Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Android

Google Play To Ban Call-Recording Apps (arstechnica.com) 125

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Google has announced a "bizarre" policy that effectively bans call-recording apps from the Play Store, ArsTechnica reports. From the report: As part of Google's crackdown on apps that use Android's accessibility APIs for non-accessibility reasons, Google says call recording is no longer allowed via the accessibility APIs. Since the accessibility APIs are the only way for third-party apps to record calls on Android, call-recording apps are dead on Google Play. NLL Apps -- the developer of a call-recording phone app with a million downloads on the Play Store -- has been tracking the policy change. The Google Play support page lays down the new law, saying: "The Accessibility API is not designed and cannot be requested for remote call audio recording." Google's ban kicks in on May 11, the first day of Google I/O, oddly. There's no clear reason why Google is banning call recording from the Play Store. Many jurisdictions require the consent of one or more members of a call in order to start recording, but once you meet that requirement, recording is entirely legal and useful. The Google Recorder app is a product built entirely around the usefulness of recording conversations. Google doesn't seem to have a problem with call recording when it comes to its own apps, either -- the Google Phone app on Pixel phones supports call recording in some countries. Google just doesn't provide the proper APIs to let third-party app developers compete with it in this market, and now it's shutting down their attempted workarounds.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Play To Ban Call-Recording Apps More

Google Play To Ban Call-Recording Apps

Comments Filter:

  • Nothing new (Score:5, Informative)

    by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Thursday April 21, 2022 @11:34PM (#62467596)

    Google disabled call recording in android 9. This is simply the next logical step to disable the workarounds around the original ban.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Googles own apps can record calls in some jurisdictions. The Phone app has that feature built in.

      This is probably more to do with abuse of the accessibility APIs. The old Google Translate app used to have a floating icon that was very handy, but Google removed the API for it and apparently didn't tell the team developing Translate.

      There may also be some legal issues with potentially illegal apps on the Play Store. They can make sure their own apps only enable recording in certain jurisdictions, but since th

      • Re:Nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @07:31AM (#62468148)

        Yes, but google's native stuff doesn't actually do that pretty much anywhere as far as I know. Which is why users needed to have a separate app to record calls. And that function just suddenly ceased to work after updating to Android Pie.

        You can google this. There's an absolutely hilarious amount of rage on various forums and google's support channels about it. Google didn't give a single fuck. They just terminated the access to relevant permissions for third party apps and that was that. Go fuck yourself or cry about it and then go fuck yourself was the general gist of the answers to queries as to why millions of people using these apps legally suddenly no longer couldn't.

        The workaround that was quickly devised back then was to put caller on the speaker and the app would record that. Not optimal, but it would work. I believe it still works in fact.

        • Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)

          by CubicleZombie ( 2590497 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @10:34AM (#62468686)

          The workaround that was quickly devised back then was to put caller on the speaker and the app would record that. Not optimal, but it would work. I believe it still works in fact.

          It does not work. I have a dire need to record phone calls and I live in a one-party-consent state, so it's legal. So I tried using speakerphone and a sound recorder. When I went back and listened to the recording, it goes silent while the call was in progress.

          There is no way to record a call with Android. It used to work. I could carry a second device to record, I suppose, but that is inconvenient because I never know when my abusive ex-spouse is going to call and threaten me.

          • The workaround that was quickly devised back then was to put caller on the speaker and the app would record that. Not optimal, but it would work. I believe it still works in fact.

            It does not work. I have a dire need to record phone calls and I live in a one-party-consent state, so it's legal. So I tried using speakerphone and a sound recorder. When I went back and listened to the recording, it goes silent while the call was in progress.

            There is no way to record a call with Android. It used to work. I could carry a second device to record, I suppose, but that is inconvenient because I never know when my abusive ex-spouse is going to call and threaten me.

            Prove it.

            How in the FUCK can something that a human can hear out in the air POSSIBLY be "hidden" from a regular audio recorder?!?

            Proof, or STFU.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

            You didn't select the correct audio output source to record. It still works as long as you select the correct source. It's just that nowadays, you actually have to test on per phone basis what exactly it is that your phone calls the audio that it outputs into the speaker.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sjames ( 1099 )

        When an API is widely 'abused', it's often a sign that there is a proper API that is missing. Many places have single-party consent. You pressing the record button meets the legal requirements in those places. In places with 2 party consent (really all party consent), the onus is on the party doing the recording to announce that the call will be recorded, and anyone else may either accept that or hang up.

        • Google isn't the only one guilty here. Lineage OS has the same policy it seems. Lineage argues that because about 5% of the US is two party consent, then they have to disable that feature for the 95% of the US that is single party consent. It's pretty much a dick move but not much you can do.

          Really if either Google or Lineage were really that concerned, they could just make you agree to legal indemnification. They already do that anyways for pretty much every one of their EULAs, it's worded like "You agree

    • Re:Nothing new (Score:4, Insightful)

      by arglebargle_xiv ( 2212710 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @05:14AM (#62468002)

      That doesn't explain why they're doing it though. In some cases it's absolutely essential to be able to record calls, my neighbour works for an organisation that helps people in abusive relationships and they often need to record calls for evidence purposes to present to the police or courts, if Google block this it'll severely impact their work.

      Can you record calls on an iPhone? This is going to be a really expensive switch if they need to move to Apple just to continue their work.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

        Back in the Android Pie "what the fuck, why doesn't my call recorder work after update", the reason given was that some nations require both parties to concent to being recorded. I'm not sure if the argument was "we're saving you from committing a crime by accident" or "we're covering our asses as accomplices to such crime".

        Typical workaround early on was to put caller on speaker and then let the call recorder record that. Not exactly optimal, but it worked.

        • Typical workaround early on was to put caller on speaker and then let the call recorder record that. Not exactly optimal, but it worked.

          Ah, yeah, that'll do it. Recording calls is legal here (in fact it seems crazy not to allow it given how essential it can be as evidence) so there's no chance of committing a crime by accident.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • That law only applies to certain jurisdictions, and I've never heard of anyone being blamed for a lack of consent because they made the operating system the phone uses.

            Indeed. If Google has decided they need to be a policeman to make sure their device is not used for anything illegal, they should also disable the ability to place and receive phone calls. Phone calls can be used to make threats, plan murders, and remotely detonate explosive devices.

            Why is Google continuing to look the other way while people commit illegal activities with their products? Sure, they make a token change like disabling call recording, but you think people don't still see what a gross ena

            • You're not wrong.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

              If you look at the relevant support threads from those days, you'll find these arguments and more.

              Google didn't give a fuck.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

              If I had to make an educated guess, looking at how the rest of Alphabet properties are run, someone in the top brass likely got screwed by someone else being able to record a phone call with them.

              So they pushed this change through.

              I can name quite a few examples from Alphabet properties that had this sort of this happen and then you'd have some random interview with the person responsible explain that "I ran into this problem, and I thought it would be important to do it differently here at [Alphabet proper

      • That doesn't explain why they're doing it though. In some cases it's absolutely essential to be able to record calls, my neighbour works for an organisation that helps people in abusive relationships and they often need to record calls for evidence purposes to present to the police or courts, if Google block this it'll severely impact their work.

        Can you record calls on an iPhone? This is going to be a really expensive switch if they need to move to Apple just to continue their work.

        I have never found an on-device way to record an iPhone call. I've always used speakerphone mode and a voice-recorder sitting next to the main speaker output.

        In fact, I orient the (stereo) recorder such that one mic is closer to the phone, and the other closer to me. That way, a modicum of "mixing" can be done afterward, in case one side of the conversation is much louder than the other.

      • Can you record calls on an iPhone? This is going to be a really expensive switch if they need to move to Apple just to continue their work.

        Never been a thing there.

    • Re:Nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Friday April 22, 2022 @08:47AM (#62468368) Homepage Journal

      Google disabled call recording in android 9.

