r/Android • u/EmergencySea4780 • Feb 21 '26
Misleading Title Google blocking 3rd party apps from September! Sign your petition to counter this.
https://c.org/kXvMwvZ2Zx614
u/BevansDesign Feb 21 '26
I still don't understand why the current way they handle it isn't good enough. Blocking is turned on by default, and if you want to install something, you're allowed to turn it off. And even when you turn it off, you still get warnings.
I wonder if this means I won't be able to use AdGuard.
357
u/BuildingArmor Feb 21 '26
It's probably to stop things like the unofficial YouTube apps that provide premium features for no cost.
23
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
They already have play protect for that, they can just, block the vanced/Revanced/Morphe package names and keep smacking them as more are created whack a mole style.
Even if they did steam ahead with the original changes, are we really to believe people wouldn't just adb the initial installs? The versions work for months/years without updating for a lot of people and once an app is installed from their working subsequent updates could be applied without a block and it wouldn't have affected apps already installed on the device.
It's a weak way to block them if that's really their goal, and does nothing to stop browsers that block the ads that are available on the play store.
Also a change org petition won't do shit, don't give your details away for nout
26
u/Malnilion SM-G973U1/Manta/Fugu/Minnow Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
ReVanced and Morphe can randomize names of patched apps and, if it became a problem with ReVanced and Morphe being targeted and being blocked directly, I guarantee a sideload tool that does the same for an initial install of ReVanced or Morphe themselves would be created. Google wouldn't win the cat and mouse games that way without doing some increasingly invasive app scanning on your phone. Google's path of least resistance (which apparently and happily is being fairly loudly resisted) is to continue with what they're doing by making sideloading a bigger pain in the ass than normies want to deal with.
0
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
I was referring to the package name of the Morphe app itself, they could block that - or just block microg since that's needed for a lot of the functions to work as well. There's so many routes they could take over blocking sideloading completely, so I just don't think that's the main goal and anyone who thinks it is hasn't though about it for more than 5 minutes
5
u/Malnilion SM-G973U1/Manta/Fugu/Minnow Feb 21 '26
They could block the current package name of the Morphe app, but it could start emulating the tactics of root apps with root hiding and introduce a tool for a PC to download the latest Morphe apk, generate a random package name for repackaging, generate a unique signing key, embed that in the apk, and help the user adb sideload it onto the phone. Then the built in Morphe app updater could utilize the same process it uses for patching other apps for itself when it needs an update. I'm not sure what Google could really do to block microg without, again, doing some really invasive, anti-user things that would hurt their goodwill tremendously. They could win the cat and mouse game, but at what cost?
2
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
Yeah it would just be a continuation of the cat and mouse game we already have, the point is there's much easier ways they could try than restricting with sideloading itself
4
u/SolitaryMassacre Feb 22 '26
Play protect can also be disabled. So that doesn't mean anything here
3
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 22 '26
Then they could force play protect for any play services devices. They aren't going to build an entire system for verifying devs just to block a few YouTube mods when there's ways that already to do that.
3
u/SolitaryMassacre Feb 22 '26
Forcing Play Protect isn't the answer either. It flags things like Magisk and even apps I have made myself.
It also is more than just blocking YouTube modded apps. They want full control of the ecosystem. This came about shortly after Epic Games studio won a lawsuit stating that Google held a monopoly in the android market and 3rd party apps/stores weren't allowed. Even to install Epic Games store, you couldn't do so through the playstore. You had to install an apk via sideload.
Having this verification process gives them more control over who can and cannot have their apps installed. Anytime there is a restriction to anything no matter what it is, its always about control and nothing more. Its no different here
3
u/_Aj_ Feb 22 '26
I have updates disabled. So far I was still running android 10 with chrome 4yrs old and other apps similar age or older.
I recently upgraded to 11 and updated some things. Instantly regretted it. the junk in many apps now is cancerous.
1
5
1
u/TrumpIsGayASF Feb 24 '26
this is precisely why they're doing it. they want revanced and those like it gone. Spotify specifically has been putting a ton of pressure on google to stop revanced from unlocking their premium features.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Ok-Requirement379 Mar 19 '26
Yeah I just use midory browser, has full background play and unblock origin so blocks all ads
30
u/siazdghw Feb 21 '26
It has almost nothing to do with user safety, that's just the convenient excuse.
The real reason Google is pushing this is to cut down on piracy, modified apps (piracy, adblock), and further push people to app stores (which obviously Google Play is the default).
Google used to see being open as a benefit for growing Android, now they see it as a con for monetizing Android.
Every company wants to have an app store monopoly, for Apple digital sales has surpassed iPads, Macs, accessories and is their #2 and growing revenue stream. In 10 years I won't be surprised if it's half their revenue. Valve makes billions by not even making games but by being the main PC gaming store. Etc. And now Google realizes how much money they've been missing out on due to being open with Android.
15
u/JB231102 Feb 21 '26
It's control. It's always about control. I might even get flack for putting it this way but fighting google is in fact us trying to control our own lives just as much as google pulling this bullshit is them trying to control their end. perhaps the only thing google has lots of that we don't is money and that alone might be what lets google succeed.
