←back to thread

A theoretical way to circumvent Android developer verification

(enaix.github.io)
194 points sleirsgoevy | 1 comments | 31 Oct 25 20:20 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
asimops ◴[31 Oct 25 21:30 UTC] No.45776925[source]▶
While it is technically feasible, it is not a good idea to try and find a technical solution to a people/organisation problem.

Do not accept the premise of assholes.

I hope we can get the EU to fund a truly open Android Fork. Maybe under some organisation similar to NL Labs.

--- edit ---

Furthermore, the need for a trustworthy binary to be auditable to a certain hash or something would make banning this a simple task if Google would want to go that route.

replies(8): >>45777355 #>>45778228 #>>45778511 #>>45779765 #>>45779867 #>>45780458 #>>45780743 #>>45781937 #
closeparen ◴[01 Nov 25 01:28 UTC] No.45778511[source]▶
The same EU that's doing Chat Control?
replies(5): >>45778682 #>>45779494 #>>45779799 #>>45780908 #>>45781445 #
supermatt ◴[01 Nov 25 13:22 UTC] No.45781445[source]▶
It appears that you are an American who has conveniently forgotten about FISA, EARN IT, CLOUD act, PATRIOT act, LAED, etc, etc, and wants to take a dig at the EU for what, exactly? NOT passing Chat Control? Seriously..
replies(3): >>45782748 #>>45782787 #>>45782902 #
1. 0xDEAFBEAD ◴[01 Nov 25 16:08 UTC] No.45782787[source]▶
It's interesting how so many online discussions of internet privacy devolve into nationalist chest-beating. I'm beginning to suspect that people don't inherently value privacy all that much -- they just want to brag about how their country is the most private.

Recall that the premise of this thread is that the EU should sponsor an alternative to Android. The EU vs US question isn't really topical, since no one suggested that the US government should sponsor an alternative to Android instead.