[android-developers] Re: Meta: Changes to new-user moderation policy
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 3:29:14 PM UTC-8, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > > I sent a message last night but I can not see it. > It was stuck in moderation, since the mod bit on your account was still set. See my 2nd post in this thread for instructions. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/11b7edac-20a8-4140-8a0f-4d28ba851326%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: Developer training guide problem.
HAXM requires a VT-X enabled processor, which I believe AMD doesn't support. AMD processors *do* support a similar technology, AMD-V -- but this is only supported under Linux, since the Linux emulator uses KVM instead of HAXM for hardware virtualization. You have two options: - Use the ARM emulator images, instead of the x86 images. It'll be slower, since you'll be using software-based emulation, but it will work. You should still be able to enable hardware GPU boost for a bit of a speed boost. - Install Linux, assuming your processor supports AMD-V. You could also try Genymotion (https://www.genymotion.com), which is a third-party emulator that some developers have reported success with. It's a paid product though, and not endorsed by Google. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com If HAXM doesn't work for you, just use the ARM emulator images. It'll run slower, because it won't be using hardware-accelerated On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 1:02:01 AM UTC-8, bradley herwy wrote: > > Im following the developer training guide. Im trying to run my hello world > app on an emulator. I follow the directions and I get an error telling me > to download Intel HAXM. But the thing is this laptop has an amd A10 > processor. What should I do? For now I know I can side step this problem by > using a pc with an Intel processor or just plugging in a device with > android os but id like to be able to use this laptop without having to have > an android device. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/5a85868d-aa14-41c0-ba99-d8be63a42423%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: Meta: Changes to new-user moderation policy
Folks who joined the forum in the past still have their moderation bit set. (This list has 270k subscribers, so going through and fixing stuff up manually isn't an option.) I go in periodically and clear the bit for folks who have messages waiting in the moderation queue. So in your case, your moderation bit has been cleared and your future posts will show up immediately. Your past messages have also been approved. Alternatively, for other folks, I believe unsubscribing and immediately re-subscribing would be another way clear your moderation bit. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 2:01:07 PM UTC-8, Chuong Le Pham wrote: > > That's good to know. I post an Android development question about ten > minutes ago and it hasn't shown up yet. What the current turnaround time > for a new question to appear in the list? > > Thanks. > > > On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 09:28:00 UTC+10, Trevor Johns wrote: >> >> *As of today, new members to this group are able to post immediately, >> without being subject to moderator approval.* >> >> Previously, posts from new members to this group would be held for >> moderation. However, with the addition of Stack Overflow and Google+ as >> popular discussion mediums, it's been difficult to find volunteer >> moderators. As a result, the moderation queue has been showing signs of >> neglect -- which means that new posts just aren't getting through. >> >> To address this, effective immediately, I've removed the moderation >> restriction for new members. >> >> While this means that some spam may get through, this is necessary in >> order to keep this group functioning properly going forward. If you do see >> spam, simply report it through the Google Groups web UI. (Click on "Report >> Abuse" next to the "Reply" button.) For larger/urgent issues, you can also >> contact the group owners via email: >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!contactowner/android-developers >> >> -- >> Trevor Johns >> Google Developer Programs, Android >> http://developer.android.com >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/5611cac8-4f81-492b-b6a4-c1cc2fed9780%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: 'org.apache.http.params.HttpParam' is deprecated
On 2015-12-10 03:17:39 +, Hanis Hassan said: Hi... I'm still newbies... Anyone please help me solve this problem... That error shouldn't actually hurt anything, at least not in the short term. It's just a warning. That said, it's still a good idea to update the code so you don't run into problems in the future. As to how to fix it, this Stack Overflow post sums up the solution nicely: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22038957/httpclient-getparams-deprecated-what-should-i-use-instead The short version of which is use a URIBuilder object instead of asking for an HttpParams object. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/n4ar9s%24a4g%241%40ger.gmane.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: https://developers.google.com/mobile/add page down
On 2015-12-09 18:44:21 +, Séadna Long said:
I'm running through the Android sample app setup,
https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/android/v4/start
and in the second step, it says,
To use the sample, you need to provide some additional information to
get a configuration file and finish setting up your project. Use the
package name com.google.samples.quickstart.analytics for the sample.
After you complete the registration, download the google-services.json
file to add to your project.
And points you to https://developers.google.com/mobile/add .
Unfortunately when I visit the page, it loads to a spinny waiting
animation, and stays there.
Opening up the developer console, I see two Javascript errors,
Refused to display
'https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=cloudconsole&osid=1&passiv…le.developers.google.com/mobilesdk/bootstrap/?authuser%3D0%26hl%3Den&hl=en'
in a frame because it set 'X-Frame-Options' to 'DENY'.
script_foot.js:349 Failed to execute 'postMessage' on 'DOMWindow': The
target origin provided ('https://console.developers.google.com') does
not match the recipient window's origin ('null').(anonymous function) @
script_foot.js:349n.event.dispatch @ jquery.min.js:3r.handle @
jquery.min.js:3
If I click directly to the frame URL, I get through, but the /add page
is broken.
Thank you for the report. I've forwarded this on to the team that
maintans that page, and hopefully we'll get it fixed up quickly.
(Tracking as internal issue 26105368.)
--
Trevor Johns
Google Developer Programs, Android
http://developer.andriod.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android
Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/n49un6%249kf%241%40ger.gmane.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [android-developers] Is anyway to make apps support 'app streaming' right now?
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 4:46:57 PM UTC-8, Chuck Crisler wrote: > > I haven't looked at your link and I am not sure exactly what you mean by > 'app streaming', but you should look at GStreamer. It is an open source > media framework that works on many platforms, including Android. > http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/ > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Evan Lin > wrote: > >> Google announced a demo for app streaming technology, >> http://bit.ly/1NMddIz >> Is anyway we can do to make apps support 'app streaming' right now? >> > *Chuck:* If you checked the link, you'd see that the question has nothing to do with streaming video content. The question is about allowing apps to run without being installed. The non-shortlink version of what was posted is: http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/18/9755890/google-can-now-stream-apps-to-your-phone *Evan: *To answer your question, app streaming is currently in beta and only available to a limited number of developers, but do stay tuned for future announcements. In particular, they've started allow attaching a streamed trial of games to in-app advertisments (also in beta): http://adwords.blogspot.com/2015/12/trial-run-ads-interactive-interstitials-beta.html In the meantime, my recommendation is to take a look at App Indexing and deep links: https://developers.google.com/app-indexing/ It's not streaming, but it does allow users to jump from Google Search results directly into your app. Slightly different experience, but there is some overlap with the link you posted -- so depending on what you're looking for perhaps that will be useful to you. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/267bf884-805f-4693-af15-e695582cdaad%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: developer.android.com defaults to Chinese.
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 3:31:01 AM UTC-8, Sara Leroy wrote: > > To whom it may concern: > > Please help me fix this problem. Every time I go to the home page for > developer android, it redirects me to > http://developer.android.com/intl/zh-cn/index.html and any link I access > under developer android domain has this intl/zh-cn/ inserted. I am in the > US and I do not speak Chinese. > > Is this a common problem? Is my computer sending a ping locator from China? > > Please let me know, > > Thank you > When you switch languages on developers.android.com (which includes just following a link to a page that's in a different language), a cookie is set that defaults future visits to that language. To change back to English, use the language selection menu in the lower-right corner of the page. It's a known issue that this behavior is too easy to trigger and too hard to get out of. We're looking into it. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/e18a0330-0bc8-4376-ac40-9969fdd17be5%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: Recommended Android Dev Courses/Trainers in the UK
On 12/01/2015 05:51 AM, icklebear wrote: Hi, Have been looking for a training provider in the UK for 3 very experienced Java Web devs and a dev manager. We're a very small company which has to be careful where it spends it's budget so can't afford to get burned forking out for below par training. Anyone got any recommendations? We can't really travel outside of the UK am afraid. Many thanks :) I can't comment on any UK-specific courses, but if you're okay with an online course, take a look at the Udacity Android program: https://www.udacity.com/course/android-developer-nanodegree--nd801 Udacity charges if you want a certificate or instructional support, but the course materials and videos are free -- so you can either check the content out beforehand or just take the classes as a self-led program if you're on a budget. The courses were developed by engineers on Google's Developer Relations team (my department!), so I can vouch for the quality. ;) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/n3lc0k%24mhu%241%40ger.gmane.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: How to use default lock screen and access user set password in a custom app?
