I bet a cookie that this will be used to kill apps like NewPipe and Revanced.
Yep.
I've already seen it try to disable sideloaded apps. Was yet one more motivator to go to a de-googled device (specifically DivestOS). I can't do Graphene with my current device, but my next phone will be a Pixel 5.
Why a Pixel 5? It's end of life already.
Currently using an Essential Ph1. Paid $100 for it. Runs fast. Faster than my friends newer phones.
I see no reason to pay hundreds of dollars for a phone. I'd rather pay $130 for a good condition Pixel 5 that has the features I want, and I can afford to keep a testing phone around or use it as a hot spare, and still pay less than a "new" phone.
I have sideloaded apps where the malicious code has been removed (e.g. a Spotify client without ads). I bet this is an attempt to block them.
But... they could've already done that with current tools? Not like these change the package ID often.
They could, but I think that would be too obvious. Why such system they could flag it at OS level with a big, scary warning and claim it was for security sake.
I bet a cookie that this will be used to kill apps like NewPipe and Revanced.
Yep.
I've already seen it try to disable sideloaded apps. Was yet one more motivator to go to a de-googled device (specifically DivestOS). I can't do Graphene with my current device, but my next phone will be a Pixel 5.
Why a Pixel 5? It's end of life already.
Currently using an Essential Ph1. Paid $100 for it. Runs fast. Faster than my friends newer phones.
I see no reason to pay hundreds of dollars for a phone. I'd rather pay $130 for a good condition Pixel 5 that has the features I want, and I can afford to keep a testing phone around or use it as a hot spare, and still pay less than a "new" phone.
Or more an excuse to monitor and read app data
Or things like AdGuard.
I have sideloaded apps where the malicious code has been removed (e.g. a Spotify client without ads). I bet this is an attempt to block them.
But... they could've already done that with current tools? Not like these change the package ID often.
They could, but I think that would be too obvious. Why such system they could flag it at OS level with a big, scary warning and claim it was for security sake.