Related
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/28/new-licensing-service-replacing-existing-copy-protection-metho/
Looks like pretty soon the days of people copy and pasting apk's all over the place are coming to an end.
I hope this doesn't make theming harder.. We'll see.
From reading that article,
Seems like airplane mode or a firewall would crush all the hopes and dreams of google and app devs.
It seems that every time we open an app it needs to verify that it's been paid for by contacting a "licensing" server and retrieving a response.
I feel like that could slow down launch times, and being unable to use an app when offline would be like UBISOFT hell all over again.
I really hope google puts a lot of thought into this..
I wonder if this if already being done? Every time I try to play that golf game on my EVO on an airplane while the radios are off I get a FC when it starts. As soon as I an on the ground and turn the radios on the game works fine.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
what if you are in an area with no signal or on a plane or something? you cant open any apps???
This is already in place in a number of apps, one is IP Cam Viewer.
I paid the money for it. I transferred all my files to my wife's Evo 4G, and thought "hell I'll see if it works..." Well it didn't. When I try to open the app, it tells me that I have to purchase it from the marketplace.
I'm all for buying apps when they're good, and I understand single user licensing. Guess I was just hoping I wouldn't have to spend double the money for all the apps I use.
simplyphp said:
This is already in place in a number of apps, one is IP Cam Viewer.
I paid the money for it. I transferred all my files to my wife's Evo 4G, and thought "hell I'll see if it works..." Well it didn't. When I try to open the app, it tells me that I have to purchase it from the marketplace.
I'm all for buying apps when they're good, and I understand single user licensing. Guess I was just hoping I wouldn't have to spend double the money for all the apps I use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard of couples sharing the same email as apps get replicated on the two phone
I can confirm that they don't get replicated..
I have two evo's right now under the same email and they're definitely not replicating crap.
cahiatt said:
I wonder if this if already being done? Every time I try to play that golf game on my EVO on an airplane while the radios are off I get a FC when it starts. As soon as I an on the ground and turn the radios on the game works fine.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that's a problem I understand about paying for apps but not working when I'm in a place with no signal. I see a law suit brewing up. I paid for the app I should be able to use the app whenever I want to. Class action law suit coming real soon.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Crap....
"A limitation of copy protection is that applications using it can be installed only on compatible devices that provide a secure internal storage environment. For example, a copy-protected application cannot be downloaded from Market to a device that provides root access"
...Seriously???
EDIT - the above quote was misrepresented in the place I copied from...research shows it to be misleading. the actual bit of Google's text is posted over on page to of this thread. disregard my indignation in this post...
This is discouraging, because a lot of people like to try the full before they buy it expecting more than what full has to offer, only to be disappointed later.
willwgp said:
This is discouraging, because a lot of people like to try the full before they buy it expecting more than what full has to offer, only to be disappointed later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do get a 24 hour refund option when you buy from the market so I'm not worried about trying before you buy. I do worry about not being able to play something when I'm in the bathroom at work because I don't get a signal there.
well how many ppl do actually piracy apps??? oh my bad forgot that this is Android, for a second i though it was apple!!
Just to clarify a couple of things:
There are 2 ways to use the Licensing - one is Strict - you CAN NOT USE THE APP WITHOUT ACCESS TO MARKETPLACE. Personally, screw that.
Option 2, however, is a non-strict policy. Server managed, where the license is 'cached' to storage. You also can programmatically set how long your app can be used without any license check.
That'd be the way i go
josue85 said:
You do get a 24 hour refund option when you buy from the market so I'm not worried about trying before you buy. I do worry about not being able to play something when I'm in the bathroom at work because I don't get a signal there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'll be up to the developer. I like this approach, as I'd be happy to do say... a 5-7 day turn around on the license check. After 7 days with no data signal, seriously, where the hell are you? LOL
Besides, if you've used a paid app for 7 days, and by that time can't decide if you need it or not - wow.
And of course, as soon as you got signal again, the license check would go through and you can use the app again, no problem.
I'm sure there will be UbiSoft and EA style implementations though - way too damn draconian for my tastes. I don't care to know every single second that someone's using my app. I would just like to know that they haven't 'copied that floppy' as it were LOL
I have no doubts this will be defeated in time, though. All it would really take is mimicking the server license response, which can be extracted from the locally cached license of an actual paid product.
People that pirate software are going to do it, regardless. Don't make the honest people pay the price of draconian DRM.