On 11/30/2015 11:24 PM, Cinjo Jose wrote: Hi Want to use the default device lock password which the user has already set as a password for my app. The app should show the same default lock screen and access password to enable some features. Is it possible to use device lock screen and access the password in Custom application ? If yes, How ? Thanks.. Cinjo, Take a look at the android.app.KeyGuardManager API. Specifically createConfirmDeviceCredentialIntent(). I believe this will do what you want. Take a look at the Confirm Credential sample to see how this works in practice: https://github.com/googlesamples/android-ConfirmCredential -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/n3l8ne%244mp%241%40ger.gmane.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: Help: Android Studio continually crashing Windows 10
On 12/01/2015 12:28 AM, Joshua Springer wrote: Hi, I've been developing an Android app for one of my classes. I am familiar with programming and using computers in general, but not virtualization software. I am trying to get Android Studio on my computer, but having some serious problems. I installed Android Studio on my computer the first time, and whenever I would run it, it would freeze Windows (10) completely, with this error <https://cdn.xtremerain.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/screenshot-CLOCK-WATCHDOG-TIMEOUT.png>. I reinstalled Windows, and then reinstalled Android Studio, and it worked fine for a day. Now I come back today and the same error is happening. I don't feel like installing Windows again. What should I do? I've tried running it in compatibility mode for 8.1, 7, and running as administrator, as well. And I have two other machines, both Macs, which run Android Studio and the emulators without a problem, although they are slower. Please help! Also, I should note that I'm using an i7 4790K @4.00GHz on a Gigabyte Z97N-Gaming 5 motherboard with 16GB of RAM. Also I have a GTX 970 and naturally the NVIDIA drivers, but I feel like this definitely wouldn't affect the performance of Android Studio. Joshua, When are you seeing this crash? Visualization isn't involved unless you're actively running an emulator. Otherwise, Android Studio is just an ordinary Java desktop app. We also have no reports of this on the Android issue tracker. Generally speaking, a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT is a hardware issue. It means that one of your CPU cores failed to respond to an interrupt. See Microsoft's documentation, here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff557211(v=vs.85).aspx This isn't something that Android Studio should be able to cause directly. Something else is more fundamentally wrong with your computer. There's some troubleshooting tips in this thread: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_8-update/clockwatchdogtimeout-error/33b46641-fc90-45d9-8027-b834f44cfd03 Basically you're going to have to troubleshoot your system from the ground up. (Make sure temperatures are within spec, remove software that interfaces with the BIOS, clear your BIOS settings, etc.) If all of that fails, you likely have a bad CPU. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/android-developers/n3l5d8%24fl0%241%40ger.gmane.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: Is this list dying?
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:09:34 -0700, Tobiah wrote: > I used to get dozens of posts per day from this list. Has the buzz > moved to another forum? > > Thanks, > > Tobiah (Sorry for the slow delay replying to this.) Admittedly, we've had a problem with lack of moderators for a while now, and that's probably been hurting activity on this list. Now that Stack Overflow and Google+ exist, it's been difficult for us to find employees willing to spend time going through the dozens of messages that come in each day (much of which is spam). That said, I think there's still value in having a traditional discussion group. Stack Overflow doesn't allow objective threads, and Google+ is a different experience. I've changed the moderation policy for this group, so that we're not a bottleneck. Let's see if that helps improve things. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/android-developers/mo_djBs5_EY -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Meta: Changes to new-user moderation policy
*As of today, new members to this group are able to post immediately, without being subject to moderator approval.* Previously, posts from new members to this group would be held for moderation. However, with the addition of Stack Overflow and Google+ as popular discussion mediums, it's been difficult to find volunteer moderators. As a result, the moderation queue has been showing signs of neglect -- which means that new posts just aren't getting through. To address this, effective immediately, I've removed the moderation restriction for new members. While this means that some spam may get through, this is necessary in order to keep this group functioning properly going forward. If you do see spam, simply report it through the Google Groups web UI. (Click on "Report Abuse" next to the "Reply" button.) For larger/urgent issues, you can also contact the group owners via email: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!contactowner/android-developers -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[android-developers] Re: All Android in app subscriptions were mysteriously automatically canceled
fibercode,
Can you let me know if you're still seeing this? I just confirmed with our
engineering team that everything should be back to normal. If anything
still looks off, let me know and I'll have them take a closer look.
(It's possible there was some caching delays with the Developer API, which
might explain why you were still seeing non-renewing subscriptions.)
--
Trevor Johns
Google Developer Programs, Android
http://developer.android.com
On Thursday, August 9, 2012 11:38:03 PM UTC-7, fibercode wrote:
>
> Trevor,
>
> Thank you for your prompt response and the explanation. At least now we
> know that we are not living in some alternate reality and stopped pinching
> ourselves in disbelief.
>
> But, we still have all of our customers subscriptions canceled. None of
> those were restored back to active. Now when we query the Google API server
> to see if the subscriptions are still active we get "false".
>
> For example:
> We queried Google order number: 574480490664998 and got the following
> JSON response:
>
> {
> "kind": "androidpublisher#subscriptionPurchase",
> "initiationTimestampMsec": "1342064134000",
> "validUntilTimestampMsec": "1344749703290",
> "autoRenewing": false
> }
>
> That order should have been restored to autoRenewing: true!
>
> Please let me know if we are missing something?
>
> Our customers have not had any termination of service, since our servers
> are correctly keeping track of the expiration date of their subscriptions.
> But that is not the point. The main thing is that they would have to now
> manually go and purchase the same subscription they did subscribe to before
> (the one they did not unsubscribe from).
> I think that is a horrible way to treat them.
>
> I do not want to sound harsh, but we are trying to run a business not
> play high school games.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated!
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> On Thursday, 9 August 2012 21:29:30 UTC-4, Trevor Johns wrote:
>>
>> fibercode,
>> A number of in-app billing subscriptions were erroneously marked as
>> canceled this morning due to an issue on our servers. Most of the affected
>> subscriptions have already been restored by our engineers, and users did
>> not loose access to content during this time. We will be sending a followup
>> email soon to those affected explaining what happened.
>>
>> There were a small minority of users who's subscription auto-renewal
>> dates occurred before we we were able to restore the subscription, and
>> accordingly were not renewed. These users can choose to re-subscribe using
>> the standard in-app billing mechanism within your app (they will appear as
>> a standard expired subscription to your app).
>>
>> The HTTP Android Developer API would have still returned the correct
>> expiration time for all subscriptions, so users continued to receive all
>> content they had paid for.
>>
>> We sincerely apologize the inconvenience this has caused, and our team
>> will be taking steps to ensure similar incidents do not occur in the future.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Johns
>> Google Developer Programs, Android
>> http://developer.android.com
>>
>> On Thursday, August 9, 2012 12:03:23 PM UTC-7, fibercode wrote:
>>>
>>> One of our Android applications has supported in app billing for a while
>>> now.
>>>
>>> A little over two weeks ago we published an update that supports the
>>> newly released by Google in app subscriptions.
>>>
>>> Everything was fine until this morning when mysteriously all the
>>> subscriptions purchased by our customers were canceled automatically!
>>> We got up this morning, checked our emails and our test accounts had the
>>> subscriptions canceled even though we had not done that. This obviously
>>> raised a lot of red flags so we started checking our customers'
>>> subscriptions and it seems that they were all canceled !!! We were even
>>> contacted by several of our customers who thought that we canceled their
>>> subscriptions.
>>>
>>> The new subscription purchases done today (August 9th) are not being
>>> canceled but we can no longer trust how long that will last.
>>>
>>> The only conclusion we could come to is that Google canceled the
>>> subscriptions (either on purpose or accidentally).
>>> Most likely this looks like a bug on the Google side, but we need some
>>> help to narrow this down.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: All Android in app subscriptions were mysteriously automatically canceled
fibercode, A number of in-app billing subscriptions were erroneously marked as canceled this morning due to an issue on our servers. Most of the affected subscriptions have already been restored by our engineers, and users did not loose access to content during this time. We will be sending a followup email soon to those affected explaining what happened. There were a small minority of users who's subscription auto-renewal dates occurred before we we were able to restore the subscription, and accordingly were not renewed. These users can choose to re-subscribe using the standard in-app billing mechanism within your app (they will appear as a standard expired subscription to your app). The HTTP Android Developer API would have still returned the correct expiration time for all subscriptions, so users continued to receive all content they had paid for. We sincerely apologize the inconvenience this has caused, and our team will be taking steps to ensure similar incidents do not occur in the future. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Thursday, August 9, 2012 12:03:23 PM UTC-7, fibercode wrote: > > One of our Android applications has supported in app billing for a while > now. > > A little over two weeks ago we published an update that supports the newly > released by Google in app subscriptions. > > Everything was fine until this morning when mysteriously all the > subscriptions purchased by our customers were canceled automatically! > We got up this morning, checked our emails and our test accounts had the > subscriptions canceled even though we had not done that. This obviously > raised a lot of red flags so we started checking our customers' > subscriptions and it seems that they were all canceled !!! We were even > contacted by several of our customers who thought that we canceled their > subscriptions. > > The new subscription purchases done today (August 9th) are not being > canceled but we can no longer trust how long that will last. > > The only conclusion we could come to is that Google canceled the > subscriptions (either on purpose or accidentally). > Most likely this looks like a bug on the Google side, but we need some > help to narrow this down. > > Thank you. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: reboot method?
On Jul 11, 1:55 pm, bob wrote: > Is there any way for an app to reboot an Android Ice Cream sandwich phone? Not on user builds, no. -- Trevor -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: what's wrong? "curl http://Android.git.kernel.org/repo >~/bin/repo " doesn't work!