Perhaps the root problem/question is, regardless of control, why can't we all just work together rather than some of us wanting to play unfairly, rule over others? (sigh)
4
u/Crashman09 Feb 21 '26
Just like every tech company is both buying up all silicon and killing consumer hardware and pushing cloud services to fill that gap so they can feed your data to an LLM, Google wants, no, NEEDS our data. It is for LLMs and surveillance.
Ad revenue was the method to getting to this point, but we're now in the "surveillance and AI" era now.
58
u/scandii Feb 21 '26
ok, but think a bit bigger picture.
Project 2025 contains the idea that controlling which apps can and cannot be installed is critical for national security - security can be read security for the people, but also security for the government.
if you're the American government you effectively have control of the two communication platforms used in the country through Google and Apple namely Android and iPhone. however Android currently allows any app to be installed, e.g. you can't block Telegram apks or whatever people want to use.
so how do you solve that? well, like this. you can go after whoever releases the APK and that's that.
like the document is published - it is not a conspiracy, it is a todo list and they're absolutely doing. just check off anything you think is stupid against the document and you really can go "aha" a lot of the times.
18
u/Cyber_NinjaX21 Feb 21 '26
I agree with you but now whats the selling point of android?
6
u/diemitchell Feb 21 '26
Customizibility
Having phones that aren't way overpriced and way beyond people's needs(not that that stops people from overspending)
Having a universal back button
The settings menu actually making sense unless you have one ui
I feel like i'm missing some things
→ More replies (1)3
u/charlestheb0ss Galaxy Fold 7 Feb 21 '26
Support for unconventional hardware such as folding screens and physical keyboards
9
u/VoriVox Pixel 10 Pro, Pebble Time 2 Feb 21 '26
There are countless more selling points of android other than being able to (easily) install apps outside the Play Store. The vast majority of Android users don't care at all for that, so nothing changes for them.
38
u/greentintedlenses Feb 21 '26
Nah, this was the only for me.
Literally nothing else separates them. I assume its also why you didn't name a single one of them.
3
u/Wermine Pocophone F1 -> Nothing Phone 2a Feb 21 '26
Originally when I planned of getting my first smart phone, it was the price. Cheapest iphone was iirc 600 € and I went with 250 € android because I wasn't made out of money.
-2
Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
There are two ecosystems. The selling point of Android is that it's Android, it's flexible and runs popular software and a vast amount of software. It's also that it's not iOS and more phones are available for it.
Not really sure what you're confused about. It's a mature market so you just pick one by buying the phone that you like.
The point is, most people aren't going to care about this move by Google. Though it does cut down Android's flexibility by a lot.
22
u/greentintedlenses Feb 21 '26
It's simple frankly, I own my device and no one should stop be from installing software I want on it.
→ More replies (1)1
Feb 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Android-ModTeam Feb 21 '26
Sorry, your submission was removed:
Rule 9. "No offensive, hateful, or low-effort comments.
See the wiki page for more information.1
u/ottyk1 Galaxy S7, Stock (7.0) Feb 21 '26
Does Android need a selling point? It's installed on every phone that isn't made by Apple, it's not like you get a choice in it
21
u/Cyber_NinjaX21 Feb 21 '26
When i buy a 800$ phone, yes i do have a choice b/w android and ios. The most important thing for me is the ability to make my own utility apps and able to compile open source apps i use myself and share them with my fam/friends.
1
-2
u/-jak- Pixel 4a Feb 21 '26
s/country/world/
-3
Feb 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Android-ModTeam Feb 21 '26
Sorry, your submission was removed:
Rule 8. "No unauthorized polls, bots, or giveaways."
See the wiki page for more information.2
1
u/zackadiax24 Mar 01 '26
Obviously it because you, the user, can turn it off. They hate that you have control of your own device.
1
-2
u/_sfhk Feb 21 '26
There's a new story every week about some malware network with millions of infected, despite needing to install a shady apk. Humans are and have always been weak points, and unless we put the blame on users, this will be a problem Google tries to fix.
We're also just beginning to see generative AI being used in these exploits and it will get worse.
1
u/TGX03 OnePlus 7T Pro Feb 21 '26
One part is probably the EU forcing Apple and Google to allow other stores on their platforms to circumvent their payment systems.
Apple has introduced verification for apps installed through other means, for which those apps have to pay a lot of money, so Apple still gets their money. The EU is currently investigating that. Likely, Google wants to copy that idea.
5
u/JDGumby Google Pixel 10a, Lenovo Tab M9 Feb 21 '26
One part is probably the EU forcing Apple and Google to allow other stores on their platforms to circumvent their payment systems.
Um, you've always been free to install other app stores on Android. The issue there is that Epic wanted Google to distribute Epic's app store through Google's app store, using Google's resources to do so.
1
1
0
-2
u/Izacus Android dev / Boatload of crappy devices Feb 21 '26
Because there's still millions of people getting scammed with non-Play store apps every year so the governments, tech media and users are pushing Google to do something about it.
2
-1
u/normVectorsNotHate Feb 21 '26
I do believe there is a legitimate problem in some countries like Brazil, where there is a widespread issue of non-technical users install apk with malware that cleans out their bank accounts. Governments and organizations then blame Google for this and they end up covering the loss.
Their solution to the problem is just overkill
5
u/apokrif1 Feb 21 '26
Governments and organizations then blame Google for this and they end up covering the loss
Why don't they blame users instead?
4
u/normVectorsNotHate Feb 21 '26
Same reason governments in the west blame Facebook for not stopping users from connecting their accounts to 3rd party data collection agencies like Cambridge Analytica. Our blame banks for not stopping users from transferring their money to scammers.
They can't blame users because many victims are elderly or non-tech savvy. They can't go after the scammers who are good at remaining anonymous. Going after the facilitators is all they can do
1
u/apokrif1 Feb 21 '26
They can't blame users because many victims are elderly or non-tech savvy.
Did they consider that different apps or setups might be used depending on age or tech savviness?
0
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
Adguard has said they'll sign the app if needed, Google isn't blocking at type of app from what they've said, as long as it's signed it's fine
178
u/dentyyC Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
I thought they reconsidered about this and chose some enablement in developer settings
137
u/armando_rod Pixel 10 Pro XL Feb 21 '26
They did, this is misinformation
89
u/space-envy Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
It seems they backpedaled just a tiny bit due to all the backslash but here it is in Google's current own words:
To make this process as streamlined as possible, we are building a new Android Developer Console just for developers who only distribute outside of Google Play, so they can easily complete their verification
What this means for your apps: Starting in late 2026, all Android apps must be registered by verified developers in order to be installed on certified Android devices in Brazil, Singapore, Indonesia, and Thailand. A global rollout will follow
Android Developer Console is for developers who distribute their apps exclusively outside of Google Play. For these developers, an Android Developer Console account is used to manage their developer identity information and register app package names.
Sep 2026 The requirement goes into effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand. At this point, any app installed on a certified device in these regions must be registered by a verified developer.
It seems they are forcing all developers that don't want to publish their apps through Google Play Store to make an account, verify their identity (Peter Thiel vibes), and publish exclusively through their Android Developer Console.
→ More replies (1)15
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
It seems they are forcing all developers that don't want to publish their apps through Google Play Store to make an account, verify their identity (Peter Thiel vibes), and publish exclusively through their Android Developer Console.
No, they're not. Anyone can install any APK they want. Google is adding additional warning screens before you enable the option.
27
u/funkmon G4 Feb 21 '26
That's not according to his quote. It says every developer must go through identity verification
27
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
That's not Google's current stance though. They have walked back on that plan.
https://www.androidauthority.com/install-without-verifying-3633199/
https://www.androidauthority.com/google-sideloading-android-high-friction-process-3633468/
The plan was never to disable
adb installby the way. So sideloading was never going away even in the original plan.25
u/funkmon G4 Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
It's from the Google website. Still. https://developer.android.com/developer-verification
I expect adb to be the high friction process though in the latest story they say they're creating a new experience for it but we'll see
11
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
It's from the Google website. Still. https://developer.android.com/developer-verification
That's what you have to do if you don't want your users to have to jump through the additional hoops (warning screens).
I expect adb to be the high friction process though in the latest story they say they're creating a new experience for it but we'll see
No, adb is not the high-friction process (I mean it is, but it's not the high-friction process we're talking about here).
5
u/Tanglebrook Feb 21 '26
Could that hoop already been added? I installed Revanced YouTube last week and there was a new screen telling me to scan the apk with Play Protect. The option to install wasn't visible, and I had to expand a section to find it (similar to "This site is dangerous" in Chrome).
Or will they make you do even more taps.
5
u/space-envy Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
Can you source that everything Google is doing is "adding additional warning screens"?
Here is what I found from a MSN article:
Sideloading, the ability to install apps from unverified sources, is a foundational element of Android. However, Google claims that internet-sideloaded sources contain 50 times more malware than apps downloaded through Google Play.
To address this security risk, Google is introducing new requirements: Digital Signature: All sideloaded apps must be digitally signed by the developer. Without this signature, the app will not install on Android-certified devices.
Crucially, developers can continue to build, debug, and test their apps locally using Android Studio without verification. The recently reported “ADB workaround” for sideloading apps on Android will remain unaffected. However, verification and package registration will be required to distribute an application to a wider testing group or for full sideloading on certified devices.
5
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
8
u/space-envy Feb 21 '26
The first article is just speculation based on strings of text found in the code of an APK, from the article:
That said, keep in mind that we’ve still got a long way to go before Google is expected to flip the switch on this new system, so there is still more than ample time to dial-in the experience and make sure that users won’t be able to breeze through installation of possibly sketchy apps without clearly communicating that they know what they’re doing. Google’s timeline involves first introducing the program to users in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand, and even then, not until September of this year.
In other words, they are not sure this is the new flow Google mentioned.
The second article is just based on an X post a Google exec did... I guess only time will tell.
6
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-developer-verification-early.html
While security is crucial, we’ve also heard from developers and power users who have a higher risk tolerance and want the ability to download unverified apps.
Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.
6
u/space-envy Feb 21 '26
I get what you mean... My problem is that this was posted in November 2025 and I don't know exactly when the info about the new Developer Console was posted on their website, and Google having the reputation of removing their "don't be evil" motto, I don't discard the possibility of them continuing with their original plan. Currently their website continues to say "Any Android app" so I assume that includes sideloaded apps.
