Database Info

Good News for Developers, Bad News for Pirates!!

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.

Taintdroid...android's duff security model

Worrying article on how apps are using personal information.
www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/30/suspicious_android_apps/
I'm sick that they had to go too such lengths to find out. We need a better net architecture to enable a proper firewall to work.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

Also, app naming FAIL!

Well, since they only tested 30 apps and won't release the names of the ones they tested, only saying that they are "the most popular", personally I don't buy it.
And the information these apps are sending out is primarily geolocation. Well, no ****. If an app wants your location and you don't think it should have it, it's either using it for ads or you should decline to install the app and just send an email to the dev asking him why he needs that information.

tjhart85 said:
Well, since they only tested 30 apps and won't release the names of the ones they tested, only saying that they are "the most popular", personally I don't buy it.
And the information these apps are sending out is primarily geolocation. Well, no ****. If an app wants your location and you don't think it should have it, it's either using it for ads or you should decline to install the app and just send an email to the dev asking him why he needs that information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed... geolocation is pretty obviously straight forward. I don't know about the 'transmissing every 30 seconds' thing though.
Any thoughts ont he transmitting sim card and IMEI info?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnLujX1Dw4Y
Also discussed here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=795702
With explanation where to get it from http://www.appanalysis.org/

A very well-written reply by "Steven Knox" on The Register, demonstrating how this 'research' is simply a pile of intentionally-misleading statistical rubbish:
By selecting only from applications that access both personal data and the internet, they're overstating the significance of their study by about 3x. Furthermore, their summaries blur this distinction unnecessarily.
Specifically, their FAQ says "We studied just over 8% of the top 50 popular free applications in each category that had access to privacy sensitive information in order to get a sense of the behaviors of these applications." Since there were 22 categories at the time they did the study, that would imply (22*50=1,100 * 8% =) 88 applications. However, they actually only tested 30, because of the 1,100 top 50 applications only (from the PDF) "roughly a third of the applications (358 of the 1,100 applications) require Internet permissions along with permissions to access
either location, camera, or audio data." -- meaning that the other 742 apps don't have the necessary permissions to play badly. The clause "..that had access to privacy sensitive information in order to get a sense of the behaviors of these applications." from the FAQ is grammatically ambiguous in this case (it may refer to "applications" or "category"), and not specific enough to indicate that over 2/3 of the applications are (relatively) safe by dint of not having the necessary permissions.
They also didn't include in their study apps from 10 of the 22 categories, but they don't explain whether that was due to a) there not being any or enough applications in those categories that required internet and personal data permissions, b) a conscious choice to focus on the other 12 categories, or c) the results of random selection (with an explanation of why they did not use a stratified sample).
Once you factor back in the applications they ignored, the numbers don't look quite so bad. Assuming their sample was representative, 2/3 of the 358, or about 239 applications of the top 1,100 of the time use personal data suspiciously. That's about 21.7% or just over 1 in 5 -- still significant, but a far cry from 2 out of 3. In fact, the worst case maximum is actually 358 of 1,100 or just under 1 in 3 (32.45%) because they are as mentioned above the only ones that actually acquire the permissions necessary to do anything "suspicious".
I understand why both the researchers and the reporter used the 2/3 figure -- you all believe you have to sell the point as hard as possible*. But the real story is that it's likely that at least 1 in 5 Android Apps use private data "suspiciously" -- and that number is still high enough to cause concern and to justify the further use of tools like TaintDroid. It's a pity you didn't trust the facts enough to avoid the unnecessary sensationalism.
*I am assuming, here, that Mr. Goodin did actually read and digest the paper as I did, rather than simply picking out the figures from the study, the FAQ, or a press release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

good spot. But one in ten woolf be too many. The point is we should have more fine grained control and transparency off what apps do over the net, and we can't, by design.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

We need to develop a shim that reports modified IMEI/SIM data for different apps. IMO, very few apps need that information. We may not be able to keep all those apps from sending our private information, but we can make that information useless if it appears that we all are using the same IMEI/SIM...

patp said:
...The point is we should have more fine grained control and transparency off what apps do over the net...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed....

if you are rooted. With Root Explorer go to /data/system/ and open accounts.db you might be surprised what you find in it... Some people it will be fine for but mine it shows my exchange email and password in plain text and a few others show up as plain text has well...Its not geo they are worried about (for the most part) and...this file has been known about for awhile
Don't worry though unless your downloaded android specific virus holding apps you wont have any problem. And if your getting all your apps legally through the market then its no big deal =) and if your pirating them...well I don't feel bad for you...

