this post was submitted on 28 May 2025
267 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

70498 readers
2908 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
267
Google Play’s latest security change may break many Android apps for some power users. The Play Integrity API uses hardware-backed signals that are trickier for rooted devices and custom ROMs to pass. (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 4 days ago by abobla@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
70 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zak@lemmy.world 46 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Many devices, including Google's own Pixel devices have user-unlockable bootloaders. No security vulnerabilities are involved in the process of gaining root access or installing a third-party Android distribution on those devices.

What's going on here isn't patching a vulnerability, but tightening remote attestation, a means by which a device can prove to a third party app that it is not modified. They're selling it as "integrity" or proof that a device is "genuine", but I see it as an invasion of user privacy.

Google can’t exactly make root access and custom ROMs easier to use in 2025.

Sure they can. They're in a much stronger position to dictate terms to app developers than they were in 2010 when it was not yet clear there would be an Android/iOS duopoly.

They don't want to though, because their remote attestation scheme means they can force OEMs to only bundle Google-approved Android builds that steer people to use Google services that make money for Google, and charge those OEMs licensing fees. A phone that doesn't pass attestation isn't commercially viable because enough important apps (often banking apps) use it.