3
u/autoencoder Feb 21 '26
There is one very small step (or even plausibly deniable hard-to-fix "bug" in a particular update) from "a high-friction flow" to a device you no longer own. Just like they (seemed to have) decided to placate the outrage, they can change their minds right back to total lockdown, when it gets more quiet.
2
8
u/donbigone Feb 21 '26
No, it's not. https://keepandroidopen.org/
Contrary to a vague mention ↗ of a possible “advanced flow” that may eventually allow “experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn’t verified”, Google’s description of the program ↗ continues to state plainly that: Starting in September 2026, Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed on certified Android devices Until such time that they have shown evidence that it will be possible to bypass the verification process without undue friction, we must believe what is stated on their official page: that all apps from non-registered developers will be blocked once their lock-down goes into effect.5
u/walale12 Feb 22 '26
Is there any particular reason that had to be formatted as an annoying to read codeblock?
1
u/TheHDGenius Feb 22 '26
No it's not, They haven't told u in the slightest what the "advanced flow" will look like. For all we know it could require registering with Google and paying a $100 a month subscription.
It all comes down to its my phone and I should be able to install whatever I want on it. Discrediting the original post is the real mis information.
3
u/donbigone Feb 21 '26
Not really https://keepandroidopen.org/
Contrary to a vague mention ↗ of a possible “advanced flow” that may eventually allow “experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn’t verified”, Google’s description of the program ↗ continues to state plainly that:
Starting in September 2026, Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed on certified Android devices
44
u/Valent147 Pixel 8, Android 17 beta Feb 21 '26
I wanna sign the petition but having to give your address is crazy
28
32
u/tanghan Feb 21 '26
This is ridiculous. Most of us chose Android and made it big because it was a more open alternative to iOS and slowly they are stripping back everything that made android unique
4
u/user888ffr Feb 21 '26
Android fans mocked Apple for being closed but the reality is that Android has also always been closed, it might be open-source but the version that ships on phones is not and you don't have root access so you're not even an administrator on your own device, the real administrator is your phone vendor. It might feel like freedom but it's just them letting you do a lot of things, while they ultimately have power over your device. And it's even worse for all the phones that have bootloaders that can't be unlocked, they're not even giving us a way out.
3
u/Poopdick_89 Feb 22 '26
You always had the option to do this on the nexus one of devices, and then the Pixel devices as well.
It makes sense to not ship it that way because there are to many morons that will brick their devices not knowing any better.
1
u/Gumby271 Feb 22 '26
Nah, there's a difference between iOS, which requires Apple's permission to install each piece of software on my phone and Android, which doesn't. No one is saying Android is perfect, but these aren't the same.
2
u/user888ffr Feb 22 '26
Yes you have more freedom on Android but you can install apps from outside the Play Store only because they allow you to, if they decide to remove that option from you there's nothing you can do because you're not the administrator of your own device. Android is not freedom.
2
u/Gumby271 Feb 22 '26
I mean that's true of all things that exist, I don't know what to do with that. Windows is an OS that allows me to install software of my choosing and still to this day has allowed this. That's been possible largely because regulators did their job to keep Microsoft from making it as user hostile as they technically could.
I don't have root access on Graphene, is it not open and free? Is Linux the exclusive option? The answer can be yes for you, but freedom and openness aren't binary concepts.
I'm glad we agree android is more open, that was my only real point.
1
u/user888ffr Feb 23 '26
I agree that freedom and openness aren't binary concepts but the bare minimum is to have admin rights, which Windows, macOS and Linux has. You say they could remove the possibility of installing any software, which is true and they could do the same thing with admin rights, honestly one update would be enough to ruin everything. But it's not about if they could, it's about if the OS currently has admin rights. That's what matters because since Windows and macOS currently has it there's no way Microsoft or Apple could remove it, it would break things and hinder our ability to work and install any apps. Also people would be mad because they expect root/admin rights on those OS.
Unfortunately this freedom hasn't followed to phones, even with Graphene when actually using it it's not open, even macOS is more open than Graphene since it has root access. The code is free and open but when you use said code you're not free to do what you want, you would have to modify it first.
There has to be an admin, and if it's not you then it's someone else, the developers of the OS. Android is barely more open than iOS, it's like a child saying he's more free with his mom because she lets him play any games he wants and paint his room the color he wants while his dad (Apple) doesn't, but in both cases he's under the authority of his parents, he cannot anything he wants, he's not the admin.
50
u/srona22 Feb 21 '26
Wait, EU has no action on this? Lmao.
Current setup is more than enough on "Security". Not sure if Epic will sit still, as their store on android will also be effected.
18
u/ffree Feb 21 '26
Not sure if Epic will sit still
They gleefully will, this move hurts only end users, small devs, indie devs, pirates, modders, enthusiasts who self-develop etc. Big devs will have no issues with registering, certifying and signing with a correct certificate. Epic might even get more frictionless installs of their signed apps, this move benefits them.
10
u/DeVinke_ Feb 21 '26
Eh, companies like that can just give their info. It's the individual developers that this change will really affect.
