• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

PATH: iphone allows data mining, Android has protections.

5280Man

5280Man

Well-Known Member
Not sure if this has been discussed yet, didn't see anything, so I thought I'd throw it out there. PATH, a popular app on ios and has since been ported to Android, was recently caught taking your entire address book from your phone. Other social media apps have been found doing the same thing as well. ios allows for apps to data mine your info without your knowledge and without you giving it permission. Android, on the other hand, asks for permission. Apple has vowed to solve this issue. In other words, Apple will have to follow Android in asking people for permission and giving them that option. Android was on this from the very beginning. Now with that comes more options, options asking the user for input and to make decisions. Apple has been against allowing people to think for themselves by not giving these options. Along with that comes a more streamlined OS with less lines of code to run. A great idea in theory, but as Apple is realizing it's quickly becoming a major problem. Android has long been criticized for not being as 'easy' to use as ios and having too many options compared to ios. I have not been one of those critics, instead I have seen the options as useful and needed. Well, Apple's 'streamlined' 'give the user less options and make decisions for them' OS is causing some major security risks.
Android displays the permissions an app is requesting when you install it. Ios does not giving devs full access to everything. Can an app like PATH data mine on Android? Absolutely, but only after you the user give it permission to. Do more controls need to be in place? I think so, and so does Apple. Hence why Apple will have to follow in the footsteps of Android. Yet another way Apple has had to follow Android to stay relevant and in this case, safe. The big one was the drop down notifications. Apple copied it but Android has improved it even more in ICS. The notifications bar was one thing, but allowing devs full permission to everything without any controls or asking the user for permission is borderline irresponsible. So, the next time you hear someone say that Android is too difficult or it asks you too much for input or that ios is sooo much smoother and streamlined, remember which OS is putting the power in your hands. Below are a few links to some articles about the problem.

iPhone App Privacy: Path, Facebook, Twitter And Apple Under Scrutiny For Address Book Controversy

What do Path's privacy violations mean for Android? | The Download Blog - Download.com

Path iPhone App Uploads Your Entire Address Book to Its Servers

What say you?
 
I say Android doesn't go far enough. Listing permissions prior to installation is a good thing, but the user's choices are to either install the app or not. What we need (read: I want) is the ability to allow or deny individual permissions for each app. For example, I like Pandora, but see no reason for it to "add or modify calendar events and send email to guests, read contact data". I have no intention of using features that would require this access, and would be more comfortable if it didn't have them.

I had this ability with CyanogenMod on my OG Droid, and miss it on my Bionic.

I also wish permissions were more fine-grained, so that benign permissions could be granted without granting more invasive permissions at the same time.
 
The downside of Android is that that Google doesn't inspect the apps before they hit the market. This has resulted in a number of Melware apps that were on the Android Market. Some of the apps you can tell 100% that they were fishy (ex. Hot Asian Girls Wallpapers) while others might not be so. It'd be nice if Google has some kind of filters in place for devs to submit apps. Not to the extent of Apple's filter system, but something at least.

Only thing with allowing users to deny permissions is that they might deny permissions that the app requires (like SMS app that is denied to read your contacts). Then you'll find comments on the market about how so and so app is broken and wouldn't open or froze the phone.
 
Roze said:
Only thing with allowing users to deny permissions is that they might deny permissions that the app requires (like SMS app that is denied to read your contacts). Then you'll find comments on the market about how so and so app is broken and wouldn't open or froze the phone.
Click to expand...

I fully agree that this is the problem with allowing users access to which permissions are denied and which are not. But, you may be able to get around it by having two different categories of permissions.
1. App-critical permissions: You must accept all of these for the app to be downloaded. (Internet access for Pandora for example)
2. Optional, but helpful permissions: These can be de-selected and denied permission but the app will still download with certain features disabled. (Ex: declining contact or calendar data for Pandora)

The issue is there will still be many comments added by people who are idiots and would say... deny Pandora's permission to read contact data, email, and calendar use and then complain that they can't share their favorite song with their friends or concerts while their friends who also have Pandora can.

Another issue could be badly coded apps, where although a permission is denied some obscure legitimate part of the coding could call a function that requires a denied optional permission and cause instability within the app and user environment.

This would also make life harder for developers, because they would be forced to take into account all possible combinations of permissions so that they can ensure that their apps work as they should.
 
This is one of the reasons why I am a root user and root every device I can as soon as I can. With LBE Privacy Guard, I can disable access to certain permissions (like contacts, internet, and positioning) without any impact on the app other than what has been denied. Other apps that actually disable the permissions of the apps have a possibility of causing the app to force close.

And while Google is not as intensive in screening out apps as Apple is, Google does have some anti-piracy screening programs that filter out a number of bad ones.
 
Roze said:
The downside of Android is that that Google doesn't inspect the apps before they hit the market. This has resulted in a number of Melware apps that were on the Android Market. Some of the apps you can tell 100% that they were fishy (ex. Hot Asian Girls Wallpapers) while others might not be so. It'd be nice if Google has some kind of filters in place for devs to submit apps. Not to the extent of Apple's filter system, but something at least.

Only thing with allowing users to deny permissions is that they might deny permissions that the app requires (like SMS app that is denied to read your contacts). Then you'll find comments on the market about how so and so app is broken and wouldn't open or froze the phone.
Click to expand...
I think Google's Bouncer is designed to review the apps and flag suspicious apps, so there is some review...
 
dan330 said:
i say.. Google patent this .. Option to get permission from users...

Then what will apple do? Hahahahaah lol
Click to expand...
roflmao!!!

On top of the contacts debacle with iOS, there is also this mess with iOS: http://gizmodo.com/5880593/the-apple-bug-that-let-us-spy-on-a-total-strangers-iphone

This is why I really hate iOS - no transparency to the users at all about what you're being exposed to. You have to trust Apple has everything taken care of...which is becoming more apparent that it's not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom