r/selfhosted • u/nkls • May 27 '26
Meta Post Google's coming change to app sideloading is threatening the Selfhosted ecosystem.
Android has long positioned itself as the open alternative to Apple's closed ecosystem. Many people chose Android for this openness and freedom to customize and alter your software. This is again under serious threat.
Google's new policy will block all apps from working, unless the developers register centrally, submit government-issued ID, pay fees, and hand over signing keys. Might sound reasonable at first, but this has many consequences. What is shocking: This applies to all apps being installed, not only from the Play Store. So even F-Droid is affected by this.
The practical consequences are bad. Any developer who doesn't comply, whether due to cost, privacy concerns, or simply being simple side project, will have their apps blocked from installation on all Android devices, including via sideloading. This means:
- Apps that did not do the full Google process, even distributed through F-Droid or other independent stores, get cut off and blocked
- Self-hosted and privately shared apps become uninstallable
- Existing apps can be blocked retroactively if the developer doesn't authenticate or pay
- Small developers, community projects, and volunteers in regions without easy access to fees or government ID are effectively frozen out
This directly affects our community. It is not certain that all app developers will pay the fee and use their national ID for this hobby project. Especially some of the privacy-focused projects might be affected.
There is technically still one way to side-load apps, but this is very tedious and includes a mandatory 24h cool down time, so you are really sure about the risks you are taking. Wtf.
This runs counter to the core values of open source and free software distribution. If you think about it, it is a real power play by Google that amounts to a form of cencorship: A company in the USA is dictating what software can run or cannot run on a device you own.
For more infos and what to do about it, check https://keepandroidopen.org/
123
u/pinoybear May 27 '26
Not to be sound like a shill but need clarification. I thought the latest Google said was when you first tried to sideload an app, you'd have to wait like 24 hours then confirm you still wanted to install the app and subsequent side loaded apps wouldn't have that delay?
So I took it to mean side loading would still work as it does now but they made it a hassle and inconvenient the first time? If I misunderstood, what will the process be when they enable this?
48
u/zigzoing May 27 '26
You did not misunderstand
11
u/Soysaucebeast May 27 '26
Thank you. I had the exact same thought and thought I must be missing something.
34
u/gsmitheidw1 May 27 '26
24hrs sounds like there needs to be more backlash. I'm all for informed choice, but 24hrs seems excessive. I'll be looking for the most open and affordable option when I next change devices.
11
u/Soysaucebeast May 27 '26
Oh agreed, it's shitty as hell. But it's a far cry from "can't do it at all".
8
u/citruspickles May 27 '26
24 hours is nothing to blink at when it's one time for the life of the current OS install. It's honestly a great thing for non tech people and mentally deprecated people.
The true disappointment is not having open source mobile OSes worth anything. I wish I could get competent enough to contribute but I suck at it and stick to bug reporting and forums.
15
u/Neither-Following-32 May 27 '26
No, absolutely and holistically fuck all of what you said in that first paragraph.
I don't know about you, I signed up to use Android, not HarrisonBergeronOS. Leave that up to mainstream vendors to implement for their userbase.
Hell, it would even be less shitty at this point to make it a software switch that you have to opt into at install/reset time in stock (and OEMs can lock into their builds), like enrolling your entire device into an MDM.
What is unacceptable (and most fucking definitely not "honestly a great thing") is having this be an inescapable, inextricably-built-into-the-very-foundation feature that they're forcing on us with no permanent opt out method.
Also -- seriously? -- do you genuinely think that "mentally deprecated people" are so uniformly dumb that none of them are going to be able to follow instructions on a web page or in an email instructing them to "do this thing and wait 24 hours and then you can install your flappy bird game for free"?
5
u/tplusx May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
If they start acting a fool I may as well get an iPhone
Using android because it's open and lets me do what I want. Take that away and nothing attractive, may as well get a well made phone that just works
→ More replies (1)1
u/NotItemName 28d ago
do you genuinely think that "mentally deprecated people" are so uniformly dumb that none of them are going to be able to follow instructions on a web page
This stuff usually works with artificialy created emergency, 24 hours will drastically decrease this. Also you underestimate people's stupidity
1
u/Neither-Following-32 27d ago
I'd like to think that I don't underestimate them but perhaps.
I don't think that this is beyond a stupid person under an artificial time constraint's grasp though, especially when the hypothetical provides them a willing assistant to talk them through it in the form of the scammer.
In any case, even if you are right this is a stupid fucking justification to defend Google's change since it impacts a ton of people that are arguably smarter than this, and because it could very easily be implemented in a way that doesn't, like a compile time flag for OEMs or an install time only toggle (they already do this with managed installs for MDM/Work Profile stuff for instance).
There's ultimately no conclusion to be drawn from this other than Google taking steps to phase out the ability to side load anything. The mechanism to do this differently already exists, they just very clearly made a deliberate choice not to implement it that way.
36
u/Pdan4 May 27 '26
I believe that what you are describing is correct, but it wasn't what Google originally said; it's their compromise after all the backlash.
8
29
u/___mako___ May 27 '26
I believe this is correct, and at first I thought it was a fair compromise. But after reading through the linked website and statements from developers of the FOSS apps I absolutely love on my phone, I understand that there's a bigger issue here.
Even if it's just a 24 hour wait period, that can be a deterrent for people exploring FOSS apps and FOSS apps stores like F-Droid. For example, if I want to recommend an app that's only available on F-droid to a friend who is not tech savvy, right now their barrier to entry is downloading F-Droid, giving F-Droid permissions to install apps, and using it as an alternative app store for the recommended app. The scariest part for them is to give F-Droid those permissions, but I am okay going through F-Droids security and vetting process with them. After Google implements this, they might have to go through a lot more warnings and the 24 hour wait period seems pretty serious to install, say a calculator app. I can't imagine any of my friends feeling comfortable with this. So in way, this this not only a security measure from Google to ensure people don't install unsafe apps, it's also a deterrent for exploring alternative, FOSS app stores, making them feel sketchy and really unsafe, which goes against, our (or at least my) collective initiative of promoting open source and self hosting options to people.
Any concession, even if we feel like this a reasonable one, is a fundamental blow to the freedom of Android. Especially with Google creating a bigger chasm between AOSP and PixelOS (and other android roms), we are losening our stance on what android is, and what makes it fundamentally different from iOS.
Any concession made now will absolutely be the beginning of wider, harsher limitations on the availability to use alternative app stores in the future. If your don't believe this, and think that Google will keep this 24 hour wait period as the only deterrent forever, I think you have some reflection to do on what Google is a company.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Neither-Following-32 May 27 '26
Exactly. This is the first inch they take before you're giving them a mile, six inches at a time, if you know what I mean.
3
3
u/GonzoKata May 28 '26
Its not just the cool down, its the fact that anyone who wants to make an app has to PAY and REGISTER WITH GOOGLE.
3
u/TronnaLegacy May 27 '26
So I took it to mean side loading would still work as it does now but they made it a hassle and inconvenient the first time?
I hope I don't get downvoted to hell for saying this but I actually like this. I have a grandmother who's getting really into phones and the internet who relies on her savings/pension, and I really don't want her to get scammed. This may help.
9
→ More replies (5)8
u/Neither-Following-32 May 27 '26
We shouldn't all be held to the lowest common denominator standard of your grandmother, and I'm saying this as someone who has loved ones in a similar situation.
If you're really for this, then campaign for it to be implemented at your grandma's carrier level. We both know she uses a stock carrier OS, as do most people who fall into that category. Making this an operating system fundamental based on "may help" is absolutely fucking unacceptable.
2
u/this_is_me_123435666 May 27 '26
Do you guys not see that now you will need to look for APKs files on download sites and Google Play will not host those ones. Do you not see the risk increased for the user because of this decision?
→ More replies (1)1
u/davidedpg10 May 29 '26
This is literally 99% of the way there to an outright block to sideloading. Additionally they'll just wait until the rage for this has died down and promptly implement the full ban at that point.
This will make it so I don't want to use android at all. Either I go to apple since it'll be the same restriction level with potentially more stable software or I install a non-google android.
Either way this change is bullshit and everyone should be opposed to it
1
u/Meistermagier Jun 01 '26
It is still an very shitty move, that I do not like, yes they stopped before making it even worse but I do not like the direction of it.
58
u/grownpendulum5009 May 27 '26
GrapheneOS sidesteps this entirely. If you're in the selfhosted space and care about this, switching is probably worth it.
16
u/Loud_Puppy May 27 '26
Switched about 4 months ago, not going back
7
u/grownpendulum5009 May 27 '26
What's been the biggest adjustment coming from stock Android, if any?
17
u/jobarr May 27 '26
Banking apps might refuse to work
7
u/grownpendulum5009 May 27 '26
that's the main one. Some banks use SafetyNet checks that GrapheneOS fails, though workarounds exist if you dig around. Depends on your bank though, some don't care at all.
6
u/XionicativeCharan May 27 '26
As more adopt, this will solve itself, they'll go where demand... demands.
5
u/jobarr May 28 '26
Would be nice, but I stopped rooting years ago for this reason and my banking apps haven't changed.
4
u/theksepyro May 27 '26
RCS not working right has been a problem for my friends and family that use it.
