on LineageOS. Even if it did, I wouldn't install it, but still.

Ended up making them purchase a hardware security key for me instead.