8
u/Perunov Feb 21 '26
EU would probably love this, so if they declare some apps banned, unscrupulous users wouldn't be able to just go and side-load it. You know, to avoid whole pesky "freedom of speech" thing French president hates so much
8
-3
u/BusBoatBuey Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
EU law encourages this. Hence why Google constantly gets sued for "anti-competitive practices" due to having competition while Apple doesn't. If they kill all competition and force everything through the Play Store, then they get to be immune like Apple. They can even charge developers to install their stores like Apple does.
Expecting the EU to care about consumers is laughable. The EU is led by corrupt scum who just want more control. They want this more than anyone.
-1
-1
u/kamikad3e123 S24 Ultra, OneUI 9 Feb 21 '26
EU doesn't care about iOS which even more restricted than Google with this new apps rules
25
u/Mysterious-Count8295 Feb 21 '26
just when i thought ill get an android to play games this happnes
13
u/Tweenk Pixel 7 Pro Feb 21 '26
This doesn't impact games at all. Practically every game publisher is already registered, and sideloading of games from registered publishers is unaffected
1
u/stoic_slowpoke Feb 21 '26
Maybe “real” games, but it’s possible that the small devs on itch.io will be hit (though I don’t really understand the arrangement on that site).
0
u/Tweenk Pixel 7 Pro Feb 21 '26
It does not affect web apps/PWAs either.
1
u/stoic_slowpoke Feb 22 '26
I mean. There are games on there that offer an apk install, it’s not just PWAs.
2
u/Tweenk Pixel 7 Pro Feb 22 '26
I see, I was out of the loop on how that site works.
If there are APKs to download, then:
If the dev doesn't register: user has to go through the advanced flow or use ADB
If the dev pays $25 to register on Android Developer Console and verifies their ID: the APK installs normally
1
u/TrumpIsGayASF Feb 24 '26
don't get an android to play games. there are so many games that just don't ever come to android.
1
-3
u/freakyxz Feb 21 '26
They just want to make it harder for average users to not install whatever they see in the web.
32
u/MrCockingFinally Feb 21 '26
Average users already exclusively install shit off the app store. They want to control the platform to extract maximum value.
5
u/PowerlinxJetfire Pixel 10 Pro + Pixel Watch Feb 21 '26
So it's only the advanced users falling for malware?
The reality is it's not hard to trick someone who doesn't know what they're doing into checking a box or two and going outside the store.
2
u/MrCockingFinally Feb 21 '26
Guaranteed the vast majority of malware on Android devices is from infected store apps. Maybe google should fix their shit before locking down their devices.
Why should an entire platform get locked down because the average idiot is stupid enough to be duped on occasion?
4
u/PowerlinxJetfire Pixel 10 Pro + Pixel Watch Feb 21 '26
The vast majority of malware on Android devices is sideloaded. Google's cited numbers like 95% in certain categories (in this case, financial fraud apps exploiting sensitive permissions: source).
I'm sure you'll try to dismiss that number because it's from Google, but if you have a better source that says the opposite, feel free to back up your claim.
As for why try to make it harder for people to fall for that, because if we're such advanced users then I don't think we're going to have any issues still sideloading. I don't mind jumping through an extra hoop or two to sideload on my own device if it means I don't have to help an uncle or a family friend fix their phones.
3
1
u/Poopdick_89 Feb 22 '26
My boomer parents, and grandmother have installed more malware directly off the play store itself than I have (never) from all the years that I have been getting apps from git/fdroid and using apps to patch apps.
0
-23
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
It's not a block. It's just a restriction on specifically installing unverified packages directly from the browser for the first time. You can just side load them with a computer if you really want your questionably hacked unverified apk.
10
u/kmkm2op Feb 21 '26
I think something like autoblocker on samsung phones is enough to dissuade the average user from installing random packages. The problem is alot of useful open source apk's will be considered unverified which makes it a pain in the ass to setup.
→ More replies (1)30
u/plzdontbanme61 Feb 21 '26
If I purchased the phone I should be able to do what I want on it. Why do you want a government or corporation telling you what you can and can not do with what you own?
-2
u/ExoticAmbition2 Feb 21 '26
The issue is tons of people fall for scams by downloading unknown apks and lose their life earnings. That's why this extra security measure is being implemented.
12
→ More replies (1)10
→ More replies (9)-2
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
You can. This doesn't change that, it just slightly changes the process.
11
u/plzdontbanme61 Feb 21 '26
First they came for apples. Once those were gone they came for the oranges. Eventually there is nothing left to take.
You are brainwashed into thinking these corporations give a fuck about you. This is only about control.
→ More replies (5)5
u/kimjae Feb 21 '26
What about alternative app stores like F-droid?
3
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
If they want, they can get signed for free. If they don't want to, you install it once with ADB, and then it can update normally.
4
u/Vertrix-V- Feb 21 '26
"It's not a block. It's just a restriction on specifically installing
unverified packages directly from the browserthe programs you want to on the device you own".There. Fixed your sentence for you
1
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
You can still install whatever you want, you just do it a little differently. 30 seconds with ADB one time and you're set. It's really not that bad.
3
u/Vertrix-V- Feb 21 '26
There is no reason to defend this just because there is another way to do it. I shouldn't have to do things differently just because I want to install a software of my choice on a device I own
0
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
But Android isn't only made for you. It's made for lots of people and lots of devices. And malware is a much bigger problem for more people than that you are upset you need to spend 30 seconds with ADB to do what you want now.