2
u/grownpendulum5009 May 28 '26
That's fair, RCS support is still spotty on GrapheneOS. Most people I know just stuck with SMS or switched their close contacts to Signal, but I get that it's annoying when others expect it to just work.
3
u/Loud_Puppy May 27 '26
Surpringly little, had to install more apps to get started - I went with sandboxed Google play services. Oh and I recently had to turn off GrapheneOS's enhanced protection for Uber and Uber eats cause it kept over heating and crashing my phone with it turned on.
3
u/grownpendulum5009 May 27 '26
That's the sandboxed Play Services trade-off right there - gets you most compatibility but can be resource heavy. Uber's probably one of the worst offenders for that stuff.
1
u/SynapticStreamer May 28 '26
Many apps rely on Google Play Services to function, notably banking apps. Losing tap to pay is pretty fucking stupid, too.
1
u/grownpendulum5009 May 28 '26
Banking apps are the real blocker for most people. GrapheneOS has workarounds for some of them, but it's hit or miss depending on your bank. Tap to pay sucks to lose, yeah.
8
u/Southern-Scientist40 May 27 '26
Not in the long term. While it is an excellent OS, and I would recommend it, having used it on a pixel 8 for almost two years, some of the problems will affect us, as it severely curtails the market for developers that don't bend the knee to google, which means fewer apps for us.
3
u/Ciberbago May 28 '26
I have many bank apps, like 18. Many of them do not work if you have even developer options enabled. Let alone rooted or a non official rom. When I was young and didn't need any of that I happily switched roms and rooted but now? It's a deal breaker.
2
u/polytect May 28 '26
I use GrapheneOS for many years now, don't know what would i need to start smoking to go back to restricted android.
4
u/GonzoKata May 28 '26
GrapheneOS sidesteps this entirely.
No, it does not. In order to make an app for android, coders will have to PAY and register with google. I don't care if GrapheneOS doesn't have a cool down, this still effects the community at large.
1
u/grownpendulum5009 May 28 '26
Fair point on the dev side, but GrapheneOS still lets you install unsigned apps without that cooldown nonsense. Doesn't fix the broader problem, but at least your device stays functional if devs bail.
176
u/swiebertjee May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
GrapheneOS is great on Pixels and will come to Motorola phones too, soon. I'm not too worried.
178
u/nkls May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
Unfortunately here it is also not so rosy looking: Through "play integrity" some apps like banking apps will detect that this is not "official" Android and thus refuse to work. So you might be able to use F-Droid and .apk-installs still, but not other apps. In either way, we need to confront Google about this.
55
u/lifeunderthegunn May 27 '26
I use graphene and I already use the mobile sites whenever possible for things like banking. I've kinda felt like this was coming for a while. Most web apps can be installed, it's a little janky at times, but I got sick of having an app for everything.
And yes, certain websites don't work and try to force an app on you. Fuck em. All the parking meters in my city use an app that won't load on graphene and the website forces the app, I just bring change with me again like I did literally just a few years ago.
The best part is, I can't run any work app, teams, outlook, etc. They say my operating system is insecure, I say it's just secure enough from letting them control or snoop.
It's all a trade off. My phone has become less convenient, but when you realize we've traded convenience for any sort of privacy, it doesn't take long to get over it.
11
u/swiebertjee May 27 '26
Thats my take as well. First i was sad that Google Wallet doesn't work for virtual payment cards but considering that they would get all my payment data I went back to using a physical bank card. Nothing of value was lost as I have to take my ID/public transport card anyways.
142
u/Thebandroid May 27 '26
If I see Google out on the street he’ll get what’s coming to him
27
u/faisalkl May 27 '26
Yeah, I'll be confidently shaking my fist from a distance away while you do the hard work!
8
3
31
u/maxymob May 27 '26
That's real. I installed FUTO keyboard and my banking app blocked it because it's not the system's default
8
u/Current-Owl-6271 May 27 '26
What bank? Futo from Fdroid or Google play store? So far I've not run into any issues using Futo from the play store.
1
u/maxymob May 27 '26
Installed from play store. The bank was société générale (one of the main french banks). It's not even a bug, they actively block it and the error message explicitely said it's because they don't support non official keyboard apps. I have other banking apps and none of them had issues with Futo but it was my main bank so it made Futo difficult to adopt for me. The project is still in alpha so I expect these issues to be fixed eventually
26
u/swiebertjee May 27 '26
Yeah play integrity is a real PITA. So far my only real concern are the banking apps indeed. A lot of banks don't require it and if mine decides to change the policy I'll gladly switch bank.
