Android Also Comes With a Kill-Switch

Aviran writes "The search giant is retaining the right to delete applications from Android handsets on a whim. Unlike Apple, the company has made no attempt to hide its intentions, and includes the details in the Android Market terms and conditions, as spotted by Computer World: 'Google may discover a product that violates the developer distribution agreement... in such an instance, Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your device at its sole discretion.'"

oh well...

and here I was looking forward to this phone for the reason I would be able to add whatever apps I wanted. Google please do not become apple.

soforkit

So take the OS source, fork it, and update your phone. There, kill switch is gone.

Re:soforkit

If you produce a custom build, how will you sign the custom firmware image so that your phone runs it?
Or are you going to produce your own hardware to run it on as well?

Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought I read that even though the OS was open, the handset would only run firmware images that had been digitally signed by the handset maker. The OS is open so the handset makers can play with it - not the users.

Re:soforkit

So now we need to look for open hardware to run theoretically open software? You're seriously killing my buzz here.

Re:soforkit

If HTC (or any hardware manufacturer) let you install completely bespoke firmware images on your phone, then they'd have no control over what code you ran on the phone. You could accidentally or intentionally create firmware images which crashed or disrupted the phone networks they were connected to. The network operators would then be very quick to block all Android phones and the handset makers wouldn't be able to sell them anymore - Androids name would turn to mud. I'm pretty sure the firmware images have to be signed by the hardware manufacturer or all hell would break loose.

Re:soforkit

Security rule #1: don't trust the client.

Re:soforkit

There's a reason the baseband firmware and the application firmware (Android) tend to run on seperate CPUs with seperate RAM and flash storage. These then connect to the system via a serial or USB link.

There's no real good reason to not let users update their own user space firmware with whatever they want other than the simple reasons of DRM and user-control.

Re:soforkit

Your comment doesnt actually make any sense. If the network was so unstable, people would be crashing it for fun out of their own garages. You don't need a handset to cause the type of chaos you're worried about here. Disregarding your paranoia, why would HTC care what software a customer runs on their purchased hardware? Oh, right. Cause HTC doesnt sell to consumers, it sells to telcos. The telco doesnt want to lose control, so the telco is the one demanding these lockin capabilities.

Re:soforkit

Whether or not HTC 'lets' you is irrelevant- you can.

In fact, I'm doing it right now. My phone has a linux build available for it, and I'm running a tailored build of Windows Mobile that's entirely different from the one HTC sent me with the phone.

Only for Google App Store applications

Yawn, yet another inflammatory Slashdot article.

The search giant is retaining the right to delete applications from Android handsets on a whim

Good use of 'whim', makes it seem utterly random rather than based on a particular criteria.

Yes, they can remove apps you buy at the App Store from your phone. Unlike Apple and the iPhone however, you can get applications from other places that aren't subject to the kill-switch.

Re:Only for Google App Store applications

Really, it makes sense. Imagine 2 million people download "punch a monkey" via the Google store. The malware, not surprisingly, racks up data access fees for customers. Who will get blamed by customers? Google. Seems like a good idea to have a way to kill it, particularly if customers are free to install from other, more "risky" repositories if they wish.

Re:Only for Google App Store applications

"Really, it makes sense. Imagine 2 million people download "punch a monkey" via the Google store. The malware, not surprisingly, racks up data access fees for customers."

We had PRECISELY this for Windows Mobile (and for mostly all platforms excluding iPhone) for many, many years. NOTHING of consequence happened. Yes, there was a Symbian worm that would spread itself via MMS and it would rack up your bill but it is only fitting. We had before that windows zombies that would dial-up premium numbers with the same result. Nothing REALLY big happened. There is something wrong when the trust and the tools provided by Microsoft seem "too much" and "too liberal" to be allowed for our own good.

Nothing really big happened because neither Symbian or Windows Mobile had a centralized app store like the iPhone has and apparently the Android platform will have.