The best approach I can make as a developer, is give my customers the features they want, in a stable, good performing package, and discourage 'casual' piracy. Beyond that, it's out of the developer's control, and honestly, any more than that usually just pisses off the customer and annoys the pirates for about a day and a half.
Ok...had to read the SDK paperwork as I really wanted to know this...my previous post was incorrect and here is the update...
From Google:
Android Market Licensing is a flexible, secure mechanism for controlling access to your applications. It effectively replaces the copy-protection mechanism offered on Android Market and gives you wider distribution potential for your applications.
A limitation of the legacy copy-protection mechanism on Android Market is that applications using it can be installed only on compatible devices that provide a secure internal storage environment. For example, an application using the copy-protection mechanism cannot be downloaded from Market to a device that provides root access, and the application cannot be installed to a device's SD card.
With Android Market licensing, you can move to a license-based model in which access is not bound to the characteristics of the host device, but to your publisher account on Android Market and the licensing policy that you define. Your application can be installed and controlled on any compatible device on any storage, including SD card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also...there are options for the Devs to allow for apps to be used a chosen number of times before they need to check in for licenses. Strict has to check in every time....other option allows dev to choose based on times used or time since last check in.
SO...all in all I am much less worried about this now.
topdnbass said:
I can confirm that they don't get replicated..
I have two evo's right now under the same email and they're definitely not replicating crap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With licensing the dev can choose whether an app can be accessed from different phones. It is an option...
(greeked...multiple times)
Question: Does that mean we won't be able to open, modify, and resign apks? Like...to change the appearance (make a widget clear, etc).
More like bad news for paying consumers. That's who always pays for everything. Those of us who actually buy the products.
I plan on speaking with my wallet. I wont buy any app that requires I have an internet connection.
A limitation of the legacy copy-protection mechanism on Android Market is that applications using it can be installed only on compatible devices that provide a secure internal storage environment. For example, an application using the copy-protection mechanism cannot be downloaded from Market to a device that provides root access, and the application cannot be installed to a device's SD card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait so according to google us rooted folk couldn't download copy-protected apps before now?
Urrr, i think im missing something
This is actually a nice implementation for both the software developer and the user. Most will implement this where it only has to check-in every week or two. So the odds of getting caught in a spot where there is no connection is low.
At the end of the day, it is a pretty straightforward way to handle copy protection that really shouldn't inconvenience anyone.
Also it will bring more developers to the platform if they know they don't have to worry as much about piracy.
Piracy will still run rampant. People will find ways to circumvent this, that's just how it is. At least it will curb some piracy since copying and pasting an apk file wasn't much of a deterrent.
I am new to Android. Just got my Vibrant. I want to protect this phone so that in case it is lost or stolen I can recover it. Could you tell me what are some of the best apps for this?
Here is a list of names I know about for now:
Where's My Droid - This is currently installed, but required me to send a text to my phone to activate the GPS and even then it won't keep the GPS active long enough to get a precise location. Furthermore, it can alert the would be robber.
Glympse - well, this is not for stolen phones
Wavesecure - couldn't find any good threads on this. Seems to have an annual subscription fee of $19. I don't want that. Just want a standalone tracker.
Remote security - Not clear that this is a good app.
TheftAlarm - Again, developed in foreign language and I don't know how good it is
MobileDefense - Maybe this is the best app, but it is still in beta and no more users are accepted. I already filled out a request.
Find My Android - Was suggested in this thread, but it doesn't seem to be different from Where's My Droid, except the notification when SIM is replaced.
Lookout Mobile Security - Doesn't seem bad, but it doesn't lock your phone remotely. Can easily uninstall the program. I also found out that I better use a different email address than the one my phone gets otherwise the phone gets an email with "location" of the phone when you look it up online. This is better than Where's My Droid since you can do it more discreetly online, without sending texts (but have to make sure the email you use is not managed by the phone).
Am I missing something? I really want to protect this phone and it is frustrating that among so many apps, we seem to be missing good anti-theft solutions. Preferably I want something that can lock the phone remotely and allow me to do things without interruptions from the thief or at least discreetly. What would you recommend?
Also, I have a rooted (stock) Vibrant.
Thanks.
Where's My Droid isn't exactly very subtle about sending out replies, the author basically said there's nothing he can do.
Most of the other options include AntiVirus and other nonsense, and are expensive or questionable.