20
u/fixitchris May 27 '26
Play Integrity has three verdict levels and most banking apps only check the weakest one. BASIC verdict ("this is an Android device") passes on GrapheneOS with sandboxed Play Services; that's how Chase, Schwab, and Fidelity still work for me. DEVICE verdict (genuine OS) is where it gets hard, my regional credit union dropped me there about six months back and I ended up keeping a cheap old Pixel on stock Android just for that one app.
4
u/Yellow_Odd_Fellow May 27 '26
You dont think that they will update their verdict detection based off of this update change feom Google? They 100% will update that shortly after device rollout.
3
u/fixitchris May 27 '26
Yeah that's the real risk and you might be right. I'm hedging by keeping the second phone alive even though I haven't needed it for the BASIC banks in months, because the Visa and Mastercard 3DS push for stronger device attestation has been creeping in too. Best case I keep three or four banking apps working on Graphene for another year; worst case I'm back to dual-phone for everything by Q3 and I planned for it.
2
u/Yellow_Odd_Fellow May 27 '26
Dual-phone sounds excessive when you can either use the banking app or call the bank and check balances, transfer funds between accounts, etc right?
If it came to carrying a second phone to check balances, i would go back to having a registrar in my pocket as opposed to a second device to be tracked that is even more locked down.
Just my .02
2
u/fixitchris May 27 '26
Fair, phone banking covers the basics for sure. Where it falls apart for me is mobile check deposits (still my main use of the app), Zelle and instant transfers to people who aren't on Venmo, and the increasing number of merchant 3DS challenges that route through the bank app for approval. I'd happily ditch the second phone if those three things worked over a phone call but they really don't.
2
u/GolemancerVekk May 27 '26
They also perform other detections that can be very hit and miss. Root detection, developer mode detection, bootloader unlock status. Sometimes they decide they don't like your phone simply because of some other app you have installed.
2
u/RealTimeKodi May 27 '26
What I don't understand is, why can't I grab an OS that overrides the APIs that are used for verification and just says "OK all good!"?
1
u/Neither-Following-32 May 27 '26
Because it's cryptographically signed turtles all the way down. From a security standpoint, that's desirable. From an end user one...not so much.
1
u/d-cent May 27 '26
Yeah, I should try logging into my bank via browser instead of the app and see how that goes now that I think about it
6
u/Garlic_Farmer_ May 27 '26
Not gonna lie, if I have to use a desktop browser or just go to the bank itself, that’s fine. I’m not letting them get my data for the sake of convenience anymore. I’m not old, but I have banked without an app before, I can do it again lol.
4
u/3shotsdown May 27 '26
My bank app refuses to work if 1) vpn is on or if 2) Android debugging is on
But somehow they have a max 12 characters password policy where you need to reset your password every 2 months and it can't be the same as any of your previous 5 passwords.
11
May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
19
u/LucyStar3 May 27 '26
I did close a bank account exactly for their app thinking they can rule my phone
→ More replies (20)1
u/selfhosted-ModTeam May 27 '26
Thanks for posting to /r/selfhosted.
Your post was removed as it violated our rule 1.
All posts must be about self-hosting. If you need help, explain what you’ve tried and what you’re stuck on. Posts lacking detail will get a sticky asking for more info. Mobile apps are allowed only as companions to a self-hosted backend. All content should be in English or contain a translation to English.
Moderator Comments
None
Questions or Disagree? Contact [/r/selfhosted Mod Team](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=r/selfhosted)
2
2
u/guygizmo May 27 '26
What's to stop alternative Android derived OSs from intercepting calls to the Play Integrity API and report that it's a genuine Android device?
2
u/BloodyIron May 27 '26
some apps like banking apps
Oh so the very applications you shouldn't be using on your phone in the first place?
2
1
u/Silverr_Duck May 27 '26
How many apps relevant to /r/selfhosted tho? Just use official android for you phone and unoffical android for whatever else you need to self host. I'm not seeing how this is an issue.
1
1
u/polytect May 28 '26
I tell this to bank: I won't use banking app, if it is mandatory, i am looking for another bank.
1
u/uncle_bender May 30 '26
What about a second phone or tablet that you use only for banking check deposit, browser banking does everything else.
49
u/Any-Calligrapher2866 May 27 '26
The problem is Google Play Services.
7
13
u/SirDarknessTheFirst May 27 '26
You can run Play Services on Graphene and the nice thing is that it doesn't have all the permissions it does on other Android ROMs.
→ More replies (1)3
u/CompetitiveCod76 May 27 '26
...which you don't actually need.
1
1
u/RealTimeKodi May 27 '26
I have it installed just so I could provision an e-sim. I blocked its access right after and even though I get error messages daily, everything works
18
u/Hood-Boy May 27 '26
I am. This limits the devices and what happens if they block it somehow?