Looks like I spoke just a few minutes too soon. The source just went live again 30 minutes ago. Gitweb/Gerritt are still down, but the Git mirrors are online and serving code again. Details here: http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a On Oct 19, 12:54 pm, Trevor Johns wrote: > We've been working on it. > > JBQ and the rest of the team have been going through and verifying all > of the commits (yes, every one) to make sure nothing has been tampered > with, and I suspect they have some other work to do as well to get > things online again. This is all on top of the work we've been doing > to get ICS shipped. > > In the meantime, you can find a mirror of the source > here:https://github.com/android > > -- > Trevor Johns > Developer Programs Engineer, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > On Oct 19, 9:14 am, Jared wrote: > > > > > > > > > This downtime is getting old. Google needs to get their act together > > already and get this back online. Its been over 6 weeks now... > > > On Oct 18, 5:51 pm, Kristopher Micinski > > wrote: > > > > First, you need to use git, not curl, to fetch the source. Download > > > git and get it set up on your machine, then read a little about it to > > > determine how to use it.. > > > > After that, grab the android source from somewhere else (like github) > > > instead, the official branch is still down.. > > > > Kris > > > > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:00 AM, puwei wrote: > > > > can't use curl to get repo, > > > > when i try commad " curlhttp://Android.git.kernel.org/repo>~/ > > > > bin/repo" > > > > just can't download any thing , and there was a file name repo , > > > > use "vi ~/bin/repo" there just a few line words like "ther was > > > > error , from this site ...bla bla" , > > > > > i'm a newbie in android develope, could you tell me , what should i > > > > do ,to fix this step ,download repo? > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: what's wrong? "curl http://Android.git.kernel.org/repo >~/bin/repo " doesn't work!
We've been working on it. JBQ and the rest of the team have been going through and verifying all of the commits (yes, every one) to make sure nothing has been tampered with, and I suspect they have some other work to do as well to get things online again. This is all on top of the work we've been doing to get ICS shipped. In the meantime, you can find a mirror of the source here: https://github.com/android -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Oct 19, 9:14 am, Jared wrote: > This downtime is getting old. Google needs to get their act together > already and get this back online. Its been over 6 weeks now... > > On Oct 18, 5:51 pm, Kristopher Micinski > wrote: > > > > > > > > > First, you need to use git, not curl, to fetch the source. Download > > git and get it set up on your machine, then read a little about it to > > determine how to use it.. > > > After that, grab the android source from somewhere else (like github) > > instead, the official branch is still down.. > > > Kris > > > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:00 AM, puwei wrote: > > > can't use curl to get repo, > > > when i try commad " curlhttp://Android.git.kernel.org/repo>~/ > > > bin/repo" > > > just can't download any thing , and there was a file name repo , > > > use "vi ~/bin/repo" there just a few line words like "ther was > > > error , from this site ...bla bla" , > > > > i'm a newbie in android develope, could you tell me , what should i > > > do ,to fix this step ,download repo? > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: C2DM for production. Please sort this out Google!
Eurig, Sorry about that, there's a slight backlog in approving C2DM production quota requests at the moment. I've been working to clear it out. I just approved your request, you should be getting a reply in about 5 minutes from our ticket system saying your'e good to go. Let me know if there's anything else you need. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In app billing...
No. That's a policy issue for app developers. (Developers might decide that, depending on the nature of whatever's being purchased, that they don't want to issue refunds, even over email.) It's something you'd have to explain in your UI. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In app billing...
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > Thanks. > > Is that somehow explained to the user during the checkout process? > > -- Kostya > Yes. See the bold text in the middle screenshot here: http://developer.android.com/images/billing_checkout_flow.png -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Urgent Need : Oracle PL/SQL Developer in Cambridge, MA for 6+ Months(F_2_F)
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Haroon Khalid wrote: > Can we ban indian people? > No. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL behavior on client side license validity check for free apps
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Brill Pappin wrote: > What about uploading as a paid app and then changing it to free? > > - Brill > > You cannot change a paid app to free. Once a paid app, always a paid app. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In app billing...
In-app purchases have no refund window. (The developer can still manually issue a refund via their Checkout merchant console, but the user would need to manually email you.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > In this lite/pro conversion scenario, can the user cancel his purchase of > Pro key to revert back to the Lite version (for whatever reason)? > > There is a 15 minute window for refunds with the current scheme (separate > Lite / Pro applications) - is there one for in-app purchases? > > The middle screenshot here says "This in-app purchase cannot be refunded", > is that always the case for in-app items? > > http://developer.android.com/guide/market/billing/index.html > > -- Kostya > > 04.02.2011 11:17, String пишет: > > On Friday, February 4, 2011 1:03:26 AM UTC, Mark Carter wrote: > > I can't see a nice way to do it. The best way I can think of is to >> introduce in-app billing to the Lite version and convert the Pro version >> into some kind of "pro key" token app. The Lite version would check for >> existence of this "pro key" app (and validate) if the in-app-upgrade had not >> been purchased. >> >> Does that work? >> > > I'm not sure it does, actually. Consider your existing Pro users, most of > whom presumably don't have the Lite version installed. When you convert Pro > into (in your words) "just a marker app", all these users will lose the > functionality until they go download the app formerly know as Lite. They'll > also end up with both items in their app list unless you go through some > shenanigans with hiding the Pro token app; I say "shenanigans" because you > can't afford to hide it for users who *don't* have Lite installed. That's > a PITA, I know, I've done that kind of thing. And in any case, you're likely > to annoy and confuse a good percentage of your existing paid users. > > String > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > > > > -- > Kostya Vasilyev -- WiFi Manager + pretty widget -- > http://kmansoft.wordpress.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Can't get android sources
Indeed. android-platform is probably a better choice for this. However, I'll go ahead and forward this on to JBQ anyway so he can take a look at it. (Note that the froyo-plus-aosp branch does seem to exist, so you could give that a try and see if it suits your needs.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Mark Murphy wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Massimo Messore > wrote: > > same issue here. It seems like froyo branch is not yet present in the > > manifests. > > > > Is there any chance to get it back? > > Sure there is a chance. This list has nothing whatsoever to do with it, > however. > > Questions regarding the AOSP belong on a suitable AOSP list: > > http://source.android.com/community/index.html > > -- > Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) > http://commonsware.com | http://github.com/commonsguy > http://commonsware.com/blog | http://twitter.com/commonsguy > > Android Training in Atlanta: http://bignerdranch.com/classes/android > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL behavior on client side license validity check for free apps
Err, typo there: Free apps cannot request the com.android.vending.CHECK_LICENSE permission. (Billing works just fine with free apps.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Trevor Johns wrote: > Technically the backend license servers allow it and return a large > validity timestamp, BUT... > > The market publisher console will not allow you to upload an APK that's > free and requests the com.android.vending.BILLING permission. > > In practice, this means that free apps cannot use the LVL, because you > won't be able to upload them. > > (Marco: This change was made very late in the development of the license > service. For a long time during development, it was indeed possible to use > licensing with free apps. The reference you found in the docs was probably > an artifact from this that that we just missed before publishing. I'll > submit a change to remove it to prevent confusion.) > > -- > Trevor Johns > Developer Programs Engineer, Android > http://developer.android.com > > > > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:14 AM, MarcoAndroid wrote: > >> @rojorshi: here's the link you were looking for I think. Seems you >> should be fine for free apps. Just search for the word 'free' in this >> link: http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html >> It looks like you won't be able to upload a free version with the LVL >> permission in it... if your app is already available as free. >> >> But it also says it returns LICENSED for free apps in table A-2. So >> what situation would this be then? >> >> >> On Feb 3, 6:01 am, rajorshi wrote: >> > I had developed a game intending to publish it as a paid application >> > using the Android LVL with the default ServerManagedPolicy licensing >> > policy. Now, the powers that be have decided that we have to publish >> > it as a free app. For some reason I do not want to remove/disable the >> > license checks. My question is: how does the licensing service handle >> > free apps? Will checks always fail or always pass? Is there any way I >> > can make the license service accept any installation of my free app as >> > licensed? >> > >> > I found the following on free apps in the official documentation, but, >> > it doesn't help me much. >> > >> > "Only paid applications published through Market can use the service. >> > [...] Licensing is currently for paid apps only, since free apps are >> > considered licensed for all users." >> > >> > I would have assumed that checks will fail, but, I remember reading >> > somewhere that for free apps the licensing server will return a very >> > large validity timestamp (long.MAX) ensuring that the license is >> > always valid for free apps. Unfortunately, I have lost the link to >> > that source. >> > >> > Note: >> > 1. The problem is not as crazy as it sounds. It's just that I am not >> > able to explain my use case further without giving away some >> > proprietary information. >> > 2. I had posted the same question on StackOverflow but did not get any >> > response. Hence, posting it here. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL behavior on client side license validity check for free apps