Tasker can automatically upload GPS, respond to an email or SMS to do so.. If you send it the right command it could take pictures periodically, make an outgoing call, whatever... It's extremely flexible in what it can do.
khaytsus said:
Where's My Droid isn't exactly very subtle about sending out replies, the author basically said there's nothing he can do.
Most of the other options include AntiVirus and other nonsense, and are expensive or questionable.
Tasker can automatically upload GPS, respond to an email or SMS to do so.. If you send it the right command it could take pictures periodically, make an outgoing call, whatever... It's extremely flexible in what it can do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WOW! Ok, but the question is - 1.can it lock the phone remotely? 2.What happens if the thief uninstalls Tracker or changes the SIM (can you password protect it)? Finally, 3.can it take picture AND email them remotely? Otherwise, I don't see much use to this feature if the phone is gone.
Lookout seems rather good, but I have not tested it personally. I'd add a link, but I'm a new user. Should be easy to find with a Google/Market search, though.
Well that (un installing tasker)may be the case with any tech anti theft, if the thief is smart and careful they will wipe/reset/format whatever they took, rendering a soft lo jack useless
I would just get tasker and lookup findmyandroid on lifehacker, its the best current option
Captiv
Yeah, I found out about LookOut on Android forums. I have installed it. It doesn't allow you to lock the phone remotely and can easily be uninstalled.
As for Find My Android, I don't see how is it different from Where's My Droid., maybe except the part where you're notified if the SIM card is replaced.
I updated the original post.
Find my android isn't the name of the app, its what the lifehacker post is tagged as (#findmyandroid)
The program is tasker, and its more customizable and it can turn on gps
Captiv
Sure, Lookout can be uninstalled, as can any other app. But really, you should have some sort of password on your device. With pattern unlock, there's really no reason not to do so.
According to one of the devs on their forums, remote locking as well as "other features" will be coming to Lookout "very soon".
https://lookout.zendesk.com/entries/24881-remote-lock
In the meanwhile, I use WaveSecure for locking my phone and Lookout for tracking, as its mechanism seems much better.
If you want to prevent Lookout from being uninstalled, just move the apk to /system/app (assuming your phone is rooted).
I have had Wave Secure since the Beta (it is free to beta testers) and love it. I can understand not wanting to pay, but it really is a great app. They have a zip file that you can flash in recovery if you are rooted. That will prevent the app from being erased if the phone is factory reset. I have also been using an app lately called "Tasker". It can track your phone, although I have not used it for this. Here is a link to the Wiki.
http://tasker.wikidot.com/locatephone
GPS Tracker by Instamapper is the one I use most. With a text message, it will return its location via Google maps. It will continually do so for as long as you have it set up for. Every 10 Seconds, Every 2 minutes, Every half hour, etc. I used it to track my stolen phone with the laptop in the car. This app saved me from buying a new phone.
stickerbob said:
I have had Wave Secure since the Beta (it is free to beta testers) and love it. I can understand not wanting to pay, but it really is a great app. They have a zip file that you can flash in recovery if you are rooted. That will prevent the app from being erased if the phone is factory reset. I have also been using an app lately called "Tasker". It can track your phone, although I have not used it for this. Here is a link to the Wiki.
http://tasker.wikidot.com/locatephone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. Glad I got it while it was still a beta!
I hope this time it's the correct forum.
So long story short.
I've written an app that allows to hijack FaceBook profiles over the WiFi. So when you're connected to WiFi you can "hack" into other users profiles. It doesn't work for profiles using SSL (yes you have that option in FB). So it can be treated as a "bad app". BUT! it is not dangerous for the one using it. I am aware that this is "questionable" application, but is there any other way to tell people - "HEY! use secure connections, it is not safe to use public WIFI!". I'd bet that a lot of you don't use SSL now and after using/reading this app you will turn SSL on.
That could be the #1 reason for deleting my app.
The second one is that I've put a 'demo' app in the market with a limit to sniffing only 3 profiles. But you could buy it through paypal. And today I've found out that this also could lead to app deletion. However i've bought launcherpro through paypal so I don't see why my app was removed in less than 24 hours.
What is your opinion and what can I do to sell my app somehow (i need my 25$ back that I've paid to register in google wrr...). Is there an option I could do put it in market without google deleting it like putting a disclaimer or something? The app itself is safe for the user downloading it.