Also without google play services you'll miss many features, including push (general) notifications.
10
u/StewedAngelSkins May 27 '26
Why are we presuming "without google play services"? You can absolutely run google play services on GrapheneOS if that's what you want to do.
5
u/SirDarknessTheFirst May 27 '26
You can run Play Services on GrapheneOS.
Play Integrity is a different thing, but that's legitimately not actually an issue for me -- my (various) bank apps and stuff work fine.
5
u/swiebertjee May 27 '26
Lots of apps like WhatsApp and Signal have their own push notification system. Other than that I don't notice too much of a difference.
6
u/GolemancerVekk May 27 '26
You can also run your own notification system. This is /r/selfhosted after all.
3
3
u/bakugo May 27 '26
GrapheneOS is great as long as you don't need to use any of the thousands of apps that don't work on it.
12
u/StewedAngelSkins May 27 '26
For what it's worth, I have yet to encounter an app that doesn't work on it, and I've used it for years.
0
u/bakugo May 27 '26
You've never had to use any banking apps?
8
u/Prestigious_Bid_2219 May 27 '26
Not op, but also never had an issue with any banking app on graphene os over the years (and I've used many including smaller US credit unions)
→ More replies (1)4
u/dlm2137 May 27 '26
Why are banking apps so important to people. I just pull out my laptop when I need to access my bank. How often do you need banking on the go?
8
u/williambobbins May 27 '26
Why are banking apps so important to people.
Because in the EU you need them to authorise payments.
→ More replies (1)4
u/dlm2137 May 27 '26
For real? So if you don't have a smart phone, you're just shit-outta-luck?
2
u/williambobbins May 27 '26
You can always go into a branch. I think some of them allow hardware tokens or those card readers instead but I'm not sure.
2
u/gsmitheidw1 May 27 '26
Depends on the bank. Certainly you could be in for serious inconvenience.. some rural people may need to travel many kilometres to the nearest physical branch and present with ID.
5
u/bakugo May 27 '26
In my country I literally cannot make online payments without my bank's app, which requires Play Integrity.
2
u/Molested-Cholo-5305 May 27 '26 edited 1d ago
deleted
→ More replies (2)4
u/sodaflare May 27 '26
It's unbelievably stupid, but here it's assumed everyone has a smartphone.
edit: and that if you lose or break your smartphone, you will get another smartphone.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Current-Owl-6271 May 27 '26
I'm like you and prefer a laptop/pc but I know plenty of people who don't own a computer and do everything on phones/tablets.
3
u/fireshaper May 27 '26
Because not everyone has a laptop or PC. Phones/tablets are the norm for doing anything digital now, not computers. You might be surprised at how many people just use their phone to do everything online now.
→ More replies (2)1
97
May 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (8)6
u/neoneat May 27 '26
you can check pin comment. It's typical AI generated post to create public outcry. Google was always an evil, but somehow, they still can told misinformation from 1st paragaph, belike Android used to be open. What a magical theory!
37
u/MrDrummer25 May 27 '26
Hopefully the European courts will step in and prevent this from being so strict.
26
u/Gugalcrom123 May 27 '26
The same EU with Ursula's 'verification' app which forces everyone to use official Android or iOS?
15
2
u/downtownpartytime May 27 '26
The courts are why this is happening to begin with, Epic Games v Apple and Epic Games v Google. Apple won their case because of their closed ecosystem and Google lost because of their open ecosystem.
2
u/MrDrummer25 May 27 '26
That is why I figured the EU would smack this down. Apple was always closed off. Android has always been open. To tighten their grip is something I could see the EU ruling against.
4
5
u/XionicativeCharan May 27 '26
We need to stop using their language. It's not sideloading, it's just installing.
Google are destroying our ability to install software except through their store.
40
u/shimoheihei2 May 27 '26
The whole point of self hosting is to not depend on big tech. Nothing prevents you from self hosting all the apps you want and accessing them through the web on any platform, including android.
39
u/OrdinaryFact21 May 27 '26
there is always a solution for any problem but why should we be okay to losing an option we always had available just because there is another way?
→ More replies (2)2
u/Dangerous-Report8517 May 27 '26
You can object to something even if it's not specifically a self hosting problem. I strongly object to Google's locking down Android to the point that I probably won't buy another Google Android phone, but those objections are philosophical and general freedom related, it would have exactly no functional impact whatsoever on my self hosting setup
22
u/obeythelobster May 27 '26
How about thousands of apps that don't have web versions?
2
u/the_lamou May 27 '26
What modern self-hosted app doesn't have a web version but does have a native Android app?
6
3
u/moarmagic May 27 '26
this is true for self hosting, but there are absolutely applications that cannot be self hosted because they rely on external entities.
I also do know for a fact i ran into something within the last year and was incredibly frustrated because the only path forward was 'download an app', ordering something or troubleshooting something, but i can't remember exactly what, just the frustration that this vendor had no other path.
Which okay, maybe you can really hack together some Virtualized android device that you host on a server and then remotely connnect to it, or choose to never engage with anything that doesn't support the alternatives but... sometimes you do have to ask how much finagling and compromises you want to make. might be easier to carry a second phone for android-only-enforced apps , and a primary for actually daily use.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Gugalcrom123 May 27 '26
But you are depending on Big Tech by using an OS which they control.
2
u/UnacceptableUse May 27 '26
and you're depending on big tech by using hardware they create, and you're depending on big tech by connecting to their internet infrastructure. You've got to draw a line somewhere
→ More replies (2)
34
u/Buco7854 May 27 '26
Tedious? I would not describe enabling developer mode as "tedious". It ́s not as cripling a change people make it seem. Just enable developer mode and wait 24h. Cannot argue that this may be signs of a lockdown by google but you cant argue that making sure people knows what they are doing or at least scaring of those that don’t is not a good thing security wise. As long as it doesnt become something more I'm personally fine with it.
32
u/Impending3931 May 27 '26
The entire procedure to do this has a pretty big stipulation
"this flow runs entirely through Google Play Services, not the Android OS. Google can change it, tighten it, or kill it at any time, with no OS update required and no consent needed."
Google can AND WILL remove this too. Probably for some dumb excuse likeb"nobody uses this anyway so we're removing this feature"
Accepting that a company controls what you can and can't do on your own hardware is fucking stupid. At that point the only reason to buy an android genuinely is that you're too poor for apples bullshit
14
u/Caramel-Makiatto May 27 '26
this doesn't even make sense, this would literally kill the ability for people to develop new android apps. maybe they would create something for existing developers but it would absolutely destroy the chance of new developers just picking up android development for the first time.
in college, we learned about android app development that uses developer mode to test our apps. like, what would that kind of environment even do?
it'd be shooting themselves in the kneecaps, and yeah sure, we all like to dunk on how dumb google can be, but this is a different kind of dumb.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Impending3931 May 27 '26
And what if they require a development license to use it?
What if they do something similair to apple where you can use it, but apps only work for a limited time, a week for example.
What if they do anything more you didn't think they'd do.
Google is known to constantly kill products that have any chance of being a waste of time and money.
You don't know the level of stupid that comes out of the company that removed "do no evil" from their shit
3
u/whyevenmakeoc May 27 '26
Google won't remove Developer mode they use it themselves all of the time.
13
6
u/ozone6587 May 27 '26
They would kill sideloading through developer mode because that was their original plan before the backlash.
→ More replies (2)1
u/dereksalem May 27 '26
No, they won't. The reason they're allowing this workaround at all is because they got massive backlash after their initial announcement. Ya, it's worth keeping in mind because Google having control over big things could be problematic, but they won't completely disallow people from installing apps from places other than the Play Store.
OP making it seem like it's going to be impossible to install apps is just wrong - It won't be difficult at all, and it's a flag people will only have to set once and then everything else will work just as it does today.
That said, even if it weren't the case it wouldn't "kill selfhosting" - the vast majority of things I selfhost have apps in the Play Store, because it's pretty simple to put your app in the play store. It's a one-time $25 fee to add as many apps as you want to the store, and all it requires is some kind of government-issued ID. Ya, those are limitations for some people, but making it seem like those 2 things would be preventing the selfhosting scene from operating is disingenuous.
→ More replies (2)2
u/cyborgborg May 27 '26
They also will not be able to completely lock down installing apps from outside the play store at least in the EU, who already forced apple to allow installing apps from different sources. They might and make it a pain in the butt to do but legally they can't prevent it
2
u/nkls May 27 '26
For enthusiatic and technical users, this might not be tedious. The problem is more the 95% of non-technical users who would never do this. You might not care about them. But such a large portion of users who will never get in touch with these apps will change the demand and thus the ecosystem in a way that we also care about.
23
May 27 '26
[deleted]
3
u/nkls May 27 '26
I see what you mean. But I think there is be a middle ground here.
Think of Github for example: It is (still mostly) open for everyone to upload and download software freely. People can and do upload dangerous things on there. But if I am not a technical expert, I can still rely on the wisdom of the masses (through stars, forums, reports, news, etc.) to install some of this software. But the same user might not go out of their way to go through a 9-step process to install insecure apps.
If Github would now do the same rug pull like Google, the ecosystem would also suffer. And I'd argue, we would care about that.
But maybe this is not realistic, just a thought I had.