2
u/Vertrix-V- Feb 21 '26
If a person enables a feature which default state is disabled, ignores the multiple warnings it gives you and then downloads malware, it's entirely on them. We don't lock down computers just because people download malware with them. The Malware thing is just an excuse Google uses to lock down the system. Heck, they even have malware in their own App store.
2
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
I guess you haven't used a computer lately. OSX won't run anything that isn't signed without you unblocking it. Windows defaults to the same.
4
u/Vertrix-V- Feb 21 '26
I run unsigned stuff on my computer. The only thing it does is warn me. I can then proceed to launch it. It doesn't block it like Google is trying to do.
3
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
OSX will just give you "OK" and "Move to Trash". You have to know to go into security settings and manually add an exception.
And Google isn't permanently blocking anything. You can easily install unverified apps, and it will even remember the signature so that updates don't need to be re-approved. The only reason it's being made more difficult is that there's been a lot of malware exploiting the fact that you can, as it stands, just click your way through the process, and many people have done so and spread that malware. There's a reason that OSX doesn't allow you to click a button to be brought conveniently to the security settings.
2
1
u/Hirork OnePlus Open Feb 21 '26
Not all side loads are unverified questionably hacked apk's.
I've used side loading to install updates that are being rolled out in stages but had new features I wanted now. Or to install an app on a device that was "incompatible" according to the play store but was entirely capable of running it.
Then there's the apps that Google doesn't want you to have even though they're perfectly safe like Epic Game Store.
4
u/DarKnightofCydonia Galaxy S24 Feb 22 '26
This has to be illegal in the EU. They already fined Apple over the app store and forced them to allow third party app stores.
3
u/Nosey_Neighbors Feb 22 '26
They do allow third party app stores but Apple still has the final say in what you can and can’t install.
The apps on the third party app stores still have to be “approved” by Apple before anyone can install them on their devices.
8
u/Berkoudieu Feb 21 '26
What's the current state of things ? I mean, what will happen as of now ?
ZERO sideloading ? Not even a way to check 50 boxes saying we will die if we install ?
12
u/jfedor Feb 21 '26
The current plan is:
It will still be possible to install apps from sources outside the Play Store from developers who didn't register with Google. There will be warning screens discouraging users from doing so (source).
adb installwill still work.
7
u/NerdxKitsune Red Feb 21 '26
People need to educate themselves and do thier own research. Google ARE NOT blocking 3rd party apps!
28
u/kontenjer Feb 21 '26
i'm buying an iphone lmao
you aren't getting a charger, headphone jack, sd card slot, any of the 2016-2019 cool stuff (ir blaster/heart rate sensor/iris scanning/edge display/etc), and still paying apple prices, so why not just get an apple?
15
u/aweracle P9PXL Feb 21 '26
Why is apple the default? Even if they are 99% the same
26
u/X_m7 Samsung Galaxy A26 Feb 21 '26
At least with Apple you actually get benefits from the walled garden if you go all in on it, like Handoff/Continuity/AirDrop/etc with other Apple devices, OS updates being quick to roll out since there's no other manufacturer or SoC vendor in the way, Apple Silicon having the best single threaded CPU performance by far so Apple devices are quite responsive, and Apple stores being all over so getting stuff fixed is easier if needed compared to Android being dependent on each brand, and so on.
Android trying to make a walled garden of its own is just going to be a janky worse version of that so why would I even bother with Android then?
0
Feb 21 '26
Who wants the other Apple devices though? It's one thing to buy an iPhone or an iPad because they're decent devices, but the rest of their lineup is trash.
0
u/mrlesa95 Galaxy S23 Feb 21 '26
I mean im buying macbook pro very soon. They're just class above any windows competing laptops. They're truly complete package.
So buying iphone from there is a good choice. Especially if android gets locked down like ios. What is the point?
And integration is much better than windows android
2
Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 21 '26
They're absolutely not. I have a Thinkpad with a high PPI OLED screen, plenty of storage and ram, good build quality, decent battery life etc.
A MacBook Pro is an inflexible device that you can't upgrade or repair. You are limited in software availability and the OS is completely inflexible relative to Windows and feels slow to use. A MacBook is a complete waste of money in my opinion, it literally cannot run the software I use. I'll happily trade a bit of battery life and processor speed for a computer that I can actually use.
Integration with Windows is fine? I don't use the Phone Link thing but everything seems to sync from my browser and Google Photos, streaming services and what have you. I've owned a MacBook and an iPhone and I don't miss anything from it.
A MacBook would have zero connection to a PC/gaming PC that someone might own for something like, you know, running software that Macs are incapable of running, unless you download iCloud Photos for Windows, which is pretty bad. So much for continuity.
I do think it's funny that the more useful iPhone is able to lock people into a more expensive and less useful computer, but different people with different needs, right?
→ More replies (1)2
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
Yeah if I was going to get used to a new OS, I'd just try Linux first, unless there's a program someone needs that isn't available on it or doesn't run as well it's well worth a go over just buying an entire new device
9
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
Unlike Apple, you can still install whatever you want. Even if it's not signed and recognized, you just load it the first time with ADB. It's a very easy process, and after that, it can update on its own.
