←back to thread

Is it possible to allow sideloading and keep users safe?

(shkspr.mobi)
205 points ColinWright | 4 comments | 30 Aug 25 12:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.809s | source
Show context
Disposal8433 ◴[30 Aug 25 13:01 UTC] No.45074267[source]▶
Sandboxing should prevent most of those issues. We can't control the users giving permissions to everything, but with more control on those permissions, or disabled by default, a phone should stay pretty safe, or am I missing something?
replies(3): >>45074326 #>>45074353 #>>45081846 #
rafram ◴[30 Aug 25 13:12 UTC] No.45074353[source]▶
People have been trained to tap through those prompts without really reading them, and it’s unreasonable to expect a less technical user to know what the implications of granting a permission are.
replies(4): >>45074405 #>>45074427 #>>45081105 #>>45084351 #
mathiaspoint ◴[30 Aug 25 13:21 UTC] No.45074427[source]▶
Giving illiterate people access to computers is going to be dangerous for them no matter what you do. UIs and operating systems should consider their caretakers instead.
replies(1): >>45074586 #
1. rafram ◴[30 Aug 25 13:37 UTC] No.45074586[source]▶
Not everyone has caretakers, unfortunately, but everyone needs a phone.
replies(1): >>45074605 #
2. mathiaspoint ◴[30 Aug 25 13:38 UTC] No.45074605[source]▶
Then they can have flip phones. Those are still made and are great for children and other people who aren't capable of caring for themselves.
replies(1): >>45080518 #
3. daxfohl ◴[31 Aug 25 05:06 UTC] No.45080518[source]▶
Or maybe when you buy a phone you can pay $5 extra to get the OS build that allows sideloading, or make it cost $5 and require you to hand-sign a bunch of forms to upgrade an existing phone to a sideloading-capable version. A little extra friction at phone purchase time (rather than app download time) would likely steer most people, especially non-techies, toward the safer option. Sure, maybe it doesn't stop the problem completely; someone completely bought in to some scam may go through the effort anyway. But if someone is that gullible, they're pretty destined to be scammed out of their money no matter what the protection.
replies(1): >>45081961 #
4. StopDisinfo910 ◴[31 Aug 25 10:05 UTC] No.45081961{3}[source]▶
Why should people pay for the privilege of installing apps without having to submit their personal record to an American mega corp which then vet what they install?

You have the issue reversed. I should people should be able to buy specifically locked phones separately if they want to. Actually they already can.