Technically the backend license servers allow it and return a large validity timestamp, BUT... The market publisher console will not allow you to upload an APK that's free and requests the com.android.vending.BILLING permission. In practice, this means that free apps cannot use the LVL, because you won't be able to upload them. (Marco: This change was made very late in the development of the license service. For a long time during development, it was indeed possible to use licensing with free apps. The reference you found in the docs was probably an artifact from this that that we just missed before publishing. I'll submit a change to remove it to prevent confusion.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 6:14 AM, MarcoAndroid wrote: > @rojorshi: here's the link you were looking for I think. Seems you > should be fine for free apps. Just search for the word 'free' in this > link: http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html > It looks like you won't be able to upload a free version with the LVL > permission in it... if your app is already available as free. > > But it also says it returns LICENSED for free apps in table A-2. So > what situation would this be then? > > > On Feb 3, 6:01 am, rajorshi wrote: > > I had developed a game intending to publish it as a paid application > > using the Android LVL with the default ServerManagedPolicy licensing > > policy. Now, the powers that be have decided that we have to publish > > it as a free app. For some reason I do not want to remove/disable the > > license checks. My question is: how does the licensing service handle > > free apps? Will checks always fail or always pass? Is there any way I > > can make the license service accept any installation of my free app as > > licensed? > > > > I found the following on free apps in the official documentation, but, > > it doesn't help me much. > > > > "Only paid applications published through Market can use the service. > > [...] Licensing is currently for paid apps only, since free apps are > > considered licensed for all users." > > > > I would have assumed that checks will fail, but, I remember reading > > somewhere that for free apps the licensing server will return a very > > large validity timestamp (long.MAX) ensuring that the license is > > always valid for free apps. Unfortunately, I have lost the link to > > that source. > > > > Note: > > 1. The problem is not as crazy as it sounds. It's just that I am not > > able to explain my use case further without giving away some > > proprietary information. > > 2. I had posted the same question on StackOverflow but did not get any > > response. Hence, posting it here. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Urgent Need : Oracle PL/SQL Developer in Cambridge, MA for 6+ Months(F_2_F)
People, please don't respond to these threads. It makes cleaning up the spam harder (because now I have to delete *your* posts too to make the original content disappear). Click on the "report" link or forward them to the list owners and we'll take care of things. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Need to buy 15 Nexus One Unlocked
All Nexus S devices are unlocked. You can use any GSM SIM in them (though whether you get 3G depends on the carrier), sideload apps if you need, and you can unlock the bootloader by running 'fastboot oem unlock'. (Note that unlocking the bootloader will void your warranty.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:08 PM, joshbeck wrote: > Hello, > > I'm a developer and I recently got a grant approved to buy hardware > for an Android developer class. > I'd like to get my hands on 15 Nexus 1's. The limit listed is 10. Is > there anyone I can contact? > > Can I get the Nexus S unlocked at Best Buy does anyone know? > > Thanks for any assistance. > > Josh Beck > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Is Android good for this?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru) < cor...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Android is good for everything! > >> EVERYTHING I say!!! > > I can tell you from experience, Android makes a very poor laundry > additive. > You're just not using it right. ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geAXiC7vqe0 -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In app billing...
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Mark Carter wrote: > After updating the Pro version (to be just a marker app), I would want to > unpublish it (to avoid confusion) but would existing users see the update > after unpublishing? > Yes, because they already have a license for the application. They'll continue to see it in their list of purchased items (and presumably get updates too) as long as the app is compatible with their device. > Also, would existing users who buy a new phone automatically get that > unpublished app? > Assuming the system restore works properly, then yes. However, if the user disabled the backup service or doesn't sign into their phone during the setup wizard (i.e. they skip signing into their account until later), then we can't restore. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In-app billing - ITEM_ID limitations
The primary problem is that the developer payload field is limited in size. Whatever data you put there has to travel through our entire billing system. Save the content to a datastore somewhere (either on-device or on a third-party server), then put the record ID in the developer payload field and you'll be fine. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 2:11 PM, tomgibara wrote: > I've just finished reading the preliminary documentation for in-app > billing. > > If I've understood correctly, as part of the billing request you can > supply: > > * ITEM_ID which is limited to a small number of pre-registered product > ids > * DEVELOPER_PAYLOAD unconstrained - but with caveats? > > and these are the only two pieces of data you can send to identify the > product being purchased. But even the DEVELOPER_PAYLOAD appears to be > off-limits; the documentation contains the following (rather cryptic) > advice: > > We recommend that you do not use this field to send data or content. > > I take this to mean product data/content, but that's no more than a > guess, and if that's the correct interpretation, why? The result seems > to be that you can't sell individuated items. > > I was hoping to use the in-app billing system to allow purchases of > dynamically generated designs from my forthcoming Metaglow > application, but this doesn't appear to be possible without operating > some sort of 'credits purchase' system which I think would provide a > very poor user experience and which isn't what I want to give users. > > Can anyone shed light on this? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] 404 on "In-App Billing Pricing" page
They appear to be working. I suspect they were still hidden from before the announcement, and have since been un-hidden. Please let me know if you are still having problems with them. (As for answer.py — there's a lot of reasons that can happen. Locale auto-detection is sometimes difficult to do. Sorry about that.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:53 AM, ob1 wrote: > Hi, > for your information, the following page has 3 reference links at the > bottom. All return a 404 for me. > Working page: > http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?answer=1153485 > > Contains the following broken HTML: > > > In-app Billing: > Availability and Policies > In-app Billing: > Overview > Creating In-App Product > IDs > > > These links are fully qualified and accessable from other related > pages, for example: > > http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/ > answer.py?answer=1072599">Creating In-App Product IDs > > Secondly, answer.py thought I was from Czechoslovakia (as opposed to > the UK). > > Oli > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In-App billing: Can it be used for Donation?
Answers inline below... On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Prateek wrote: > 1. Can In-app billing be used for accepting money as donation? Please > note that this is NOT a donation given to a registered charity but its > like money we give to fellow freelance developers if we appreciate > their work. Don't know if there is anything in Google's Terms & > Conditions that stops developers from accepting money in the way as > mentioned above. Any ideas? > > If yes, my guess is that it will be implemented as "unmanaged" > purchase type. > IANAL, so I can't interpret the terms and conditions for you. Sorry. > 2. Is In-app billing only for Paid apps? > No, it will be available for all apps published in Market. I cannot find the "Product list" under my currently published Free app > listing as mentioned on > http://d.android.com/guide/market/billing/billing_admin.html#billing-list-setup > > May be it's not activated for my account yet. Just wanted to verify. > This is correct, it has not been enabled yet. (Once it is enabled, keep in mind you'll need to associate a Checkout account with your account for this to appear.) 3. What is the refund time window? Is it 15 mins for In-App billing > also? > There is no end-user refund period. If you want to issue a refund, it has to be done manually by the application publisher through their Checkout merchant console. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] android market 2.3.0
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Mark Murphy wrote: > > All my devises had 2.2.11 android marquet app. Is there a way to > > update it? > > Wait for an update. AFAIK, 2.3.0 does not yet exist. > This is correct. We haven't released 2.3.0 yet. When it's released, you'll get it automatically. (Market has the ability to auto-update itself.) -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] In app billing...
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Mark Carter wrote: > I was recently thinking about how to change an existing Lite/Pro combo to > use in-app-upgrade instead. > > I can't see a nice way to do it. The best way I can think of is to > introduce in-app billing to the Lite version and convert the Pro version > into some kind of "pro key" token app. The Lite version would check for > existence of this "pro key" app (and validate) if the in-app-upgrade had not > been purchased. > > Does that work? > Yes, that would work. There are apps that already use "pro keys". You'd just be adding a second check with the in-app billing service for a license that's been purchased in the past. -- Trevor Johns Developer Programs Engineer, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Notice: Holiday Post Moderation
Hey everyone, Just a heads up that with the holiday season in full swing, most of Google's engineering team will be on vacation. This includes those who have volunteered their time to moderate this group. I'll still be checking in on things, as will some of my colleagues, but please don't be suprised if it takes a little longer than usual to get your posts approved. (And for those of you who don't know: Moderation normally only applies to users who have never posted before. If you've been around for a while, your posts will continue to flow without delay.) Thanks for your understanding, and happy holidays! -- Trevor Johns Developer Advocate, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: Buying your own App, Testing Licensing
Reply inline, below... On Dec 7, 12:23 pm, Brill Pappin wrote: > So, apparently i'm unable to buy my own app. > Two problems: > > First is that it looks like Market wont accept my Google Apps > credentials even though I have a valid checkout account (including > merchant account). > This thread describes others having the same > problem:http://www.google.as/support/forum/p/Google+Apps/thread?tid=78d6fa09f... You'll need to register for a regular (non-Google Apps) account. This has been the case for quite a while. You can do so here: https://www.google.com/accounts/NewAccount > Also, I came across another bit of info saying that developers are > *not allowed* to buy their own apps re the Google Checkout policies. > The problem is that in order for licensing to be tested properly, not > to mention I actually want to *use* my own app (because i like it), I > need to get it through the Market. > See:http://market.android.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=141659 Create a new GMail account for testing purposes. -- Trevor Johns -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Licensing server, app cracked.