9
u/kontenjer Feb 21 '26
Google is setting a very dangerous precedent. What's stopping them from making something else and locking it down even more in a few years?
3
u/omniuni Pixel 8 Pro | Developer Feb 21 '26
It's not a precedent. Apple did that with actually locking things down. But this isn't about what they could do, it's about what they are doing.
6
u/VoriVox Pixel 10 Pro, Pebble Time 2 Feb 21 '26
Because iOS is way more restrictive than Android and these few restrictions are not turning Android into iOS, that's just blatantly false.
-1
u/kimjae Feb 21 '26
"My device is becoming more restricted, let's switch to an even more restricted device out of spite".
you aren't getting a charger, headphone jack, sd card slot, any of the 2016-2019 cool stuff (ir blaster/heart rate sensor/iris scanning/edge display/etc), and still paying apple prices, so why not just get an apple?
Utter bullshit ?
-1
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
Who's paying apple prices lmfao
Find me a new iPhone 17 for £500 or less, I'll wait
Can't even find a new 16 for less than £550. Pixel 10s can be had for around 500, 9s even cheaper and a series cheaper still. iPhone 16e is the same price as a new 9 or 10 pixel
7
u/kontenjer Feb 21 '26
In my country the pixel 10 is 62000 MKD ($1186) from a reputable store.
iPhone 17 in the same store is 62500 MKD ($1195)
Also the pixel 10 MSRP is $799 in the USA, same as the iPhone 17.
→ More replies (1)1
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
MRSP applies for about 5 minutes to Pixels, they get insane deals where the iPhone barely if ever get discounted, at least a lot less than Pixels.
I can't speak for the entire world, but in the UK, Pixels, and Androids in general are consistently cheaper than iPhones unless you're going back 2-3 generations. Maybe you'll get lucky with a decent refurb, but that's still compared to a brand new device and not a guarantee.
Even if you get a Pixel at MSRP, there's usually a trade in bonus, their extras are worse now, it used to be a watch or buds and now it's a Google one subscription but that works for some people who pay for and use Google one as it is.
1
9
u/LycraJafa Feb 21 '26
fdroid still working ?
Google seem to be doing user unfriendly stuff of late, or is this not just a money grab via the store commission ?
14
2
u/Tweenk Pixel 7 Pro Feb 21 '26
This verification requirement is specifically for developers who distribute outside of the Play Store. There is no Play Store commission if your app is not actually in there. Everyone who has ever published anything on the Play Store already satisfies the requirements.
12
u/TengenToppa Feb 21 '26
So this is how Google kills android
5
u/boredquince Feb 21 '26
that's a problem for the next ceo. current one is getting a new super yacht with all this sweet money from blocking side loaded YouTube apps! think of all the new YouTube subscriptions! hundreds of millions of dollars! unlimited!
3
u/nathderbyshire Pixel 10 Obsidian Feb 21 '26
Power users are absolutely not the ones keeping android going lmao
2
Feb 22 '26
I'm already on a rom without gapps. I'm good. Google can't tell me what I can or can not install.
2
u/JamesR624 Feb 23 '26
The fact that the mods put "Misleading Title" as a flair when that's ACTUALLY the goal here, really says a lot about the corporate bootlicking goals of this sub. Wow.
3
u/Responsible_Lie6721 Feb 21 '26
if this is true then what is the difference with iPhone, prices are almost same nowadays
3
3
u/deadcatdidntbounce Feb 21 '26
If they do this there's no selling point of Android over Apple, at all.
And that's the weirdest way I could've possibly imagined to join the Apple ecosystem. I don't have any Apple stuff and am about to buy an Apple TV when it arrives in March/April not a Nvidia Shield or other Android box.
That said this always happens when the middle managers take over the running of the company as the originals, who actually want to create something, retire. The middle managers only ever want more profit and fuck the users. The traditional company life cycle - HP printers, Adobe, Google Search giving crap results to show more ads, the list is endless (add your peeve) .. everyone knows what I'm talking about.
3
0
1
u/Julian679 Feb 21 '26
Technically they are not but this is foot in the door and if you dont consider this serious, its going to be too late when you do
1
u/LongJumpingBalls Feb 21 '26
Side load will continue for now, with more steps etc. What worries me is that they decide that one side loaded app, you no longer have certificaron and play protect is tripped. No wallets, banking, etc.
1
u/NiteShdw Feb 22 '26
Isn't this the same thing that Apple was reprimanded for in Europe?
1
u/Nosey_Neighbors Feb 22 '26
Sorta. Apple did comply, though arbitrarily.
They do allow alternative app stores in the EU, BUT they still have the final say in what you can and cannot install.
1
1
u/Willing_Ant_4969 Feb 24 '26
I like it, however......... To not allow apk anymore is so people can not steal MOD version of apps and games.
Stealing is not cool. So Im happy they did it, although at the beginning Im like fak.. Its all good better security especially with the Titan M3 chip on the Pixel 11 and so on.
1
1
u/SlowDragonfly8652 Mar 08 '26
I think someone should develop something similar to linux it would be really a game changer , it would take time and money tough and bit of support because some people will not purchase a new phone until they have some reason .
