I was considering writing something like this into the library, but it wasn't a priority since I figured somebody would be able to defeat it easily (as you mentioned ;)). If you be willing to clean it up (add JavaDocs and JUnit tests) and sign a CLA, I'd be happy to accept it as a contribution for a future release. Assuming you were amenable to the idea, of course.
That being said, I'm currently working on a patch to ServerManagedPolicy that will allow specifying an initial grace period in case the user is offline during the initial license check. It will also have a tripwire that can optionally delete an application's data if it detects the licensing shared preferences have been deleted -- a consequence for trying to take advantage of the grace period as a workaround. Since that's at the top of my list, there's a very good chance that will be in r2 of the library. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Mark Carter <[email protected]> wrote: > I've been playing around with the new LVL announced yesterday and > wanted to write a policy which only stops the user when it is certain > that he does not have a license. > > In other words, the policy will only "dontAllow" the user if the last > meaningful response from the licensing service was NOT_LICENSED. > Therefore, if the user is offline when they first use the app, then > they will be allowed in. > > The idea behind this is that I don't want genuine paying users to ever > (within reason) be inconvenienced by this licensing system. > > The downside is that all the user needs to do is clear the app data > and go offline before restarting the app. The app will continue > working until they go online (and restart the app). > > My thoughts are: > > 1. Most users won't know about that workaround > 2. Those users that are happy to use that workaround, probably > wouldn't pay for the app anyway > > Any other thoughts? > > === > > Here is the code: > > public void processServerResponse(LicenseResponse response, > ResponseData rawData) { > mLastResponse = response; > if (response == LicenseResponse.LICENSED || response == > LicenseResponse.NOT_LICENSED) { > // note - we don't want to say "IS_LICENSED" because that > can be > hacked > SharedPreferences prefs = > PreferenceManager.getDefaultSharedPreferences(this.mContext); > Editor edit = prefs.edit(); > if (response == LicenseResponse.LICENSED) { > edit.remove(NOT_LICENSED_PREF); > } else if (response == LicenseResponse.NOT_LICENSED) { > edit.putBoolean(NOT_LICENSED_PREF, true); > } > edit.commit(); > } > } > > public boolean allowAccess() { > if (mLastResponse == null) { > // this is the first call > return false; > } > switch (mLastResponse) { > case LICENSED: > return true; > case NOT_LICENSED: > return false; > default: > return !isDefinitelyNotLicensed(); > } > } > > public boolean isDefinitelyNotLicensed() { > // if we don't know, then its NOT definitely not licensed. > SharedPreferences prefs = > PreferenceManager.getDefaultSharedPreferences(mContext); > return prefs.getBoolean(NOT_LICENSED_PREF, false); > } > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<android-developers%[email protected]> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