      I just installed Cube ACR on my Android 11 phone (Moto G Power 2021) and it was able to record both sides of a call to voicemail.

      This is simply the next logical step to disable the workarounds around the original ban.

      What ban? What workarounds? I just installed the app from the Play Store. Hopefully it won't get removed from my device when it's removed from the store, in the past apps have not been.

      • Thank you. I also installed Cube ACR on Nord N200 5G. Test call worked and recorded just fine.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

        From CubeACR page:

        Does Cube ACR app support Android 10/11?

        >Please make sure that Cube app is up to date and that ‘Cube ACR App Connector’ is switched on in the app settings - miscellaneous.

        >Set phone recording audio source to ‘voice recognition (software)’ and increase the recording clarity in the app settings - recording. In the same menu, also enable ‘force in-communication mode’. If this does not help, change the audio source to ‘voice call (software)

  • I thought the whole advantage of Android is that a[ps can be sideloaded. That developers were not oppressed by the huge Apple oppression racket. Canâ(TM)t anyone who wants an voice recorded app just get it elsewhere?

    • Sure, you can get apps elsewhere. At the cost that they haven't been checked by the security checks of Google's app store. If you don't check the permissions carefully, you might get an app that does something nefarious like - record your calls.

      • Re:Sure, at a cost - they could record calls (Score:5, Insightful)

        by xxdelxx ( 551872 ) on Thursday April 21, 2022 @11:58PM (#62467622)
        the security checks of Google's app store.

        I'm sorry - I can't seem to parse this collection of words into a meaningful (partial) sentence.

        • the security checks of Google's app store.

          I'm sorry - I can't seem to parse this collection of words into a meaningful (partial) sentence.

          It's talking about a hopeful future where Google Play will provide similar features to fdroid [f-droid.org] and warn you about bad features of your apps.

          Look at Fennec [f-droid.org], for example, where you get the warning that

          This app has features you may not like.
          * This app tracks and reports your activity
          * The upstream source code is not entirely Free

          Google working on it, though it's a problem since they mostly don't have source code access so don't actually know what the apps do. When more than 5% of apps don't need these war

        • Does this help your parsing? https://pastebin.com/wLXsD0P1 [pastebin.com]

          (Goddamn Slashdot filters. "too much whitespace". Replace the spaces with periods, "use fewer junk characters".)

          If not, try the sentence diagrammer here: http://grammar.terhune.xyz/ [terhune.xyz]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by fermion ( 181285 )
        So what is it? The walled garden is bad because it lets Apple oppress users and cheat developers out of revenue or good because it provides critical security? Isnâ(TM)t the whole point of android is that it does not assume end users are idiot?

        • So what is it? The walled garden is bad because it lets Apple oppress users and cheat developers out of revenue or good because it provides critical security?

          Can't it be both?

        • >"So what is it? The walled garden is bad because it lets Apple oppress users and cheat developers out of revenue or good because it provides critical security?"

          Under Android it is both because the user can CHOOSE if he/she wants to stay "clean" with the Play Store, or venture outside it. Most users have no clue what they are doing and must jump through some hoops and warnings to enable side-loading. It seems like a very good compromise.

        • the whole point of android is that it does not assume end users are idiot?

          Think of most of the people you know, addicted to Fecebook and TikTok and Instagram and whatnot. I think it's safe to assume that most end users are in fact idiots.

        • Walled gardens are fine if they're not prisons.

          All my apps (on my current phone) are from Google Play. I do like that I have the option to sideload if I find I want to though.
        • Itâ(TM)s a careful balancing act. G*d only knows what chaos would ensue if phone apps went completely unchecked. The advertising industry has shown us what happens to privacy when there is minimal oversight, and we can hardly expect governments to protect us, so the phone OS and browser makers had to step in. Google and Apple have had to adapt to a rapidly changing world. The early âoeflashlightâ apps sprung up to gather user data. Now mobile device makers are in an arms race with commerci

        • PJ Masks and other cartoons for small children have well-defined good guys and bad guys. The good guys are perfectly good.

