[ruiseal]

You're removing the middleman (Play or F-Droid) so I don't see how.

[pjmlp]

Usually the middleman validates what the stuff does, before we do it ourselves, yes even though malicious apps get through the cracks, still makes a difference.

[fwn]

It really depends. Many apps currently cannot be distributed through the stores or the maintainers have to endure a lot of bullying to stay in the stores. (Think NewPipe et al)

In these cases, the middlemen like Google are the hostile party. Essentially the threat actor. It is natural: big tech is big tech, because they are very good at limiting user choice.

For these applications, Obtainium is brilliant.

It also shows that the store model that everyone is working to enshrine in digital policy is not the necessity that Big Tech would have everyone believe.

[gchamonlive]

This is the case if the app store is done right, that is, if it has the end user's interests in mind. But as with all things Google, the end product always boils down to how much profit it can extract from its services in ad revenues, so there isn't really that much incentive in Google to keep the Play Store tidy.

This or some variation of the idea. The result is the same, what should protect the user becomes a vector to help spread malicious apps.

[ramon156]

So if obtanium does checks, the issue is resolved?

[realusername]

> Usually the middleman validates what the stuff does

That's what they say for their defense yeah but personally I don't buy it. I've published an app myself and I've also seen the countless app scams which are allowed to advertise on YouTube.

The value we get from the store is dubious.