Most active commenters
  • grishka(4)
  • charcircuit(3)

←back to thread

Samsung embeds IronSource spyware app on phones across WANA

(smex.org)
845 points the-anarchist | 16 comments | 21 Jun 25 03:06 UTC | HN request time: 1.721s | source | bottom
Show context
grishka ◴[21 Jun 25 03:52 UTC] No.44334337[source]▶
The "unremovable" part is inaccurate. While you can't completely remove it because it resides on the system partition, you most probably can still disable it with an adb command:

    adb shell pm uninstall --user 0 com.package.name
This command is very powerful as it works for any app, even those that have "disable" greyed out in the settings. I disabled the Galaxy Store on my S9 this way for example.
replies(14): >>44334372 #>>44334377 #>>44334391 #>>44334708 #>>44334724 #>>44334999 #>>44335989 #>>44336280 #>>44336571 #>>44337223 #>>44338012 #>>44339617 #>>44339958 #>>44348889 #
1. hysan ◴[21 Jun 25 04:02 UTC] No.44334391[source]▶
> "unremovable"

> you can't completely remove it

Maybe my English isn’t very good but that sounds like the definition of unremovable.

replies(4): >>44334489 #>>44334534 #>>44334664 #>>44334844 #
2. charcircuit ◴[21 Jun 25 04:33 UTC] No.44334534[source]▶
It's in a read only filesystem. You can't modify read only data, but you can choose to ignore it.
replies(1): >>44339345 #
3. sedatk ◴[21 Jun 25 05:03 UTC] No.44334664[source]▶
There’s an enormous difference between “it can’t be stopped” and “its storage area can’t be reclaimed” though.
4. grishka ◴[21 Jun 25 05:43 UTC] No.44334844[source]▶
To be pedantic, yes, but not in a way that matters. The system partition is read-only. Mounting it read-write would require root and any modifications would break system updates. The apk will still be physically present in the file system, however, none of its code will run and it will be removed from your launcher and installed app list in settings, which IMO still counts as a removal.

Also, English is not my native language. I feel like I did get my point across anyway.

replies(1): >>44334890 #
5. hmcq6 ◴[21 Jun 25 05:51 UTC] No.44334890[source]▶
It's not being pedantic. Disabling the application does not give me the storage space back.

If people are paying for upgrades to storage space it's completely reasonable for them to be annoyed by bloatware

replies(2): >>44334960 #>>44338666 #
6. grishka ◴[21 Jun 25 06:07 UTC] No.44334960{3}[source]▶
The system partition is usually the same size regardless of which storage option of the same phone model you get.
replies(1): >>44335087 #
7. bracketfocus ◴[21 Jun 25 06:34 UTC] No.44335087{4}[source]▶
But if the system partition could be smaller, other partitions could be larger.
replies(1): >>44335166 #
8. grishka ◴[21 Jun 25 06:48 UTC] No.44335166{5}[source]▶
The system partition is made some fixed size, the same way disk partitioning works on PCs, and never resized, because resizing file systems is still a non-trivial task. It often has some free space too to accommodate future system updates.

On my 128 GB Pixel 9 Pro, /data is 109 GB. The rest is /system (although `df -h` doesn't show it explicitly, no idea what's up with that) and various other system-related partitions.

replies(1): >>44338069 #
9. themaninthedark ◴[21 Jun 25 11:34 UTC] No.44336697[source]▶
...doesn't sound removed to me, there are still copies sitting on other phones and servers somewhere.

No, still not removed...the idea and possibility for implementation still exists in people's minds.

10. bracketfocus ◴[21 Jun 25 14:55 UTC] No.44338069{6}[source]▶
Yes, but if the phone shipped with less bloatware on the system partition, then maybe that partition would be made smaller initially.

Meaning the user would have access to more of the phone’s advertised storage.

replies(2): >>44340573 #>>44342187 #
11. Dylan16807 ◴[21 Jun 25 16:14 UTC] No.44338666{3}[source]▶
Even with the outrageous prices for phone storage upgrade, an entire gigabyte of inactive bloat would be a $1 impact. It's not a big deal.
12. ashirviskas ◴[21 Jun 25 17:47 UTC] No.44339345[source]▶
Only because it is mounted as one. It is like saying that you can't have your house in pink because it is green.
replies(1): >>44340011 #
13. charcircuit ◴[21 Jun 25 19:15 UTC] No.44340011{3}[source]▶
If you modify a file on the partition the device will fail to boot. Your metaphor is not equivalent because it ignores security.
14. Henchman21 ◴[21 Jun 25 20:38 UTC] No.44340573{7}[source]▶
You have succeeded in splitting hairs down to the atomic level. Fissionable HN comments!!
15. bryant ◴[21 Jun 25 21:39 UTC] No.44340930[source]▶
Regardless of the point, this language is extremely unhelpful here, especially considering op tried with good intent to help people dealing with the issue.

And there are other analogies too, e.g with certain diseases being "functionally cured" vs "cured." Did the GP use the wrong word? Sure. But making that the sole focus of criticism misses the intent of the GP and the greater value of the whole comment, which instructs people on how to disable it so that it's functionally non-impactful.

16. charcircuit ◴[22 Jun 25 01:13 UTC] No.44342187{7}[source]▶
Or perhaps there would be less incentive for the OEM optimize for disk space and it ends up taking the same amount of space.