[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Discostrings:
Works great, further ideas

Hi guys,

I just wanted to thank you so much for creating this wonderful modification. I can report that it works great on a Samsung Galaxy S III running the 2013-01-31 build of CyanogenMod 10.1. The performance issue is fixed, MMS works fine, and I haven't found any other issues.

Using this along with AFWall, I finally feel comfortable using some Android apps that have the network access permission. It's great to have the option of using these very reasonable privacy controls that Google doesn't want to provide.

To weigh in on the default-allow/deny issue, I think default-allow seriously compromises the usefulness of OpenPDroid to someone who prioritizes data security over convenience. As nsmart just mentioned, it could lure one into a very false sense of security using applications that one might not use unless one is 100% sure that access to certain information is blocked. In the default-allow configuration, it is also very difficult to know whether data is slipping through. Default-allow is better than nothing as long as the person using it realizes its implications, but in that configuration its usefulness pales in comparison to a default-deny OpenPDroid.

However, I'm not sure I'd go as far as Lanchon suggests in refusing to provide the default-allow option. I think there's definitely a use case for people who would like to block as much private information getting out as possible without getting in the way of the usability of their devices. I'm not sure the default-allow option would increase the incentive to DoS OpenPDroid in a way that would adversely effect users with the default default-deny setting. And I think app writers who don't like OpenPDroid are almost as likely to write a DoS to prevent default-deny users from using the app at all as they are to get data from default-allow users. I could be wrong, and I'd definitely like to hear further reasoning on why default-allow shouldn't be available. I'm just not seeing it yet.

I do agree with Lanchon that today's architectural decisions should ideally reflect a desire to make OpenPDroid invisible to other apps in the future. I'm not familiar enough with the details of its architecture to know how difficult this would be, but I do know that if it remains easily detectable, other apps and app stores will be giving it problems soon enough. Do you remember the wildly heralded and praised permission restrictions that CyanogenMod 7 featured? As far as my (albeit limited) research has found, that feature was not ported to CM9 because Google threatened to disallow Market access to devices running CyanogenMod. If OpenPDroid is easily detectable, I have no doubt devices using it will be blocked en masse from app stores as soon as developers complain they're not getting the data they expect from some devices. In my view, if developers are getting telemetry that they don't like from users, it should be their responsibility to prevent those users from sending the obviously bad data or even using the app within the app itself. But I don't think Google sees it this way. I'll continue using OpenPDroid even if it means not having access to app stores, as privacy trumps using applications that wish to violate it for me, but I'm sure I'm in the minority in valuing privacy > Play Store.

I feel this is a golden age for being able to customize Android such that apps have to respect your privacy, and I hope to see it continue!