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:53 PM, sblantipodi wrote: > As title, > > http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/08/licensing-server-news.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FhsDu+%28Android+Developers+Blog%29 > > where is the guide to obfuscate our code? It's coming. We have two articles in the queue that will cover this topic. As soon as they're ready, we'll publish them. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL found to be easy to crack
FYI: We have a blog post up on this topic. It covers many of the points I made earlier, but I figured it's worth pointing out. http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/08/licensing-server-news.html -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com <http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/08/licensing-server-news.html> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 8:26 AM, a1 wrote: > > But I'm not sure that native code is any harder to patch, and there > > are still identifiable syscalls or calls back up to java for i/o to > > show where it tries to accomplish verification. > > First of all it's much harder to bypass especially if you are dealing > with optimized code and you will have to do it at least twice (for arm > abi and armv7 abi). Event toolchain setup is more complicated. > > -- > Bart Janusz (Beepstreet) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] LVL found to be easy to crack
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > The article states: > > "Even when mangles in ProGuard the licensing library code is easily found > automatically. Since you compile the licensing library into your own code > you can make some changes to it to make it harder to find when obfuscated > though." > > Perhaps it is possible for Google to re-implement LVL with more attention > to security, before it's widely rolled out? > No. Again, this is client-side code. We could spend an eternity trying to strengthen it, and it would still be vulnerable to these kinds of attacks. Remember: We publish the source code. Anything that Google does is also visible to crackers. (Application developers have an advantage here: You can modify the LVL in unique ways and *not* publish your source code.) On top of that, once one person figured out how to crack the library, they could write an auto-crack that would work on all applications. The only way this works effectively is if you have heterogeneity in the license check code between applications. (Also: This isn't to say that there won't be future releases of the LVL where we improve the security of the code. I'm just saying that there's no point in completely re-implementing the LVL to magically solve all of these issues. That's impossible. It also implies that we didn't pay attention to security when the LVL was released -- this isn't true.) Doing it as part of Market application, with only simple allow/deny passed > over RPC is probably more secure. Market app is signed with the platform > key, and the firmware checks the signature, right? > Unless you have an Android Dev Phone which allows loading custom firmware images. Or a Nexus One which can have it's firmware unlocked by running 'fastboot oem unlock'. Or you have a phone that's normally firmware-locked but somebody figured out how to root it anyway. And once that's done, you could modify Android Market to return an ALLOW response for all applications -- which would be very bad. And on top of that, you're vulnerable to somebody decompiling the APK and removing the code that performs the RPC check. And you've removed the ability to perform a server-side license check if you want. No, this is worse idea in every way. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL found to be easy to crack
So far, in all the cases of cracked apps we've seen, it's been because of the following: 1. The developer did not run a code obfuscating tool (such as ProGuard) on their application; and, 2. The developer implemented the LVL as a drop-in library, without making any modifications to the library code or API. Let be clear here: the LVL is not a panacea. As shipped, it will protect against casual copying. However, if somebody is determined enough to take a decompiler to your APK, you have to be a bit more diligent about how you integrate it. There's a reason that we ship the LVL as source code rather than as a JAR file. We encourage you to do things like change the entry/exit points, subtly tweak the logic in LicenseChecker and LicenseValidator, and even move all the entire library into your project's package. Think of the LVL as a framework for a license check mechanism: it's an excellent starting point, and all the tools (or rather, APIs) you need are there, but don't treat it as a black box. And I *strongly* encourage you to run a code obfuscater, such as ProGuard. If you decompile an application and see symbols like allow(), dontAllow(), LICENSED, NOT_LICENSED, etc., it gives crackers a pretty good hint what they need to modify. On top of that, pay attention to how you integrate the LVL in your application. For example, if your application displays a dialog on license failure, imagine what would happen if a cracker disabled the call to display your dialog (invoking a method is a single line of bytecode, not difficult to comment out). Will your application still terminate if the "Exit" button in that dialog never gets pressed? And even with all of this, I need to be clear: This is a client-side license check. It's not bulletproof -- this is the nature of client-side code. However, implemented properly, it will make your application *difficult* to crack. And as long as it's not possible to create an auto-crack that works on your application (which, if you follow the rules above, shouldn't be possible), then it's still an improvement over the old copy protection model, which only required a rooted phone to bypass. And if you feel this still isn't enough protection: If your application has an online component to it (for example, a multiplayer game), it's entirely possible to upload the license response to your server and perform a server-side validation there. (Remember: License responses are cryptographically signed. Even if the application has been cracked, the actual license response data cannot be tampered with.) You could then refuse to serve the online component of your application. Since this is all happening on the server-side (read: trusted code), this would be absolutely secure against attack. And yes, we'll be publishing some articles soon on how to use ProGuard and other techniques for securing your code against attack -- we do mention ProGuard in our documentation, but we should probably be more explicit about how to use it. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Jonas Larsson wrote: > An official response would great. > > As I (and many others) see it the main reason for Android app > piracy is paid app unavailability in most countries. When most > users have the option of being honest and pay, most would. > Until Google enables the full Market in all countries the > incitement to crack and distribute apps remains. > > When LVL was announced I played with it a bit to see how > easy it was to crack. The fact is; it's much easier than the > article on AndroidPolice shows. No need to analyze switch > statements etc. There is a much better place to modify the > disassembled code that makes it trivial to implement a generic > patcher using available open source tools and shell scripts. > As to where in the (potentially obfuscated code) I refer to > I leave that as an exercise for the crackers. Google surely knew > all this even before LVL was announced... > > The official response, or lack thereof, will be interesting. > > On Aug 23, 11:50 pm, Brad wrote: > > Well, just as I was finishing adding LVL support to my apps, I come > > across this article: > > > > http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/08/23/exclusive-report-googles-andr... > > > > Of course we all knew that this new copy protection could be broken > > (as is the case for all DRM), but I guess I had hoped that it would > > take a little more effort. Looks like this will turn out to be a > > "one-click" crack. > > > > Will Google up the ante? Is it a lost cause on such an open platform? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post
Re: [android-developers] Re: Settings.Secure.ANDROID_ID not unique on DROID2?
Right now, we use the ANDROID_ID to prevent copying the license cache between devices when using ServerManagedPolicy. In this case, you'll be able to copy this cache between any two devices that have the same ANDROID_ID. However, you still won't be able to modify the license cache, and you won't be able to renew the license. So, after the license expires (~7 days), the application will try and contact Android Market again and the license check will fail. StrictPolicy is unaffected. -- Trevor Johns On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru) < cor...@gmail.com> wrote: > How is the market licensing system affected by this? > > -John Coryat > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Settings.Secure.ANDROID_ID not unique on DROID2?
Hi everyone, Just to follow up a bit here, the reason we believe this is happening is because ro.serialno isn't set on these devices. (Note that the ro.* properties currently aren't required by the CDD/CTS.) Unfortunately, it seems that we're using ro.serialno as the seed for the PRNG when generating ANDROID_ID. See: frameworks/base/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java:416 http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=en#uX1GffpyOZk/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java&q=android_id%20ro.serialno&sa=N&cd=1&ct=rc I've gone ahead and opened up a bug here for tracking purposes: http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=10639 (We suspect that the Droid 2 isn't the only phone affected by this, likely just the most noticeable instance.) We have a fix for this checked into our internal Git repo, so once that change propagates to vendors this shouldn't be an issue on future devices. For existing devices though, if you absolutely depend on the uniqueness of ANDROID_ID, you'll unfortunately need to rely on some other identifier (IMEI, WiFi MAC, etc.). -- Trevor Johns On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:46 AM, suzanne.alexandra < suzanne.alexan...@motorola.com> wrote: > Andrew, > I don't know that this is reported in any public bug system. I've > reported it within a Motorola bug system. > > - Suzanne > > > On Aug 20, 12:33 am, "Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru)" > wrote: > > > John, have you had any complaints yet about conflicts from duplicate > > > unique ids? > > > > I handled it in code. > > > > -John Coryat > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: Settings.Secure.ANDROID_ID not unique on DROID2?
Hi everyone, I've been trying to investigate this on my end, but unfortunately I seem to having some trouble finding a Droid 2 in the office to actually reproduce this with. If anybody has access to a device that's exhibiting this behavior, would you please send me a copy of the build fingerprint? (Settings > About phone > Build number) Thanks! -- Trevor Johns On Aug 16, 12:45 pm, String wrote: > On Aug 16, 8:06 pm, "Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru)" > > wrote: > > Seems to be a problem that's mostly with the DROID2. > > Yeah, I strongly suspect those others are indeed custom builds, > looking at the devices. What's an MSM? > > On Aug 15, 8:34 pm, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > > > So what should be used for the new licensing service on this device? > > That's the thing I'm most concerned about as well, at this point. I'd > REALLY like to hear from Mountain View on that topic. Trevor, you > still out there? > > String -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns LICENSED with anonymous accounts...