          When you grow up, you'll learn about something called cost/benefit. The idea that any decision has both good AND bad points. For example when choosing a product, it's unlikely the same brand will be the strongest, the lightest weight, and the lowest price. There are trade offs.

          Given that any option has both good and bad, the total optimum tends to be something called choice. The idea th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gTsiros ( 205624 )

        if the hardware does not allow you to record a phonecall using the device itself, it makes no difference how you put the program on the phone: it won't work.

    • You can get them e.g. at https://f-droid.org./ [f-droid.org.] But don't expect them to work unless you are using a custom ROM (like Lineage OS), because the needed APIs are disabled on Stock Android.

      • The APIs that use the accessibility framework still work fine, until Google eventually removes that too or changes how it works. My phone won't be getting any more major version updates though, so hopefully it will continue to work, and hopefully they won't flag the app as malicious or something.

        • "Eventually" means "less than one month from now." Read the fucking summary.

          True, if you don't or can't update Android it won't bother you.

        • The APIs that use the accessibility framework still work fine, until Google eventually removes that too

          When did that "let the disabled be human beings" legislation get revoked?

  • Google's ban kicks in on May 11, the first day of Google I/O, oddly.

    Why is that odd to anyone? It's a time-honored tradition to dump some bit of negative action at a time when all sorts of other news on the same subject will swamp any complaints on social media or search.

  • Can we stop being okay with tech ignorance? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by slack_justyb ( 862874 ) on Thursday April 21, 2022 @11:51PM (#62467614)

    Google just doesn't provide the proper APIs to let third-party app developers compete with it in this market, and now it's shutting down their attempted workarounds.

    Man these walled gardens are so awesome! I get that this has been long time coming, because Google shut the actual call recording quite a few releases ago, but dang this whole closed ecosystem has been nothing but "G-R-E-A-T" so far.

    And what gets me the most is the biggest argument **for** all of this. . . Not everyone needs to have full access to (insert whatever) because they'll just get scammed/have to ask me questions/do dumb things. We've got the closed ecosystem, doesn't stop any of that. And even if it was a perfect world and nobody was getting their data/money/ID stolen, we shouldn't be cheering on keeping people tech stupid. The intersection of tech and everyday life is just going to get bigger and bigger. Having people ignorant of how all of that works, at least at a high level, is going to make them easier to be taken advantage of by those who do understand. We've hit a tipping point. People need to understand how this shit works, like we're hitting a point that we need to start dedicating a high school class on some basic principals of technology. Keeping them idiots isn't doing anyone a favor. Wrapping them in bubble wrap isn't doing them any favor.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ormy ( 1430821 )

      And what gets me the most is the biggest argument **for** all of this. . . Not everyone needs to have full access to (insert whatever) because they'll just get scammed/have to ask me questions/do dumb things. We've got the closed ecosystem, doesn't stop any of that. And even if it was a perfect world and nobody was getting their data/money/ID stolen, we shouldn't be cheering on keeping people tech stupid. The intersection of tech and everyday life is just going to get bigger and bigger. Having people ignorant of how all of that works, at least at a high level, is going to make them easier to be taken advantage of by those who do understand. We've hit a tipping point. People need to understand how this shit works, like we're hitting a point that we need to start dedicating a high school class on some basic principals of technology. Keeping them idiots isn't doing anyone a favor. Wrapping them in bubble wrap isn't doing them any favor.

      I agree with you 100% but as someone who has worked in education I can tell you that your proposed solution will work about as well the closed ecosystem solution has worked.

      • I can tell you that your proposed solution will work about as well the closed ecosystem solution has worked

        Well I would say that I do not have all the answers. But we need some sort of start. So perhaps high school lessons. Perhaps an actual Federal training program. The exact nature by which we do it is an implementation detail that I feel should/would be left to those closest to actual battle field, rather some Internet commenter. But I highly believe that it should not remain, literal nothing, as it currently is.