echoside said:
if you are rooted. With Root Explorer go to /data/system/ and open accounts.db you might be surprised what you find in it... Some people it will be fine for but mine it shows my exchange email and password in plain text and a few others show up as plain text has well...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Opened it, my accounts are there, but no passwords....

rori~ said:
Opened it, my accounts are there, but no passwords....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my gmail is somesort of encrypted but doesnt look that great.
Exchange shows up
facebook doesnt show anything at all aha
Thats why I said some might not have anything. Awhile back when I first heard about it one of my friends had two or three right there in plain English I didn't have a phone at the time to check...
Its been reported before but kind of just brushed over no biggy. To go real conspiracy theorist....I think apple is submitting all these articles...

ButtonBoy said:
We need to develop a shim that reports modified IMEI/SIM data for different apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great idea

The source code/instructions for TaintDroid are now out:
http://appanalysis.org/download.html

Anybody found a (recent) kernel with built-in TaintDroid-support?

Severe security flaw in HTC-sense, sensation affected.!!!

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.

[Q] Permissions from Apps-concerns

Ok, I'm a Noob on here. I just got a Android phone & I am interested in various apps from the Android Market but when I read the permissions that most of the apps have listed as to what they can do to the phone and to your privacy I am quite concerned. Is this really an issue as people seem to download apps without worrying about what the app is or could do without your knowledge. I have searched on here & elsewhere & no one seems to be address the issue. Am I just being paranoid?
I have seen that a lot of these apps will prevent the phone or tablet from going into sleep mode, is this true?
Thanks hope I haven't stepped on any toes by asking this, but I can't seem to find anything on the subject. So far I have decided not to download much a select few apps.

Rebel60 said:
Ok, I'm a Noob on here. I just got a Android phone & I am interested in various apps from the Android Market but when I read the permissions that most of the apps have listed as to what they can do to the phone and to your privacy I am quite concerned. Is this really an issue as people seem to download apps without worrying about what the app is or could do without your knowledge. I have searched on here & elsewhere & no one seems to be address the issue. Am I just being paranoid?
I have seen that a lot of these apps will prevent the phone or tablet from going into sleep mode, is this true?
Thanks hope I haven't stepped on any toes by asking this, but I can't seem to find anything on the subject. So far I have decided not to download much a select few apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries, no toes are being stepped on.
I agree that the permissions required by apps can sometimes look worrying.
But the description is often misleading. Some times it just looks very intrusive but that permission is needed for something alot more simple. It's a broad topic.
Also alot of users are just not concerned by this or just go with the crowd.
Write the developer and ask him what the permissions are needed for, if his apps description is unclear on that or the permissions seem unrelated to the apps purpose.
When it says, prevents your device from sleeping, it is most likely used to prevent the screen from turning off or dimming while something is progressing on screen. It is also needed to ensure that the cpu finishes the current operation if you press the devices sleep button, so it doesn't stop at some random point which might lead to problems for the app.
If there is a specific app and its permissions you are worried you could just SEARCH and then make a thread and ask about it.

If rooted, search for "PDroid" on XDA to control permissions, or search for "Betterbatterystats" to find programs producing wakelocks and preventing deep sleep.
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel

Aerocaptain said:
If rooted, search for "PDroid" on XDA to control permissions, or search for "Betterbatterystats" to find programs producing wakelocks and preventing deep sleep.
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But then don't complain if the apps malfunction as a result of interferring with permissions or wakelocks.
Also this is kinda missing the question of the thread.

Dark3n said:
But then don't complain if the apps malfunction as a result of interferring with permissions or wakelocks.
Also this is kinda missing the question of the thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trying to figure out how either of the options I listed does not address the concerns in the OP......
I think you should re-read the OP. Perhaps slower.
Betterbatterystats- used to indicate apps that are using wakelocks that prevent or interrupt deep sleep. Does nothing else. Does not stop them or even hinder them in any way. Its simply a tool to identify problem apps. How does that interfere with the apps themselves?
Pdroid-gives the ability to block (or regulate) unwanted actions from the apps specified by the user. Basically solves the permissions concern in the OP. And does not require root access to operate. The whole point of this software is to interfere with the users apps. If a program is looking into my contacts, I'd like to be able to stop it. If a downloaded app stops functioning because it wants access to my contacts for no discernable reason, delete the app. This app is only needed because of the plethora of greedy sometimes malicious developers releasing software that invades user privacy.
Rebel60, feel free to peruse these threads and see if either is the right fit for you.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1357056
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1179809
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel

Aerocaptain said:
Trying to figure out how either of the options I listed does not address the concerns in the OP......
I think you should re-read the OP. Perhaps slower.
Betterbatterystats- used to indicate apps that are using wakelocks that prevent or interrupt deep sleep. Does nothing else. Does not stop them or even hinder them in any way. Its simply a tool to identify problem apps. How does that interfere with the apps themselves?
Pdroid-gives the ability to block (or regulate) unwanted actions from the apps specified by the user. Basically solves the permissions concern in the OP. And does not require root access to operate. The whole point of this software is to interfere with the users apps. If a program is looking into my contacts, I'd like to be able to stop it. If a downloaded app stops functioning because it wants access to my contacts for no discernable reason, delete the app. This app is only needed because of the plethora of greedy sometimes malicious developers releasing software that invades user privacy.
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is viewing aquired wakelocks helping the OP understand what aquiring a wakelock does, and why the app did it? It's not about who, but what and why. Any type of wakelock an app aquires prevents deep sleep and a wakelock can not be used to interrupt a device that is in deep sleep.
Again the question was not about blocking permissions, but why some apps want all those permissions and why no one seems concerned with the obvious privacy issue.
While PDroid does not require root to operate, it does require it to be installed, so in the end it still needs a rooted device.
Why did you install an app that needs a worrying permission for no discernable reason anyways?
Thanks for the general developer insult. Developers really are the greediest folks *sarcasm* of them all.
Where did you take that from? How many developers of greedy apps did you ask about the permissions they request?
You can't really make that assumption as just a requested permission doesn't do anything at all by itself and what the app is actually doing with it, is unknown without sourcecode.
...and now i jumped aboard the off topic train, damn

In most cases, it does not matter why an app uses wakelocks. The fact that it does alone is important. It allows the user to identify the trouble app and either tinker with its settings to reduce the wakelock or delete it altogether if the app is not important to the user. Generally speaking, if I would like to maximize my battery endurance, the need to minimize wakelocks is a necessity. After several months of use, a user may not remember every setting he/she setup in their apps. Utilizing betterbatterystats, one could identify the apps that use short sync intervals such as email syncing every 15 minutes or weather syncing every 30 minutes and change them to longer sync periods which would dramatically decrease those pesky wakelocks and save some battery life. Both of those simple examples illustrate in general terms, how important knowledge of wakelocks could be to the battery hungry user. This of course is only one of many applications this program can be used for.
My Pdroid example, once again was a generic sample of the many ways app privacy is a concern. There are a ton of apps on the market that uses the internet even though the internet isn't needed to run the program. Yes more than not, the app is either varifying license files or uploading "anonymous user stats," however that is not all cases and users should be able to control that app and the information it transmits.
Finally, yes I looked up your information and noticed the developer notation and knew you would be offended by my developer comment. But I did not mean to insinuate that you were in that minority. I am unfamiliar with your work. Android is an open source platform and users should have full control over their devices. That is why I through those options out there. Anyone that disagrees with my full control statement should move to the iPhone and enjoy its closed platform.
Rebel60, I hope you find a way to fully utilize your device without fear of privacy infringement or apps that excessively deplete your battery. There are many people on XDA with a passion for these devices. And many different opinions. Take the time to evaluate your options and pick the right solution for you.
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel

Aerocaptain said:
In most cases, it does not matter why an app uses wakelocks. The fact that it does alone is the issue. Generally speaking, if I would like to maximize my battery endurance, the need to minimize wakelocks is a necessity. After several months of use, a user may not remember every setting he/she setup in their apps. Utilizing betterbatterystats, one could identify the apps that use short sync intervals such as email syncing every 15 minutes or weather syncing every 30 minutes. Both of those simple examples illustrate in general terms, how important knowledge of wakelocks could be to the battery hungry user. With that knowledge one could change their sync intervals and save precious battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, it would definitely help a user identifying battery drainers and in those cases it does not matter why the wakelock was aquired if it is what causes the drain. But the question was not about batteries, but about what/why wakelocks are and the description of the wakelock permission itself.
While BetterBatteryStats being a great tool, it does not answer that question. (Hence my offtopic remark)
Aerocaptain said:
My Pdroid example, once again was a generic sample of the many ways app privacy is a concern. There are a ton of apps on the market that uses the internet even though the internet isn't needed to run the program. Yes more than not, the app is either varifying license files or uploading "anonymous user stats," however that is not all cases and users should be able to control that app and the information it transmits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While bug reports or anonymous statistics are one part of it, i think most of the internet permission needs come from ads that are displayed. I don't use ads, so i'm a bit unfamiliar on that topic.
If solely googles licensing service is used, the internet permission is not needed, just the 'CHECK_LICENSE' permission (which is an extra permission just for that purpose).
It is also often used to update the welcome dialogs with news, if a dev does not want to release a new version everytime he wants to tell his users something.
Aerocaptain said:
Finally, yes I looked up your information and noticed the developer notation and knew you would be offended by my developer comment. But I did not mean to insinuate that you were in that minority. I am unfamiliar with your work. Android is an open source platform and users should have full control over their devices. That is why I through those options out there. Anyone that disagrees with my full control statement should move to the iPhone and enjoy its closed platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not denying that there are greedy and or malicous devs out there. It was the 'plethora of greedy sometimes malicious developers' that threw me a bit off. I see you meant it differently, as you wrote 'in that minority'. As english is not my main language, i might have understood it a bit too harsh too .
Most of my work falls into the 'Tools' category, if you have question about them (or the permissions ), write me a PM.
I fully agree that everyone should have full control over their devices and i also think that users should have the possibility of choice (i.e. apple selecting apps that are published vs androids more or less freedom of apps, though one might have to sort through a 'plethora' of useless apps, i wouldn't trade it for apples store).
[I needed all those big quotes to reflect what i'm responding to as you seem to edit your posts alot after you made the. Makes it a bit difficult to answer ]

Thanks
Dark3n said:
No worries, no toes are being stepped on.
I agree that the permissions required by apps can sometimes look worrying.
But the description is often misleading. Some times it just looks very intrusive but that permission is needed for something alot more simple. It's a broad topic.
Also alot of users are just not concerned by this or just go with the crowd.
Write the developer and ask him what the permissions are needed for, if his apps description is unclear on that or the permissions seem unrelated to the apps purpose.
When it says, prevents your device from sleeping, it is most likely used to prevent the screen from turning off or dimming while something is progressing on screen. It is also needed to ensure that the cpu finishes the current operation if you press the devices sleep button, so it doesn't stop at some random point which might lead to problems for the app.
If there is a specific app and its permissions you are worried you could just SEARCH and then make a thread and ask about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the answer. I think this best answers what I was concerned about. A lot of apps say that they can dial numbers in your contacts, alter settings, and a lot of other things that make me hesitant to download the app.
My phone is not rooted, although I would like for it to be, but am afraid I will brick it if I don't do something right. I don't know anything about wavelocks etc.

Rebel60 said:
Thanks for the answer. I think this best answers what I was concerned about. A lot of apps say that they can dial numbers in your contacts, alter settings, and a lot of other things that make me hesitant to download the app.
My phone is not rooted, although I would like for it to be, but am afraid I will brick it if I don't do something right. I don't know anything about wavelocks etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whether your new to android or a veteran, XDA has all of the information you'll need to educate yourself. Rooting is not for everyone and should only be attempted by someone comfortable with the process. It does however open huge doors to more control and customization with your device. My advice to you is first get to know the Android platform for a few months. In the meantime do some research and see for yourself the pros and cons of rooting. There are dozens of threads with people that are in the same situation as you. Learn from them and talk with them. If you have a direct question about android, feel free to PM me. I'd be more than happy to help in any way I can. Good luck & enjoy your device.
Sent from CDMA V6 SC GNexus w/Liquid & Franco.kernel

Rooting is pretty simple if you invest some reading time. Just make sure to search alot before asking .
Also be aware that giving an app root access is equivalent to granting every possible permission there is and more.
I'm sure most users are not fully aware of that.
So allowing an app root access is a huge trust investment in the dev, don't do it for fishy looking apps .

Read the description
Try reading through the apps full description. A lot of developers will explain why their app needs those scary sounding permissions.
If they don't explain, you could always contact the developer (seems almost like google requires app listings to include a 'contact the developer' link somewhere).

App Permissions - Little Help Please

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.