If an app is not published AND not draft, then you'll get ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. If an app is in draft (never published), then we send LICENSED for all requests for that app. If an app is published (or has been published then unpublished), then the response is driven by the dev console settings for the developer/testers, and purely by purchase history for everyone else. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Mark Carter wrote: > So to confirm. If an app is not published (nor draft) then the response is > dictated by the user's (i.e. the user running the app, not the one who > developed the app) setting in the Dev Console. If the user does not have a > Dev account (like many beta testers) then the response will be like "Respond > normally"? > > If the app is published (or draft) then the response is driven primarily by > the dev's console settings and secondarily by the Market license server > (storing who has paid for what). > > I think the first part could catch a lot of people out... > > On 5 August 2010 11:03, Trevor Johns wrote: > >> If the app isn't in Android Market, the license server will return >> ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. LicenseValidator considers that to be a fatal >> error due to programmer error, and should invoke the applicationError() >> callback method. >> >> My understanding from the server team is that uploading a draft version is >> supposed to be sufficient to avoid getting ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. (In the >> case of existing applications, you'll also need to increment your version >> code.) >> >> The other way you'll avoid this is precisely as Mark mentioned. If we >> don't find the application, we check to see if the current user has a >> developer account, and will send a test response (if one is set) using the >> user's RSA keypair. >> >> -- >> Trevor Johns >> >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Kirky wrote: >> >>> Trevor, >>> >>> Can you clarify what the licensing server returns if the App is not in >>> the Android Market? In my experience (and it seems other people) it is >>> returning LICENSED. This does not seem sensible to me. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Rob >>> >>> >>> On Aug 4, 3:23 am, Trevor Johns wrote: >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Android Developers" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Licensing - How/where do we manage the ServerManagedPolicy?
You cannot set those values. They're dynamically computed by the license server based on a number of factors. For one, we use this as one level of rate limiting. It is a managed policy, but it's managed by us. ;) If you want different behavior, just subclass ServerManagedPolicy or, if that doesn't make sense, write a completely custom policy. We fully intended for developers to do this, and it's not difficult. As for testing it in the field, our recommendation is to just register an anonymous Google account and buy your own app. You can always return it within 24 hours and not get charged. FWIW, you shouldn't be getting NOT_LICENSED if you have LICENSED set -- unless you're testing too frequently, in which case you'll start getting HTTP 503 errors (which is our rate limiting mechanism for misbehaving applications). -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:07 PM, oldskool73 wrote: > Hi, > > So I've just published my first paid app to the Market and I used the > new LVL with the default ServerManagedPolicy. > > On working through the docs and getting it set up I noted the > references to the server response extras VT, GT, GR & UT, and the > impression I got from quotes such as "a typical value would be 5 or > more days.", "a typical value would be "10" or higher." etc was that > we would have some way of setting these server response values per app > when we upload them to the Market. > > Either I'm missing something, or there does not seem to be a way to > set these in the Developer Console that I can see? > > If we can't set these, it's not really a 'managed' policy at all, but > a random 'whatever the server decides to respond with' policy, > particularly given the vagueness of the documentation. > > I really hate phone home licensing, and am only using it because it > seems to be the only option to combat Android piracy. Ideally I want > to just check once when the app is first launched, once a day or two > later to check they didn't return it, then cache that for 6 months > (forever?) to minimize disruption to my users. Is this kind of thing > possible with the ServerManagedPolicy or do I have the wrong end of > the stick about the 'management' features and have to roll my own? > > On a side note, if I can't buy my own app, how can I test my licensing > is working in the wild? I got several 'NOT_LICENSED' responses in > testing even when I set it to return 'LICENSED' in the console, so I'm > not 100% convinced of its stability and want to actually see how well > it works outside the testing environment, but apparently can't buy my > own app to do so! > > Cheers, > A > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: License Verification Library: ServerManagedPolicy, no connectivity = dontAllow?
You're probably seeing that because you're using a test response. The server sends a policy for test responses that disables caching. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:32 AM, String wrote: > My experience so far is the same. It's not what's described in the > docs: "ServerManagedPolicy is a flexible Policy that uses settings > provided by the licensing server to manage response caching and access > to the application while the device is offline (such as when the user > is on an airplane)." > > I can see why the initial license check would return "disallowed" if > the device is offline. But after a successful check, my understanding > is that the result be cached for a while, producing an "allowed" > response. Which isn't what I'm seeing either. > > String > > On Aug 5, 11:18 pm, BoD wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm still experimenting with the LVL and I noticed that, with the > > recommended strategy (ServerManagedPolicy), in case of no > > connectivity, the callback's dontAllow() method is called. > > > > This seems a bit odd to me and I wanted to make sure this is the > > expected behavior, and not a bug on my side. > > > > Thanks a lot for your help, > > > > BoD > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: License Verification Library: ServerManagedPolicy, no connectivity = dontAllow?
Yes, with the default policy implementations, this is what happens. You can write a custom policy that behaves differently if you want, but we currently don't provide any indicator to the application as to the cause of the license failure. Probably a good thing, I opened a feature request for you here: http://code.google.com/p/marketlicensing/issues/detail?id=12 For now, the recommend behavior is to just have a retry button when the license check fails. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:55 PM, BoD wrote: > Isn't it strange that if the device is offline, this gives the same > reply as if the application is not authorized?! > And the code can't distinct these two cases? > > In effect I don't see how you are supposed to use this policy. If you > receive dontAllow the first time, what are you supposed to do? > > BoD > > > > On Aug 6, 6:32 pm, String wrote: > > My experience so far is the same. It's not what's described in the > > docs: "ServerManagedPolicy is a flexible Policy that uses settings > > provided by the licensing server to manage response caching and access > > to the application while the device is offline (such as when the user > > is on an airplane)." > > > > I can see why the initial license check would return "disallowed" if > > the device is offline. But after a successful check, my understanding > > is that the result be cached for a while, producing an "allowed" > > response. Which isn't what I'm seeing either. > > > > String > > > > On Aug 5, 11:18 pm, BoD wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > I'm still experimenting with the LVL and I noticed that, with the > > > recommended strategy (ServerManagedPolicy), in case of no > > > connectivity, the callback's dontAllow() method is called. > > > > > This seems a bit odd to me and I wanted to make sure this is the > > > expected behavior, and not a bug on my side. > > > > > Thanks a lot for your help, > > > > > BoD > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL - live test
Hi everyone, I think the issue that people are seeing here (and as far as I can tell, the one Richard was experiencing) is that draft applications will always return LICENSED. This was done to facilitate testing, since draft apps can never be purchased. (They're in draft!) This doesn't seem to be documented well, so I'll make sure that gets fixed. Cheers! -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 7:30 AM, sblantipodi wrote: > Hi, since as I told you I'm on holidays and have no access on my pc I > can`t send the info requested from trevor, please keep me posted on > any news. > 4 Ago, 17:43, RichardC wrote: > > I have sent you an email with account details. > > > > Application is saved as draft (not published) - didn't want to clutter > > up the market. > > > > When I use my market account on the emulator I get the expected result > > from the test settings in my market account profile. > > > > It is only on "live" accounts where I get the unexpected result. > > > > On Aug 4, 3:23 am, Trevor Johns wrote: > > > > > > > > > Also, can you confirm that if you use your developer account and set > > > the test response in the Market publisher console to NOT_LICENSED, you > > > get a NOT_LICENSED response in your application? > > > > > -- > > > Trevor Johns > > > Google Developer Programs, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > > > > On Aug 3, 7:19 pm, Trevor Johns wrote: > > > > > > Richard, > > > > Could you please let me know what email address you're using for the > > > > test account? (Feel free to email me off-list if you'd like.) We > > > > should be able to pull the server logs and see what's happening here. > > > > > > Also, can you let me know how you've published this application? I > > > > seem to be getting an error when I try to pull up the details for > > > > com.apptude.android.apps.test.lvltest using the Android Market admin > > > > tools. (I can definitely see an entry for it, but no details. Is it > > > > saved as a draft right now?) > > > > > > -- > > > > Trevor Johns > > > > Google Developer Programs, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > > > > > On Aug 2, 2:51 am, RichardC wrote: > > > > > > > Update - tried it on my phone - same result LVL Test is ALLOWED; > note: > > > > > my phone (HTC Magic) was not using my Market Account. > > > > > > > On Aug 2, 6:02 am, a1 wrote: > > > > > > > > I do not test on emulator, since my games are GL based emulator > is > > > > > > unusable (also it's slower than actual device), but from what I > read > > > > > > LVL do not work on emulator, it's only stub implementation since > > > > > > actual LVL relies on vending app (market) for making calls to > market > > > > > > server. > > > > > > > Incorrect - from the docs: > http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html#runtime-... > > > > > > > "Because the standard Android platforms provided in the Android SDK > do > > > > > not include Android Market, you need to download the Google APIs > Add- > > > > > On platform, API Level 8 (or higher), from the SDK repository. > After > > > > > downloading the add-on, you need to create an AVD configuration > that > > > > > uses that system image. " > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > "Several versions of the add-on are available in the SDK > repository, > > > > > but only Google APIs Add-On, API 8 (release 2) or higher version of > > > > > the add-on includes the necessary Android Market services. This > means > > > > > that you cannot use Google APIs Add-On API 7 or lower as a runtime > > > > > environment for developing licensing on an emulator." > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns LICENSED with anonymous accounts...