    • Man these walled gardens are so awesome! I get that this has been long time coming, because Google shut the actual call recording quite a few releases ago

      I just tried a call recorder installed from the play store on my android phone and it worked. Google did not "shut the actual call recording" in Android.

    • we're hitting a point that we need to start dedicating a high school class on some basic principals

      Seymour Skinner [wikipedia.org] wholeheartedly agrees.

  • The laws vary widely from state to state on how you may or may not record phone calls, even if you are the primary party to a phone call.

    People who download an app are not going to pay attention to what laws that may be applicable to them either.

    This is lawsuit avoidance in my opinion, and too big of a can of worms for google. If you need to record a phone call you probably should talk to a lawyer first about what you are trying to achieve anyway.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nasch ( 598556 )

      I wouldn't say they vary "widely" as there are only two variations: single party consent and all party consent.

      This is lawsuit avoidance in my opinion, and too big of a can of worms for google.

      I very much doubt Google could be charged with wiretapping for one of their users illegally recording a phone call.

      If you need to record a phone call you probably should talk to a lawyer first about what you are trying to achieve anyway.

      It's really not that complicated. Just look up which kind of state you're in so you know if you need to inform the other party.

      • Re:The problem (Score:5, Interesting)

        by mysidia ( 191772 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @01:42AM (#62467768)

        I very much doubt Google could be charged with wiretapping

        They wouldn't. Not even the App developer could be charged or sued.

        What this would really be about would be proactively quashing competition in a coming market that doesn't exist yet - which would be "Voice assistant applications" that would run as an app on the phone and conduct some useful processing of the conversation, such as Automated notetaking, or automatically creating a calendar entry or other key information --- Access to the conversation audio is a necessary pre-requisite to develop assistant applications, and Google will have their own products AND want you not going outside Google's own voice assistant's ecosystem that they would control and monetize.

      • Just look up which kind of state you're in...

        The bigger issue is knowing what kind of state(s) the other parti(es) are in; generally the rules of the stricter state(s) will apply. It's simpler to just make sure that everyone consents.

        P.S. If the other party says that the call may be recorded, for example with that ubiquitous "for quality assurance" message, that implies that you can record as well. All that matters is that the conversation may be recorded, not who is doing the recording.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      If someone illegally records a call on a hardware voice recorder, which is easy to do by simply player the call on speaker, no one is going to sue the voice recorder company. In any case, these laws are antiquated wire tap laws. Note that video taping, even in private areas like bathrooms, are often not limited

      The laws have their place. It prevents evidence from being gathered illegally. It allows injured parties to sue if they are recorded illegally. But that does not mean we have to ban technology just

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Wolfrider ( 856 )

        You don't even need a hardware dedicated voice recorder - all you need is a 2nd cheap phone and set the Camera app to record video. Put call on speaker and 2nd phone close enough to hear.

    • So, someone installs a non-google app, and records a call where it isn't allowed. Then, somehow the blame gets shifted not to the person, not to the app writer, but to google. And exposes google to X-million dollar fine? Compare that to the usual exposure of google to fines - privacy laws, self driving car running someone over, etc, etc. Doesn't make any sense.

      • It has nothing to do with the provenance of the app. It has to do with the stock Android OS refusing to let you assign any relevant permission to any app, Google or no.

        By analogy, if the permissions of a file are owner-only and you're not the file owner, then it doesn't matter what user you use (except root), you're not going to be able to read the file.

        Slashdot filter: Seriously? One string of hyphens means I'm posting ascii art?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I really don't understand the logic of making recording phone calls illegal. All it does is allow cheats, scammers and people doing nasty shit to get away with it without any evidence. There's no such law regarding the sharing of emails for example, but someone recording calls is illegal. Seems nonsense.

  • Sideload? (Score:3)

    by Rayfield k. ( 8918519 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @12:00AM (#62467624)

    Nothing preventing this kind of thing from being sideloaded, right?
    I got out of a pretty shit situation using one of these years ago so now it's pretty much a requirement for my phone to have this ability.

