On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:01 PM, John Coryat <[email protected]> wrote: >> Let me just respectfully say that I don't understand the decision. >> The API is potentially very dangerous, yes, but that is why it requires >> a permission. >> > > Do users even look or comprehend what permissions are being used in any > given app? The user wants the app, they agree, agree, agree and then get > malware. >
This is a problem with permissions, not specifically the read logs permission. The problem with the read logs permission is that it doesn't clearly map into something the user can think about. The user can see "reads logs" and may think, "oh, reading things the device does, like, battery, etc...?" But doesn't get that it basically can let you monitor when apps start, plus whatever stupid developers do to like leaking high security data to a public channel ... Not having an API for it probably does help, as it makes it to where some people who would use the information when they shouldn't be just dont' use it because of the bar to entry (parsing the logs manually), but does (clearly) make it a tad problematic for people who want to do legitimate things with it... kris -- 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