Yes, this is correct behavior. Just to confirm: This is for an application that hasn't been published yet, correct? (You shouldn't get NOT_MARKET_MANAGED, provided that the application has been uploaded to the publisher console and, for existing apps, you've revved the version code for your application.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Mark Carter wrote: > *I* only ever get LICENSED if I have set my Dev Console to return LICENSED. > If I set it to "Respond normally" I get NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. > > Whatever I set it to in the dev console, other users will get > NOT_MARKET_MANAGED because the package name / version code combo is not > recognised by the Android Market. > > I'm assuming that if the LVL discovers the app has not been published, it > will then look at the user and ask the license server what the "test" > response is for that user and then use that. For example, if I write a new > LVL-ified app and send it to you (but don't publish) then the LVL response > will be dictated by your setting in the dev console (not mine). > > I hope Trevor can confirm! > > > On 4 August 2010 09:30, Kirky wrote: > >> Trevor, >> >> Can you clarify what the licensing server returns if the App is not in >> the Android Market? In my experience (and it seems other people) it is >> returning LICENSED. This does not seem sensible to me. >> >> Thanks >> >> Rob >> >> >> On Aug 4, 3:23 am, Trevor Johns wrote: >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns LICENSED with anonymous accounts...
If the app isn't in Android Market, the license server will return ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. LicenseValidator considers that to be a fatal error due to programmer error, and should invoke the applicationError() callback method. My understanding from the server team is that uploading a draft version is supposed to be sufficient to avoid getting ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED. (In the case of existing applications, you'll also need to increment your version code.) The other way you'll avoid this is precisely as Mark mentioned. If we don't find the application, we check to see if the current user has a developer account, and will send a test response (if one is set) using the user's RSA keypair. -- Trevor Johns On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Kirky wrote: > Trevor, > > Can you clarify what the licensing server returns if the App is not in > the Android Market? In my experience (and it seems other people) it is > returning LICENSED. This does not seem sensible to me. > > Thanks > > Rob > > > On Aug 4, 3:23 am, Trevor Johns wrote: > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] ERROR/LicenseValidator(4883): Signature verification failed.
Hi Donal, If you're getting that error, it meas that the RSA public key you're passing into LicenseChecker isn't correct. It's a little odd that it would be working in some of your applications but not others, but that's what that error means. You might want to make sure that all three applications are published using the same developer account. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Don wrote: > Hi All, > I'm having a problem with the LVL in one of my apps. > > Here are the projects in my eclipse workspace: > > com_android_vending_licensing - standard LVL > my_app_1 > my_app_2 > my_app_3 > > All three of the apps use the same licensing library project > (including the same SALT), and share the same code in their main > activities for checking the license. But when testing, one of the apps > continuously fails the license request and the others respond > correctly depending on what test response I set in the market "Edit > Profile" page. > > The error I get in logcat is: > > 08-04 15:20:20.863: ERROR/LicenseValidator(4883): Signature > verification failed. > > And the dontAllow() function of the LicenseCheckerCallback is run. > > > This error message originates from line 104 of LicenseValidator.java > in the licensing library. I've done some debugging and the > responseCode is set to LICENSED (see line 94 of > LicenseValidator.java). > > > Some help would be very much appreciated. > > I'm testing the apps on a motorola milestone. > > Cheers, > Donal > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL NOT_MARKET_MANAGED
The reason this happens is because we store the RSA keypair used for license checks on a per-app/per-version basis. The old version of your application doesn't have a license key associated with it. (We probably could make this a bit more clear.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Brian wrote: > I've done some testing on this, myself, and it seems that it only > returns the NOT_MARKET_MANAGED error for an app in the market if the > version code (the integer form of the version number in the manifest) > in the copy making the check is higher than the one currently in the > market. If the version code in the copy of the app making the check > is less than or equal to the current one in the market, then the > normal license valid/invalid response is given unless there's another > error. > > That seems acceptable to me, even if it is a bit odd considering the > docs imply that it indicates only a package name mismatch. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL - A Massive Concern
I just checked using my Evo running Froyo, and the license check is indeed mentioned. However, it's not considered "dangerous", so you need to click on "Show All" to see it. -- Trevor Johns Google Devloper Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Mark Carter wrote: > When I install an app (with that permission) I don't see the CHECK_LICENSE > permission mentioned. The other permissions are mentioned but not that one. > This is on N1 Froyo. > > Am I missing something!? > > On 2 August 2010 21:40, Trevor Johns wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Mark Carter wrote: >> >>> When the user makes a purchase, he usually does not know whether the app >>> is LVL-secured or not. Certainly, consider all purchases made before last >>> week - the users did not know anything about LVL. >> >> >> If a developer uses the LVL, they must request the CHECK_LICENSE >> permission. The user will be informed of this, just like any other >> permission. >> >> So yes, it's possible to tell at purchase time that an application is >> using the LVL. >> >> -- >> Trevor Johns >> Google Developer Programs, Android >> http://developer.android.com >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
And even if you skip the "request refund" step, we'll see a large number of license checks for a single account in our logs. So, not only can we disable that account, but we'll also know who was responsible. :P -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Mark Carter wrote: > As soon as you request a refund then the license server will return > NOT_LICENSED for that Google account. > > > On 3 August 2010 12:37, andreas.walt...@googlemail.com < > andreas.walt...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 31, 11:21 pm, keyeslabs wrote: >> > ... someone to crack the >> > app. The process looks something like this: decompile the apk using >> > a freely available open source tool, find the code that invokes the >> > licensing check, skip it, recompile and repackage the apk. >> >> Isn't there is a much simpler way to circumvent the whole thing due to >> a security leak in the LVL process? (Please tell me I'm wrong!): >> >> 1) create a new google account, e. g. my.wa...@googlemail.com >> 2) switch your Android phone to this account >> 3) Buy app, copy apk, request refund >> 4) Upload apk to warez server >> 5) Sell google account and password to interested downloaders. (e. g. >> at a 50% discount compared to the original market price). >> >> The reason for this is that the license check is google-account-based, >> not device-based. Any device being linked to the google account the >> app has been purchased with will run the app. The licensing mechansim >> will change nothing in this behaviour. >> >> Andreas >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns LICENSED with anonymous accounts...