Edit: If I put a link to this app here will this thread be deleted? If so, is there an option to promote it here?
Per forum rules, link removed
bponury said:
I've written an app that allows to hijack FaceBook profiles over the WiFi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's your answer.
JamesC_ said:
There's your answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 on that
if it allows you to hijack fb you can steal other information from the users account so why would they allow it and put themselves into a legal bind for doing so
JamesC_ said:
There's your answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if it wasn't for this app you would be safe? No, facebook is ignoring users privacy and this app is nothing more then a good way to show people what could be the cost of not using secure connections. Of course this can be used in a bad way, a lot of apps can. Like sms bombing or phone number spoofing. But they are not removed from the marked do they?
Ethics
And even worse you want to get paid for it.
wdl1908 said:
Ethics
And even worse you want to get paid for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I know what ethic is however we're not living in a perfect world and just believing that everyone is good and ethical so I can just leave my door open when leaving the house is not going to protect me against the reality. I believe in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_disclosure and this case is even better because FaceBook is aware of the problem and just ignore it. A few people are aware that there's an option to use SSL on facebook. In my opinion FB should just get it done right and force users to use it. It's not a problem these days right? And what is wrong in getting paid for my work. I've spent some time developing it. Security by obscurity is not working, really. Take my app for example it would take max 1h to crack it. It's not security it's just being to lazy to secure it. And hoping that no one would care to crack it.
sms bombing is not hacking someones account! you are just spamming someone with messages.
even if it is down to fb to let people know about security, the market owners can be sued for allowing such an app on the market. there are better ways of showing a person how unsecure a connection is without punishing them in such a way.
the secure connection is useful for public connections but some people may not want or need to use it at home so they have the ability to switch it on or off. apparently there are issues with some games on fb that are linked in with the use of the secure connection.
traumatism said:
sms bombing is not hacking someones account! you are just spamming someone with messages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People are killed for spamming in russia (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/26/russian_spammer_killed/)
And what about spoofing caller id? AFAIK that things are valid in court cases in Poland.
traumatism said:
even if it is down to fb to let people know about security, the market owners can be sued for allowing such an app on the market. there are better ways of showing a person how unsecure a connection is without punishing them in such a way.
the secure connection is useful for public connections but some people may not want or need to use it at home so they have the ability to switch it on or off. apparently there are issues with some games on fb that are linked in with the use of the secure connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how to tell people - secure yourself any other way. I know i'm devils (myself) advocate right now, but really do you think that forgetting about insecurity is a good way? I don't force anyone to use it in a bad way. But after I showed how it works in my house all my room-mates turned SSL on instantly. And they were not mad about it, shocked a bit but now they are safer now. Sure you can just tell people - hey turn ssl on and 90% of them will ignore you. But when you show them - look! i can see your messages that easily if you don't do it. Then they would listen.
haha! So, if someone got a gun and went around shooting people in cars to proove that they should actually have bullet proof windows and burst-proof tyres, that it's all ok, and not in any way shape or form, illegal?
ha. ha.
infact op ip should be reported to facebook
By nature I wouldn't go near this app. If its collecting other peoples info I could be collecting my own. Thats how I see it logically ... people always get screwed when they are doing something they shouldn't be doing.
There is a place for all apps in this world be they good or bad. You could always host a site and put it on there. I wouldn't go near it cause once again I'd be afraid of whats laced on that site.
I was just providing another point of view to the convo.
MarkusPO said:
haha! So, if someone got a gun and went around shooting people in cars to proove that they should actually have bullet proof windows and burst-proof tyres, that it's all ok, and not in any way shape or form, illegal?
ha. ha.
infact op ip should be reported to facebook
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if you have a car that can be opened by someone who has a screwdriver wouldn't you want car manufacturer to secure your car. Buying a bulletproof car isn't exactly the same as pushing a button in a web browser isn't it? And you're comparing killing a man to posting "I'm a jackass on someones FB wall". But still, you can buy a gun right? Also pretending that there's no problem isn't fixing a problem.
And hey, this app isn't new you know, if it wasn't for this thread maybe you wouldn't know that people use this apps on PC's maybe one day you would find that all your mail is gone (yes, this app could be modified to work with other sites like this forum). And ask yourself wouldn't you be pissed if you've found out that anyone using your network could get into your bank account? Well I would. But most (all?) banks use SSL by default. Google does. Why FB doesn't?
hazard99 said:
By nature I wouldn't go near this app. If its collecting other peoples info I could be collecting my own. Thats how I see it logically ... people always get screwed when they are doing something they shouldn't be doing.
