(no title)
coded_monkey | 9 months ago
The lack of consideration for this point in this thread scares me. The amount of data that can be taken from a device through a permission like this is likely huge and it’s not just about “protecting users from themselves”. I wouldn’t feel safe enabling it for any app, and while syncing all data on the device sounds very useful, it’s a damned if they do, damned if they don’t scenario for Google.
greatgib|9 months ago
apitman|9 months ago
mvdtnz|9 months ago
izacus|9 months ago
nolist_policy|9 months ago
Even if you trust the app, if there is a vulnerability in there, the Android sandbox provides an additional line of defense. Most apps don't have defenses of their own, the only apps that self-sandbox are web browsers.
zb3|9 months ago
Then don't enable it, no need to take away my ability to do so. Granular permissions are good (especially when the app can't reliably know they were refused), providing I have the ultimate control.
> it’s a damned if they do, damned if they don’t scenario for Google.
Did they consider my scenario above - where the app doesn't know it was not granted a permission?
IshKebab|9 months ago
That's the problem. Android didn't do this even though it was obviously what is needed. Android apps can easily tell what permissions they have.
I think Google prioritised UX over power and security here. They were presumably scared about people accidentally clicking the "Silently deny" button and then getting confused when the app didn't work. Big missed opportunity.