Isn't this a good thing?

I, for one, welcome a way to stop a potential robot uprising. But, I think robot's sufficiently intelligent to rebel, will also have figured out how to disable the switch.

Re:Isn't this a good thing?

We'll just have to make sure that young robots listen to metal music. Then if one happens to become intelligent and finds a killswitch, it will feel aesthetically compelled to set it to 'engage'.

"On a whim"

"violates the developer distribution agreement ... in such an instance, ..." != "on a whim"

Compensation?

If they delete an app you paid for, will they reimburse you?

Re:Compensation?

If they delete an app you paid for, will they reimburse you?

And if the app is ad-supported, will they suck the messages back out through my eyes?

Obligatory TNG reference...

Data: If you had an off switch, Doctor, would you not keep it a secret?

Yes, it's on a whim of Google's.

It's at the "sole discretion" of Google. There's no provision for binding arbitration or litigation. So "whim" is correct.

If you want openness, get OpenMoko.

If it's really Open Source...

...someone will be able to distribute a patch that disables the kill switch. If no such patch is possible or violates the purchase contract then the "phone" is not Open Source.

If such a patch is possible but results in termination of service the system is technically Opne Source but useless as such.

Obligatory Google Reality Check

Honestly why anyone is surprised at Google acting like a real company is a mystery. Since Google became a publicly traded company they only have one obligation.....

Making stockholders a profit


Few companies set out to do bad deeds but most won't rule them out. Google was supposed to be different. Regarding "Don't be evil"(tm), CEO Eric Schmidt recently clarified the policy saying that it was simply meant as a conversation starter.

Here's Google from good to bad...
+7.1 - Philanthropy
Creating a foundation to fight poverty.
+5.3 - Coddling staff
Establishing on-site day care as an employee perk.
-2.4 - Moral Triage
Giving Brazilian police access to private photo albums on Orkut to assist an investigation into child pornography.The lesser of two evils is still pretty lame
-4.8 - Immaturity
Google's on going smear campaign against Privacy International [google.com] for giving them a last place rank.
-6.7 - Screwing staff
Raising cost of on site day care to $57,000 per year.
-8.3 - Censorship
Instituting keyword filters at the request of the Chinese government. Google's do no evil policy only applies to the U.S.
Source: Wired 16.10

Cell phone network is not Open

If someone really wants to produce a fully open, Four Freedoms-safe, Stallman-friendly cellphone, they'll have to set up a fully open, Four Freedoms-safe, Stallman-friendly network to run it on. Which probably means someone kindly donating a few squillion for the infrastructure.

The internet got close to that by starting off below the radar. The comms companies will not let that happen again.

OpenMoko is as open as it gets

Google is doing everything in the Java environment precisely to put you in a sandbox they (and the cell networks) can control.

This is my problem with Android, you may as well go with Windows Mobile. They are just about as open. If you are concerned with freedom then you should get an OpenMoko FreeRunner. You can run whatever software you like on it in whatever language you want. There are plenty of other problem with OpenMoko, but software freedom is not one of them.

Re:First phone

No, this is something written into the Android OS by Google. It's a part of their app store. Any Android phone will have this as a part of it, unless Google changes Android in order to remove it (which they most likely won't). But that being said, I don't think it's a terrible feature, and I'm sure that in the near future, there will be plenty of ways to install software onto Android without going through the app store, and thereby take Google out of that part of the loop.

Re:Sounds like their marketplace only?

Yes! I talked with a Google Employee on the Android IRC Channel. You can still install applications yourself just like you do with the Android SDK Device Emulator. This is simply to prevent evil-doers from using the Marketplace as a mass-distribution network. Google still does not have an application approval system or take a cut from the developers.

These media outlets needs to stop blindly copy-and-pasting each other and learn a little bit about Android. Google could probably also get off it's ass and do a little marketing and customer awareness work.