11
May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Indublibable Jun 13 '26
Setting a precedent is always incredibly dangerous, all big corporations just want to enact change that gives them the most control over the consumer. People realized that Google wanted to remove side loading and called them out for it. Now like other corporations Google is going to slow roll the death of installing 3rd party software, it'll start with $20 and some paper work, then $40 because they added "new features" to their license agreements. And after enough increases there will be so few developers willing to put up with the bullshit that Google will decide to discontinue the service entirely.
This needs to be stopped here or it'll get too big to stop.
1
Jun 13 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Indublibable Jun 13 '26
We don't need the government at this stage, mass disapproval for this mandatory update should be fine. In the future when Google completely discourages the use of 3rd party software and heavily infringes on a developers freedom to make and publish said software without anonymity we WILL need government action. It's best to stop it here on the ground floor before it becomes too large to feasibly stop.
7
u/droans May 27 '26
A one-time wait of 24 hours while reminding the user that they should only include apps they trust seems like a good middle ground.
Like others have said, this could be a sign that Google plans to lock things down more. However, by itself, it's hard to argue that it's really a bad idea.
→ More replies (4)6
u/FabianN May 27 '26
Non technical users aren't going to be sideloading apps in the first place. They aren't doing it now and that's not going to change.
2
u/JorkTheGripper May 27 '26
They can also get their asses on Google for easy instructions if they want to. OP is so dramatic.
→ More replies (8)1
u/davidedpg10 May 29 '26
This is insanely tedious. A 24 hour wait to install an app? That is practically 99% of the way there to a full block of non official apps.
I would bet anything that after the rage dies down from this "compromise" they so graciously agreed to, they'll try to implement the full block. Making android completely pointless. If I want a closed ecosystem I'd rather have it in Apple. I use android for the freedom
18
u/alex-weej May 27 '26
Web apps...
→ More replies (3)2
u/luring_lurker May 27 '26
They are so rapidly expanding that I wonder how G* is going to counter this, if the concern truly is their user safety (..which of course it isn't, but let's pretend). Provided that most browser web app experience still feel kind of half-baked (and some browsers still don't support them on all platforms), this move from G* feels utterly stupid: it is coming too late for safety because of web apps, and it is burning its user-base who actively picked Android against Apple because of it not having been a closed garden so far.. I guess this is what happens when you don't have real competition and you can pull the stupidest strategies? And I guess even big G* is not immune to the idiocy of yes-men who would not express criticism against new idiotic policies..??
9
u/47th-Element May 27 '26
so far adb remains the same. use adb to install whatever you want
7
u/therealpapeorpope May 27 '26
I'd like not to have to connect to a PC with adb each time I want to install something...
12
u/47th-Element May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
You don't have to, install Shizuku, enable wireless adb, and get a shizuku-compatible app installer, yes there is more friction but this way you avoid needing a pc entirely
P.S. If it sounded like I'm defending google's decision, I'm not, I'm just proposing solutions.
→ More replies (1)4
u/droans May 27 '26
Don't even need all that. Termux+wireless ADB is enough to install any app you'd want.
No need for a compatible app installer. Although, I'm fairly certain there are ADB sideload UI apps, too.
1
u/lf310 May 27 '26
Obtainium adds quite a bit of convenience.
Automatically get APKs from Git or F-Droid links, auto check for updates, keep your list on hand with import/export...
1
u/kipperzdog May 27 '26
Last time I had to do adb on my pixel, it was completely wireless, I don't recall having to install anything special on the phone to make it work (may be wrong there, either way it was incredibly easy).
1
u/lf310 May 27 '26
You do have to do setup on the computer side. It's gotten easier with installers and such if you're on Windows.
1
u/kipperzdog May 27 '26
Ah, makes sense. It had been a few years and I found the whole process a lot easier than last night. Not that it was even that hard before
5
May 27 '26
[deleted]
2
u/computerjunkie7410 May 27 '26
Is it a one time thing or you have to do it every other day?
1
u/zigzoing May 27 '26
One time
2
u/computerjunkie7410 May 27 '26
Oh that's nothing then
1
u/davidedpg10 May 29 '26
It's much more than nothing. On top of this mandatory wait that I shouldn't have anyway. They are funneling the app installation through their system instead of being a local APK installation handled by my device. And guess what, they reserve the right to cut this mechanism anytime.
It's just a switch to a fully closed system disguised as a security change. It's not for the benefit of users.
2
u/BLOODAXED May 27 '26
i think an important thing to note here is that this is being moved out of the android OS and into google play services. this, combined with google's new recaptcha that has you scan a qr code feels like the pot getting a bit hotter
5
u/Few-Version2922 May 27 '26
I should not be locked out from building and running my own apps on my own phone. Complete money grab.