    • You need to add "not yet" to your question i think.
      I think we really need to regain ownership of our devices. This is just becoming too ridiculous.

    • Correct. The functionality is still in Android, it is still enabled (at least on my Moto phone) and in fact right now you can still download an app from the play store which will record your calls. I installed Cube ACR in order to test this and it successfully records both incoming and outgoing audio while calling my voicemail.

    • No.

      After the change that the article is talking about, stock Android will not permit even a sideloaded app to have access to the accessibility APIs that some current apps have been using to record calls. All other APIs that in the past allowed recording calls have already been blocked (the APIs still exist, but Android won't allow apps to have permission to use them).

      If you don't update Android, then this won't interfere with any currently working solution, sideloaded or not.
      If you root Android, you can get

  • How can googles own products be allowed, but not their competitors?

  • This is really unacceptable. It's not such an issue for me as I can sideload or use f-droid (planning to move to eOS and ditch Google altogether), but for many people they don't have that option or the know-how to do that.

    Call recording is a right in many states, and it's saved me a number of times when people try to deny they said something. In a one party state I have no intention to inform either.

    This is a really sad decision. Another way around it is to use a voip service and have the service record on

    • Re:Unacceptable (Score:5, Interesting)

      by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @02:35AM (#62467830)

      >"Call recording is a right in many states"

      Call recording isn't a "right" in any State. But it isn't illegal in any State, nor Federally either. (Just because something is not illegal doesn't make it a "right.") But to do it legally does require proper consent. Everyone requires at least one party consent (meaning the person doing the recording needs to know they are recording). Some States (15 of them) require all party consent. If you record illegally, this usually means it cannot be used as evidence in a court, and you might also be committing a misdemeanor or felony crime as well as civilly liable.

      https://www.justia.com/50-stat... [justia.com]

         

      • If you record illegally, this usually means it cannot be used as evidence in a court

        No, if a cop does it illegally then it can't be used as evidence, but no such standard exists when a civilian does it. That doesn't make it not illegal, but the evidence is still admissible. Cops use parallel construction instead.

        • >"No, if a cop does it illegally then it can't be used as evidence, but no such standard exists when a civilian does it. That doesn't make it not illegal, but the evidence is still admissible. Cops use parallel construction instead."

          Ah, OK. Thanks for that clarification.

        • Depends on the State, actually.
          In WA, for example, an illegal recording by any party cannot be used as evidence in criminal or civil trials.

      • It's a right when it is specifically legal for you to do it.

        If something is specifically legal for you to do it, then you have the right to do it.

  • Is there any good recording software for Android? (Score:3)

    by Zarhan ( 415465 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @12:21AM (#62467656)

    I haven't so far found *any* call recorder software that would allow me to record every call automatically AND that it would, you know, work. I have a rooted phone with Android 9.. So this does not really seem to be affecting much. I can of course click individual calls to be recorded.

    I've tried e.g.

    https://f-droid.org/en/package... [f-droid.org]

    Anyway, the end result seems to be that all those apps are able to record my side of the conversation, but not what's coming in from the remote end, expect with hacks (such as using speaker and recording the signal from speakers back in, quality is horrible.).

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Doesn't work with every phone, but rooted on Android 9 will give you good odds with Skvalex. [xda-developers.com].

      It's neither freeware or open source, and may need iterating through a few capture options to find a compatible setting with your phone. Does the automatic and both-sides thing very well without speakerphone band-aids. Won't work with carrier-provided WiFi calling or VoIP apps like WhatsApp, just regular 3G or VoLTE calls. Bluetooth works too.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Zarhan ( 415465 )

        Sounds nice, although closed source + root access sounds like asking for trouble. I'll take a look though.

        Open source alternative would be good to get..

    • Yea, it's a shitshow - I paid quite a decent amount for a Symbian app that just worked but with Android they're so nasty I gave up a long time ago. At some point the best way to do it involved outrageous steps like getting a SIM from something like Philippines or Indonesia and then with you could record until you did a factory reset.