There is a place for all apps in this world be they good or bad. You could always host a site and put it on there. I wouldn't go near it cause once again I'd be afraid of whats laced on that site.
I was just providing another point of view to the convo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, in fact it needs root to modify iptables and send raw arp messages and I know people get scared when an app needs root. If someone is interested I could write here how it's done and anyone could write it. It's actually nothing magical.
I wrote this app as a project for my mobile programming class. In the first version it also sniffed for Gadu-Gadu messages (it's a polish messenger). But I sure hope that when and if this app let's loose than FB will react and enable ssl by default. Maybe other websites will use it too. It's just that easy to protect your users, I don't understand why they don't do it?
most people who do not want their details stolen, do not use public access internet. does FB take money transactions over their site?
google does and the banks do so they will have a secure section. fb may do this using paypal or google checkout or otherwise so may not need the ssl that the banks need. sure it still renders people vulnerable to attack and theft of other information but even so that information is very limited dependant on the user of the account.
traumatism said:
most people who do not want their details stolen, do not use public access internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, so other people want their details stolen? You are aware of the problem 'cause your "into computers" but out of 500 milion fb users how many of them ever heard of SSL? How many know that they are unsafe?
well with the amount of messages being spread on fb already about this i think more people will know, but to let people know only by stealing their details is pathetic. sure you may have made this app for a project but why give other people the power to do this. all you are doing is providing more uses for those who like to make other peoples lives a misery. the best thing that could be done with this is to let the website provider know how unsecure their system is. especially if you are aware of the issue and are bothered by it. i know i'd do the same. if that didnt work, sure i'd tell people about it but i wouldnt sell an app on to others so they can make use of it. not even for free.
traumatism said:
well with the amount of messages being spread on fb already about this i think more people will know, but to let people know only by stealing their details is pathetic. sure you may have made this app for a project but why give other people the power to do this. all you are doing is providing more uses for those who like to make other peoples lives a misery. the best thing that could be done with this is to let the website provider know how unsecure their system is. especially if you are aware of the issue and are bothered by it. i know i'd do the same. if that didnt work, sure i'd tell people about it but i wouldnt sell an app on to others so they can make use of it. not even for free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure I could write an e-mail to facebook, but this issue is known for years! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_hijacking I am sure FaceBook is aware of it. In fact they've enabled SSL only a month ago (maybe two months) but why it isn't enabled by default?
who knows. perhaps issues with other applications on the website, or applications made to access facebook. they may have left it so they can cater for other applications for and on the site. only they can answer that question.
anyway, he just showed the spirit of a developer and created something new
he never told anyone "hey go hack facebook profiles" or "sniff those profiles, its fun"
he just showed the possibilites of android development and did nothing wrong in my opinion
it's not his fault if facebook is unable to close a security leak known for a long time
yeah dont get me wrong blezz i understand that completely. but the argument was as to why they would remove it. legality reasons would be tne main issue. to cover their own backs as they can in fact face legal action for allowing the app to become available in their market.
I don't see anything wrong with the app.
It shows the flaws of facebook, and the fact that no one in facebook cares enough to do anything about it. But then I understand whygoogle would remove it... If facebook decided to sue for this google would be sued not YOU.
so it would be best if you released it HERE on xda rather than the market
Ran accross this article just now, relized you all had to read this. It appears HTC ****** up hard.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/1...e-numbers-gps-sms-emails-addresses-much-more/
Scary stuff.
I'm so damn tired of all companies taking the liberty to just monitor our lifes just how they like, no matter if its google, microsoft, facebook, apple or HTC. What anoyys even more is how we passivly is forced into accepting it, and just shrudd our shoulders about it. Reading this, I wish I was smart enough to strike back somehow.
The article says "Some Sensations" I'd like to know what that means
Good find.
Pikabat said:
The article says "Some Sensations" I'd like to know what that means
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try running the app...
errr ok this is scary though. i wanna ask what's htcLaputa.apk is?
Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using xda premium
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
EddyOS said:
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the example of how we/some of us just go used to this kind of things and started to accept things we never would have a few years back.
How exactly do you determine whats a trusted source? Obviously weve already had a bunch of malwares entering the market.