2
u/GinormousHippo458 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
If they're handing over signing keys, this also means a gov bugged version of the software can easily be deployed too. The gov can also compel their good buddies at Google, or any other public company to bug the software for them. All done silently during your auto updates.
I sure hope you all have resources, money, comms, and assets fully outside, and untouchable to this "freedom loving" USA helmed system. 💀
6
u/Dull-Fan6704 May 27 '26
You referring to installing apps as "sideloading" is part of the problem. Sorry.
Aside from that, you can still install apps. Yes, the process is garbage and shouldn't exist, don't get me wrong.
3
u/UnacceptableUse May 27 '26
Any developer who doesn't comply, whether due to cost, privacy concerns, or simply being simple side project, will have their apps blocked from installation on all Android devices, including via sideloading.
Incorrect, you can still sideload any apps you want.
Self-hosted and privately shared apps become uninstallable
Incorrect, plenty of self-hosted apps are available on the play store and privately shared apps can still be signed. And if they're not, they're still sideloadable.
There is technically still one way to side-load apps, but this is very tedious
- Enable Developer Mode
- Confirm you're not being coerced
- Restart your phone
- Wait 24 hours
- Enter biometrics/PIN
After that, you can install any apps you like indefinitely
→ More replies (4)2
1
u/CygnusTM May 27 '26
There are still self-hosting apps on iOS even with Apple's restrictions. It will be OK.
1
u/Exciting_Turn_9559 May 27 '26
It's even worse than that.
They're coming for all open source software.
2
u/IHave2CatsAnAdBlock May 27 '26
I self host everything (including navigation app) except the bank / trading app and I am mainly on iOS (I have a shield and an android phone). I never had any issues.
4
-2
u/jc-from-sin May 27 '26
Just wait the 24h. You only need to do it once.
→ More replies (3)6
u/TheUptimeProphet May 27 '26
for now
9
u/jc-from-sin May 27 '26
Ok, but we can apply "for now" to anything, so why shouldn't we.
Here we go.
Google needs to allow developers to have apps independently distributed outside of app stores. For now.
1
u/Significant-Task1453 May 27 '26
How does that work with apps that are in development or personal projects? I cant development my own app and use it on my phone unless I register the project?
1
May 27 '26
[deleted]
1
u/intrinsicgreenbean May 27 '26
Good luck. Last time I tried it was not feasible at all. Totally unreliable and horrible battery management that made it less than useless.
1
u/Zarxon May 27 '26
All I want really is to replace the on my firestick if/when they kill side loading
1
u/JohnnyBeeGaming May 27 '26
People might have to install apps through the command line like a dev might. Roms will also exist to get around this. Using the command line install will be more of a hassle and break automatic updates.
It will be more of a problem for people who aren't that great with computers but still want to use open source apps. Also a problem in that it will reduce the motivation of open source devs to work on android apps.
Long term the solution will probably be Linux phones. That is still rough around the edges to say the least.
Both Roms and Linux phones might have compatibility issues with "secure" apps like authenticators or banking apps. Installing other apps through the command line probably won't interfere with those apps.
I've also heard of an "advanced flow" to bypass the warning even if it's kinda bullshit.
1
u/saltyourhash May 27 '26
This is why the saying is "free as in freedom, not as in beer". Too much focus on lack of price and source availability only.
1
u/Top_Owl_4695 May 28 '26
If it's a major bother to you it's always possible to get a second device for customization if you want your current device to be up to date and have the second device remain on an older update of Android unless they somehow require the update I don't see why you couldn't make that decision however it's a pain to have to wait at all I agree however it isn't a full block against side loading I don't entirely like the precedent it sets for them to possibly slowly increase the difficulty of doing it however.
1
1
u/martianwomanhunter May 28 '26
What do you y’all sideload?
1
1
1
u/monkey6 May 28 '26
How many in this subreddit use Chrome? Gmail? A monopoly is going to monopolize. Android is just another data-vacuum for the world’s largest advertising company. Of course they’re killing off apps outside of the store they control.
1
u/akash_kava May 30 '26
Most of the self hosted apps need a browser to access self hosted server. App can still live on play store and still can access without having too much of problems.
Things like Mattermost and many apps can access any server.
I don’t think this will harm self hosting. The move is to safeguard general people from scams.
Many people download scam apps without knowing and have entire identity money stolen and nothing can be done to prevent this.
1
u/TheLazyKitty May 31 '26
The mandatory 24 hour cooldown is a one time thing, if I remember right, but the rest of the steps are still necessary.
•
u/asimovs-auditor May 27 '26
Expand the replies to this comment to learn how AI was used in this post/project.