    • I have had good luck with Cube Recorder, seems to work in all scenarios except Bluetooth calls. Automatically records all my calls. Uploads to Google Drive as well.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      What OS? Some manufacturers do things that stop it working. If you can, try switching to Lineage.

    • My understanding is that it's a deliberate Android permissions issue, and simply rooting the phone is not enough. Directly recording call audio requires the CAPTURE_AUDIO_OUTPUT permission [google.com], and according to this post [stackoverflow.com]:

      CAPTURE_AUDIO_OUTPUT has android:protectionLevel = "signature|privileged", so it can only be held by apps that are installed on the privileged (a.k.a., system) partition or are signed by the platform signing key.

      I should have a new phone arriving soon, and when it does I intend to try moving C

    • Plug an audio cable into the audio jack and use a tape recorder. Then party like it's 1989.

  • Monopoly? (Score:3)

    by aitikin ( 909209 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @12:56AM (#62467686)

    Maybe it's been too long since I looked into this, but one of the original features of GrandCentral (now Google Voice) was the ability to record phone calls, directly from the interface. So is Google now making their own software violate app rules, or have they removed this feature from the Google Voice app as well? Sincerely not sure as I haven't checked in [jokingly checks watch] about 10 years.

    Regardless of the answer to the above, this just seems stupid. At least in the US, the vast majority of states are what are referred to as, "One Party Consent" states, meaning it only takes one person privied to the conversation to consent to recording for it to be legal. Why should it be against the rules when the vast majority of laws make it completely acceptable?

    • Google Voice still lets you record calls [lifewire.com] if the call came from / originated from Google Voice. But call recording is a function of the Google Voice servers and not your of your phone or the GV app. You press 4 during a call and the server notices it and begins recording. The GV app has no idea you're recording the call.

  • Only (Score:3)

    by wakeboarder ( 2695839 ) on Friday April 22, 2022 @01:44AM (#62467776)

    The NSA and Google can record calls

  • For example. Not only can Asterisk record calls 'on the server' as configured or on-demand, but you can also host multiple INTERNATIONAL DIDs [didww.com] for your client-device, no e-sim required.

    http://nerdvittles.com/5-minutes-to-paradise-incredible-pbx-in-the-cloud-for-25-yr-2/

    (Notice I opted a different install option, and the link provided details a modern and also bleeding edge Debian install, because I prefer Debian/Ubuntu to Rocky).

  • I'm considering the concept of "API Abuse"... I'm trying to think of other cases where an API is available, but you aren't supposed to use it for certain things it will work fine for. I'm excluding exploitable security holes, Google isn't terming this a security issue but more of a "you shouldn't be doing that" issue.

    Say there is an API that lets plugins change the colors in an app, is it "API abuse" if someone uses that to change the app's colors to that of a football team the app author detests? Could be

  • Americans with Disabilities Act (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Friday April 22, 2022 @10:04AM (#62468560) Homepage Journal

    Google is running afoul of US law with this move.

    Many people with memory impairment need to record their conversations to be able to function in the present society.

    That's why it's an accessibility API.

    Sorry that some of their favorite politicians have been embarrassed by this.

    • I thin a vendor can use this part of the ADA to keep their app from being removed. They will have to directly market it for those with memory impairment however, and with that it becomes a proper use of the APIs as approved by Google. That it can be used for other purposes... so be it.

    • Ah, that's the name of the law, in Google's home country. I knew there would be one, as well as a different (but similar effect) titled law in every other country where they wish to operate within the law.

      Besides, tape recorders still work.

  • Google supports your right to perform phone harassment and fraud.

  • There may be technical / legal / business reasons why Google has done this. The ability to record calls is critical when dealing with corrupt and abusive entities. I personally dealt with a corrupt and abusive counterparty on a contract. Recording the calls (clunkily with a voice recorder) was a critical piece in bringing them into legal compliance.

    This is an unfortunate choice on Google's part.

Slashdot Top Deals

Somebody ought to cross ball point pens with coat hangers so that the pens will multiply instead of disappear.

Close