I use apps only from the company in question. 'Facebook for Android' from Facebook, 'Twitter' from Twitter, etc...only use about 20 apps all in anyway so I don't think I'm at risk
I'm not saying what's been found out isn't bad - it is - I just don't really care. People are far too paranoid these days
EddyOS said:
I use apps only from the company in question. 'Facebook for Android' from Facebook, 'Twitter' from Twitter, etc...only use about 20 apps all in anyway so I don't think I'm at risk
I'm not saying what's been found out isn't bad - it is - I just don't really care. People are far too paranoid these days
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not using so much apps either, on the other hand I want to be able to try some "fun" app from androidmarket without fearing theft og my personal information.
Its not about paranoia to me, I couldnt care less about wheter or not some random dude can read my sms. But Im rather angry about the companies doing just as they like, mainly to direct commercials and ads conected to your personality. Did you know facebook, after their latest update, now saves a certain cookie after your logout and sends all urls you visit with your browser back to their server..?
Well, now Im going offtopic in my own thread.
Id like to see HTC comment on this atleast.
Again, if Facebook care if I open a YouTube video every now and then then that's up to them - I'm not interesting!!
Would be nice to see what HTC say but I'm not going to hold my breath!
Im starting to loose faith in htc
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda premium
I tried to run the app, seems like my Sensation is not affected (Dutch one, that is)
so, in order to gain any kind of advantage, those apps need to know this vulnerability exists, am i right? just deleted that apk file, along with some other ones.
As the Android Police blog appears to have melted, here's Aunty's take on it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15149588
Oh noes naughty people can access:
The list of user accounts, including email addresses (but apparently not usernames or passwords)
A log of recent GPS locations (so you can be stalked!!!!)
Phone numbers taken from recent call logs (so people you call can be stalked!!!)
SMS data, including recent numbers and encoded messages (meh if they want to read "Park 123 543" be my guest)
HTC's response:
"HTC takes our customers' security very seriously, and we are working to investigate this claim as quickly as possible," the company said in a statement.
"We will provide an update as soon as we're able to determine the accuracy of the claim and what steps, if any, need to be taken."
EddyOS said:
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a way to tell if the offending app (Htclogger.apk) is on your phone without rooting?
jggonzalez said:
Is there a way to tell if the offending app (Htclogger.apk) is on your phone without rooting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember it appears you are absolutely fine unless you install an app which is written to access the log files.
As Androidpolice says, the info could be used to clone your device, not only read some of your contacts. Now of course, you are fine as long as you do not install any malicious app, but I would even feel uncomfortable knowing that HTC can read ANY activity from my device at ANY point in time WITHOUT asking for my permission (or even after I denied that permission as shown in the video). The VNC thingie would also bug me cuz it is an app without any apparent use for the user and it does not serve a specific purpose - its just there until "someone" needs it. Now of course HTC wants to improve on user feedback and pulling it is much more convenient than asking for it, but if they want my opinion and see what I'm using they should at least ask me for it. That said, let's hope HTC addresses this problem in the very near future and does clarify why those apps are there and what purpose they serve. I will run the test app again after the next OTA for sure.
kwiggington said:
Im starting to loose faith in htc
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think HTC is the problem.
I believe the problem is Google.
Ever go to the Google Android market place and see what they want to run in the background before they let you in?
I don't go near the place.
majesensei said:
As Androidpolice says, the info could be used to clone your device, not only read some of your contacts. Now of course, you are fine as long as you do not install any malicious app, but I would even feel uncomfortable knowing that HTC can read ANY activity from my device at ANY point in time WITHOUT asking for my permission (or even after I denied that permission as shown in the video).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're misssing the point.
The phone has this feature so that should you enable "Tell HTC" it can then send the info to HTC, if you don't enable that it just sits on your phone as a system log.
xaccers said:
You're misssing the point.
The phone has this feature so that should you enable "Tell HTC" it can then send the info to HTC, if you don't enable that it just sits on your phone as a system log.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, and I agree that this is not a scary thing for itself. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, but think about a combination of things: The log is created and sits there. There is a VNC client embedded deeply in your system by your manufacturer for no reason, which gives access to your device from a remote location. I am from Germany and used to a debate about data preservation (which is illegal, in Germany), but there are other countries that have a much broader "grey-zone" for these kind of things. I wonder where those Sensations with the HtcLogger.apk are ([email protected]?). We are all running the same Android build (as long as we don't root our phones), some are affected, others aren't. I just find it weird, and I doubt that some rogue dev at HTC programmed these apk's just for the fun of it.