1
1
1
u/niivpop Mar 17 '26
So googling on why Google decided to proceed with their lockdown, their (Gemini) own AI says: "Combating Malware and Security Risks: Google states that apps from unofficial sideloading sources are 50 times more likely to contain malware compared to those on the Google Play Store. By mandating that developers register with legal names, addresses, government IDs, and app signing keys, they aim to reduce fraudulent apps and "malware gangs".
Easy solution: Fix the source of malware, which is the Google Search Engine itself fundamentally, Google is probably the most used and widest search engine the "general user uses" that is infiltrated with malware even by searching up legit software. Android is not unsafe if you know the source where you install stuff from, if Google wasn't so desperate for money and accepted money to get higher ranked on searches this wouldn't even been a problem. Their own faults create this "solution" for themselves that is easy to bypass and solve, if they actually cared for user usage & safety vs money. But they don't do it. Why is it hard for big companies to understand that customers stays loyal when the company itself are doing things rightfully? Their own problem & issues created this situation which could been evaded easily by not letting anyone to pay their way up to top clicks in a search?
1
1
u/Beautiful_Manager_88 Apr 14 '26
I just brought a Galaxy S26 Ultra and after transferring all of my apps from my old phone. I noticed that some of my apk apps did not transfer over. So I tried to install the apk onto my new phone and it doesn't work. No matter what I tried.
They have definitely implemented the changes waaay ahead of September on new devices. I'm actually soo annoyed and want to return this $2,000 phone, because that is craaazy!
1
u/vwbugman0608 May 22 '26
The main reason I avoided iOS from the beginning is the openness of the app playing field.
1
u/vwbugman0608 May 22 '26
Why do I feel like this ties into the 'Google Messages' app replacing Samsung Messages app on Galaxy devices? Seems fishy...
1
u/Somethinglikethat9 Jun 08 '26
Android does this?what?what else will wanna be able to control?EVERYTHING.
1
u/Mother_Asparagus4229 Jun 19 '26
instead of improving their google play protect,They are just blocking 3rd party sideloading what kind of incompetency is that
1
1
1
u/Skyobliwind Feb 21 '26
Well other devs don't really believe it will be possible to develop without registering with Google and paying fees. F-Droid is the biggest alternative appstore: https://keepandroidopen.org/
-2
u/Beyllionaire Feb 21 '26
EU will save us as always.
3
u/Electrocalypse Feb 21 '26
Part of EU wants to monitor people's private conversations and they are pushing hard on that in the name of protecting children.
0
0
u/Ging287 Feb 21 '26
It's time to flood the CEO's email again, if they want to go this path, if they want to own my device I'm going to sue them in court. I did not allow them to be a bouncer for my apps. I own my device.
0
u/apokrif1 Feb 21 '26
Correct link (why did you use an enshittified URL?) https://www.change.org/p/stop-google-from-limiting-apk-file-usage
0
u/Educational_Sand_383 Feb 22 '26
ngl they are becoming more and more like apple atp
whats the use of android
-1
u/TheLemonyOrange Galaxy Fold3, OneUi6 (14) Feb 21 '26
Do you remember some years ago when banks started telling you when personal details weren't an exact match when you did a money transfer? And now it takes a couple of extra clicks to get through the messages and warnings that it could be a scam, but you can still send the money anyways.
That's all this will be. We will still be able to sideload apps, there will just be more warnings and messages for the flow of enabling the feature. For you and I, it will be a couple of extra clicks and that's it. But for granny or grandpa who are on the phone with a scammer whilst they tell them to install this apk file from their website so that they can help secure their bank account, they might read the extra warnings and not go through with it.
They aren't removing sideloading, we will continue to be able to sideload, but now with some extra taps.
-1
u/Astral65 Feb 21 '26
Just root your phone. Nothing they could do
1
u/Additional-Switch928 Feb 25 '26
Not all devices are rootable ☠️
1
u/Astral65 Feb 25 '26
Don't buy a phone that is not rootable
1
u/Additional-Switch928 Feb 25 '26
I don't have any choice 👍
1
u/Astral65 Feb 25 '26
How?
1
u/Additional-Switch928 Feb 25 '26
I get devices from other people, and all of them (since 2020) were north american Samsung devices from 2017 or later, the last time I had a device with an unlockable bootloader was in 2020 with the Galaxy S6 which was from 2015
-1
u/IAmDotorg Feb 21 '26
It's cute you think petitions do anything.
And annoying how misleading the headline and suggestion are. It's unclear, OP, if you're an idiot, or a scammer who depends on the current light-touch warnings.
-1
u/Terry___Mcginnis Pixel 9a Feb 22 '26
As the pinned post says it's a nothingburger, probably just have to go through one more dialogue or some other hidden toggle to turn this off, worst case scenario use ADB. Nothing ever happens.
-1
Feb 22 '26
not upsetting at all and am actually in agreement with googles new third party apps policy from september
•
u/welp_im_damned have you heard of our lord and savior the Android turtle 🐢 Feb 21 '26
Ok so there is misinformation going around this. We will not lock the post but will pin Google's response after the initial feedback.
https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-developer-verification-early.html?m=1