Yes.. we do... and I normally don't disagree with you :). But, in this
instance.. I REALLY do.
Let me expand on why I think it is a failing, and maybe you will see
where I am coming from.
I'll use the Window Firewall as an example as it is the closest example
I can think of. It deals with permissions and security. This may be more
of a manifestation of how I use my computer, but I think many people
share this :).
Assume I have a new install of Windows. I'm not very security conscious
(I'm truly not.. if you want my email accounts, I have thousands more I
can switch to, so I don't care), but I set my firewall to lock down
everything because I do want some security, and otherwise I'm wide open.
Then I start to install my programs. At this point none of them have
internet access. Then one by one I start running them. Some of them will
immediately popup the "Firewall is Blocking me" dialog. No problem....
I'm still in the installation phase anyway. When that happens, if it's a
program I REALLY trust, I just grant the the "Allow Always" option. If
it's a program I don't have complete faith in, I only grant the "Allow
Once" option, and I pull out Wire Shark before I respond and monitor
what it's doing. Then when (and if) I trust it, I give it the "Allow
Always" option.
Doing it that way makes me feel very secure, even though I don't have
big issues with security in the first place.
I really don't think I am the only person out there that feels this
way.... I think Android would benefit from this.
Now.. do you get my point of view?... I'm not asking you to agree in
terms of changing how you do things... you may work differently... but I
think it's a valid point of view.
The way Android does it now. I just accept whatever the program asks for
because until you use it, you don't really know how it wants to use the
permission. By waiting until it wants to use the permission, I can make
a (slightly) more informed choice on whether to grant the permission or
not, especially if I have the option of saying "YES", "YES, but monitor
it", or "NO", and that makes Android not only more secure.... but
communicates that security to the user in a very effective manner.
Brad.
On 27/08/2010 10:46 PM, Dianne Hackborn wrote:
Well, we disagree.
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Brad Gies <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I would argue the opposite :)
One of the handiest features of Windows Firewall is that you have
the option of "Displaying a notification" when it blocks a
program, and when the dialog shows up, you have the option of
granting that program access, and then it never bothers you again.
I do agree that the way it was done in Vista was absolutely
horrible... but a one time "Let this program do this" works VERY
WELL, and I think it gets around all the problems you mentioned.
In my opinion, the lack of this is the single most obvious failing
in Android.
Brad.
Sincerely,
Brad Gies
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bistro Bot - Bistro Blurb
http://bgies.com
http://bistroblurb.com
http://ihottonight.com
http://forcethetruth.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in moderation, including abstinence
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can
change the world. Indeed. It is the only thing that ever has - Margaret Mead
--
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