I'm still newer to Android and today realized the permissions that apps request. Before I was quick to just accept & go. I was about to install an app that is requesting a LOT of permissions. Phone calls, hardware controls (pics/vids at any time), and network communication (SMS I believe). My questions are simple.
1. Do certain custom mods, like Synergy? Do some mods already implement certain things into itself to disable some of these features? I understand this is a mod-by-mod basis if so. Does Synergy do anything to disable this crap, anybody know?
2. How worried do I have to be about this? Will the app literally take pics and send them out without my knowledge? Or is it only the pics I take it can send out? How does this work?
3. Which of the permissions that apps request do I really need to keep an eye on and watch out for? AKA, what could take info/pics that I dont want it to?
4. Is Anti-Virus software REALLY necessary since I'm all rooted and such? I read articles saying it's useful and others saying it doesn't even provide much protection, and the chance to get something is quite rare if you only use google play/android market?
Thanks in advance for any and all help. I ditched Apple and AT&T for this thing, and with it being rooted, I am unbelievably happy I made the switch to both VZW and the S3! AWESOME phone, screen size, and customization!
Edit: Posted wrong forum....Shoulda been Q&A forum. Devs plz move.
1. Not sure. I haven't played with synergy.
2. What kind of app is it? This is huge into what kkind of permissions it needs. If its a live wallpaper app it shouldn't be asking to be able to read your contacts or send SMS. You just gotta think what does this app do and why does it need this permission. A launcher app like Apex or Nova needs A LOT of permissions. To be able to make calls and send SMS and work the camera as a launcher can do all of those. Does a game need the ability to do that though? No. It may ask to read your contacts so it can share crap with your friends though. It can be hard when you look at permission apps ask for to decide it its legit or not. If you can't decide just don't download.
I try to only download hugely popular apps that I know aren't malware. If its got over 100k downloads chances are it is a safe app.
Permissions are tricky and until you realize all an app can do you wont understand why it wants to do some things. It took me a good year of downloading apps and reading about things toto get a great grip on permissions.
The biggest thing is common sense. What does the app do and why should it need this permission. An SMS app needs permission to the camera and to send SMS that cost money and read your phone book and such. But if I download a live wallpaper or a weather widget...why would they need such abilities. That should raise a HUGE red flag. Anytime you see "can send SMS that may cost you money" in permissions try to figure out why it needs that. Cause the last thing you want is to DL it and tomorrow have $600 in txt fees.
I don't believe in anti virus on my phone. Yeah you can get em and some love em. But really. If you just use common sense and don't download suspicious things you shouldn't need one. I refer back to only download trusted apps. If it has less the 1k downloads. Be wary. It may be a new app that a dev just launched. Or it could be a reason for the lack of downloads. Look at reviews ALWAYS. Yes many are from morons. But some are helpful. Also if you want a popular game go straight to the devs for it in the market. Many times bogus apps are posted that spoof popular apps like angry birds. Download the one with millions of downloads. Not the one with a thousand.
The more you use your device the more you'll understand. I download plenty of apps from XDA with very few downloads in the market and have been safe. But this comes from knowing and trusting a developer. That's why these forums rock. You can get in on an app in its infancy and help test it and make it grow.
--Sent from GlaDos baked potato
Google is eventually going to have to step in and put a stop to this, but more and more apps are requesting permissions that they have no business requesting. It is unfortunate, especially when the intrusive app is one you would like to have.
I choose to completely disregard any app that asks for permissions it is obvious it doesn't need. The exception being internet access for ads, as incorporating ads into an app can be a legitimate way for an app developer to generate revenue. (And the unsightly ads can be removed with an ad blocker like AdAway, so it's kind of a win-win).
However, if there is an app that you just "need" to download or would just like better control of your phone, you could download an app called "Permissions Denied." This app let's you decide what permissions are granted to each app.
i use LBE Privacy Guard to help manage my permissions. You can mark certain apps as trusted and deny specific permissions for other apps. Also lets you know when a specific app is trying to access certain functions. Only had it for a couple days but liking it so far.
i used to run an anti-virus, AVG to be specific, but after a while just decided to get smarter about what i install and have been going without one.