Yes, it's necessary. We need the application to be listed in Android Market so that we can actually check and see if you've purchased it. (We send the package name and version code of the application to the licensing server -- if your app isn't published, we won't find a match for the package name.) Also, your developer account will always return a test response or NOT_LICSENSED (since you can't purchase your own app), so you'll need to test with a temporary account if you want to test the behavior an end user will see. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:00 AM, OldSkoolMark wrote: > I'm seeing the same behavior using the sample activity, using the > gmail account that is associated with my developer account. The one > thing I haven't done is upload the sample activity APK to the Market. > Is that necessary? > > On Aug 2, 12:45 pm, Trevor Johns wrote: > > It's a little hard to figure out what the initial report is describing > here, > > but I suspect it's this: > > > > The test response settings in the Market publisher console only affect > users > > who are (a) the developer who owns the publisher account, or (b) listed > as > > test accounts. > > > > Normal users are unaffected by the "test response" setting. This is so > that > > you can test your account without disturbing users who have already > > purchased your application. > > > > So, if your "dummy" account purchased the application, they should always > be > > getting LICENSED -- because they purchased the application. (Likewise, if > > you sideload an application onto phone that's using a dummy account that > > hasn't ever purchased the application, they'll get NOT_LICENSED.) > > > > There's also one exception to this: free apps. While we won't allow > > uploading a free APK that uses the CHECK_LICENSE permission to the Market > > publisher console, *requests* for these applications currently will > always > > return LICENSED. However, since (again) you can't upload these APKs, this > > isn't something that should happen often. > > > > -- > > Trevor Johns > > > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 1:30 AM, ojpdev wrote: > > > I'm getting the same problem. It works on two phones (Nexus One and > > > HTC Hero). Fails on a HTC Legend. Not sure whether that's important or > > > not! > > > > > I don't understand how it can say it's licensed. > > > > > On Aug 1, 11:46 am, sblantipodi wrote: > > > > I opened a similar thread recently but I doesn't let me enter any new > > > > post on it so I opened a new one. > > > > > > I'm having problem with LVL, I'm using the MainActivity.java > > > > from the LVL sample. > > > > > > When I call the check() method from LVL it always returns LICENSED. > > > > The strange things is that with my developer account it works well, I > > > > got licensed, unlicensed etc > > > > on the base of what I set on the developer console. > > > > With dummy email settings I got always LICENSED. > > > > > > It's strange, It always return LICENSED also if I log into different > > > > GMAIL account > > > > into the "account and sync" in the emulator. > > > > - I deleted AVD, > > > > - recreated a new one, > > > > - logged into the emulator with a gmail account with no rights, > > > > - setted NOT LICENSED form my developer console, > > > > - installed the software on the new avd. > > > > > > In this way, If I login the emulator with the developer account it > > > > works well, > > > > if I login with an anonimous email address it always return LICENSED. > > > > > > Is this a bug? I have no idea on how to go forward. > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to > android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: LVL - live test
Also, can you confirm that if you use your developer account and set the test response in the Market publisher console to NOT_LICENSED, you get a NOT_LICENSED response in your application? -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Aug 3, 7:19 pm, Trevor Johns wrote: > Richard, > Could you please let me know what email address you're using for the > test account? (Feel free to email me off-list if you'd like.) We > should be able to pull the server logs and see what's happening here. > > Also, can you let me know how you've published this application? I > seem to be getting an error when I try to pull up the details for > com.apptude.android.apps.test.lvltest using the Android Market admin > tools. (I can definitely see an entry for it, but no details. Is it > saved as a draft right now?) > > -- > Trevor Johns > Google Developer Programs, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > On Aug 2, 2:51 am, RichardC wrote: > > > > > Update - tried it on my phone - same result LVL Test is ALLOWED; note: > > my phone (HTC Magic) was not using my Market Account. > > > On Aug 2, 6:02 am, a1 wrote: > > > > I do not test on emulator, since my games are GL based emulator is > > > unusable (also it's slower than actual device), but from what I read > > > LVL do not work on emulator, it's only stub implementation since > > > actual LVL relies on vending app (market) for making calls to market > > > server. > > > Incorrect - from the > > docs:http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html#runtime-... > > > "Because the standard Android platforms provided in the Android SDK do > > not include Android Market, you need to download the Google APIs Add- > > On platform, API Level 8 (or higher), from the SDK repository. After > > downloading the add-on, you need to create an AVD configuration that > > uses that system image. " > > > ... > > > "Several versions of the add-on are available in the SDK repository, > > but only Google APIs Add-On, API 8 (release 2) or higher version of > > the add-on includes the necessary Android Market services. This means > > that you cannot use Google APIs Add-On API 7 or lower as a runtime > > environment for developing licensing on an emulator." -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: LVL - live test
Richard, Could you please let me know what email address you're using for the test account? (Feel free to email me off-list if you'd like.) We should be able to pull the server logs and see what's happening here. Also, can you let me know how you've published this application? I seem to be getting an error when I try to pull up the details for com.apptude.android.apps.test.lvltest using the Android Market admin tools. (I can definitely see an entry for it, but no details. Is it saved as a draft right now?) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Aug 2, 2:51 am, RichardC wrote: > Update - tried it on my phone - same result LVL Test is ALLOWED; note: > my phone (HTC Magic) was not using my Market Account. > > On Aug 2, 6:02 am, a1 wrote: > > > I do not test on emulator, since my games are GL based emulator is > > unusable (also it's slower than actual device), but from what I read > > LVL do not work on emulator, it's only stub implementation since > > actual LVL relies on vending app (market) for making calls to market > > server. > > Incorrect - from the > docs:http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html#runtime-... > > "Because the standard Android platforms provided in the Android SDK do > not include Android Market, you need to download the Google APIs Add- > On platform, API Level 8 (or higher), from the SDK repository. After > downloading the add-on, you need to create an AVD configuration that > uses that system image. " > > ... > > "Several versions of the add-on are available in the SDK repository, > but only Google APIs Add-On, API 8 (release 2) or higher version of > the add-on includes the necessary Android Market services. This means > that you cannot use Google APIs Add-On API 7 or lower as a runtime > environment for developing licensing on an emulator." -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns always LICENSED...
Hi everyone, So far, I haven't been able to reproduce this on my end. If you're getting LICESNED response from an paid application on a brand new test account (not the developer of the application, and not listed as a "test" account) which hasn't purchased the application, can you please send me: 1. A copy of your logcat output. 2. The name of the test account you're using, as well as your developer account. (We can check the server logs and hopefully see what response we're sending you.) 3. The environment you're running under. (Phone model, OS version, OS build, etc.) 3. (Optional, but highly useful.) The source code to a simple application which demonstrates this behavior. (A modified version of the sample app that's published with the library would be perfect.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Kirky wrote: > Devesh: > > Yes that's clear to me but shouldn't any phones that are not synced to > accounts listed in the portal simply just get not NOT_LICENSED back > from the service? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Syntax error in C2DM Registering in Google example
Thanks for the heads up! I've just submitted a change to fix this.
--
Trevor Johns
Google Developer Programs, Android
http://developer.android.com
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 8:21 AM, feras wrote:
> Well, its not that big deal but i found a Syntax error in the code for
> C2DM Registering from this site
> http://code.google.com/android/c2dm/index.html
> at the error in the line below .
>
> registrationIntent.putExtra("app",
> PendingIntent.getBroadcast(this, 0, new Intent(), 0);
>
> where they missing the end ")" and here's my magical fix :)
>
> registrationIntent.putExtra("app",
> PendingIntent.getBroadcast(this, 0, new Intent(), 0));
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Android Developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL, ServerManagedPolicy...
If you use a test response (in other words, you're using a developer/test account and have the Market publisher console set to something other than "Respond Normally" for licensing requests), the server doesn't send any response "extras". This means that your local cache will expire after 1 minute -- which is the minimum cache lifetime as enforced by ServerManagedPolicy. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 3:17 PM, sblantipodi wrote: > How can we use ServerManagedPolicy in the emulator and fastly switch > from licensed to unlicensed to something else? > > The first time I got the licensed message, than I'll continue to get > the licensed > message also if I set UNLICENSED from my developer console after I > deleted and reinstalled the app on the emulator. > > Thanks. > > On Jul 31, 4:23 pm, sblantipodi wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm using the ServerManagedPolicy implementation from the LVL code > > sample (MainActivity.class) but I haven't understood how it manage > > cache. > > > > The first time application start it needs internet to validate the > > license, if it is validated, how much time should pass before a second > > check is needed? > > > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] LVL, ServerManagedPolicy...
The lifetime of the cache used by ServerManagedPolicy is controlled by the server (as the name suggests), and has three variables: VT License validity timestamp. Specifies the date/time at which the current (cached) license response expires and must be rechecked on the licensing server. GT Grace period timestamp. Specifies the end of the period during which a Policy may allow access to the application, even though the response status is RETRY. The value is managed by the server, however a typical value would be 5 or more days. GR Maximum retries count. Specifies how many consecutive RETRY license checks the Policy should allow, before denying the user access to the application. The value is managed by the server, however a typical value would be "10" or higher. The cache is valid as long as (currentTime < VT) && (currentTime < GT || retryCount < GR). This is documented here: http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html#extras -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 7:23 AM, sblantipodi wrote: > Hi, > I'm using the ServerManagedPolicy implementation from the LVL code > sample (MainActivity.class) but I haven't understood how it manage > cache. > > The first time application start it needs internet to validate the > license, if it is validated, how much time should pass before a second > check is needed? > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL Sample application problems
The LVL sample app should be able to be built. We've tested it under Eclipse, IntelliJ, and Ant. That being said, you'll need to change the package name for it to get it working properly, since you need to upload it to Android Market (in draft mode), and you can't upload an application in the com.android or com.example namespaces. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:52 PM, metal mikey wrote: > If your R.java isn't being dynamically created it's likely because > you've got an error in one of your XML files which is stopping Eclipse > from building the App properly. > > Although, from what I saw of the LVL sample App, I don't think it's > complete and thus is not capable of being built... > > On Aug 2, 2:37 pm, Jeffrey wrote: > > I've followed the instructions for loading the sample LVL application > > and it loads up with a bunch of errors. Anywhere that a > > "R.layout.main" or "R.*" request is made it says R cannot be resolved. > > It suggests importing Android.R but if I do that then it says it can't > > find any of the files, including the R.layout.main file which is > > definitely there. > > > > What gives? I have had several problems with sample applications so > > far, am I doing something wrong? You'd think that all you have to do > > is import it from existing source and it should work. > > > > Has anyone else had this issue? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL handler on a dead thread
It was the weekend, I've got to step away from the computer sometime. ;) It is indeed a harmless error. We shut down the handler thread when onDestroy() is called, and Handler can detect when a thread is dead (as you just experienced). However, as you also noted, we should indeed be swallowing that exception to avoid cluttering the logs. I've opened a bug here: http://code.google.com/p/marketlicensing/issues/detail?id=9 -- Trevor Johns On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Pent wrote: > Hate to do it but... bump since it was the weekend. > > Any support from Google on a just-released library ? > > Pent > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL returns LICENSED with anonymous accounts...
It's a little hard to figure out what the initial report is describing here, but I suspect it's this: The test response settings in the Market publisher console only affect users who are (a) the developer who owns the publisher account, or (b) listed as test accounts. Normal users are unaffected by the "test response" setting. This is so that you can test your account without disturbing users who have already purchased your application. So, if your "dummy" account purchased the application, they should always be getting LICENSED -- because they purchased the application. (Likewise, if you sideload an application onto phone that's using a dummy account that hasn't ever purchased the application, they'll get NOT_LICENSED.) There's also one exception to this: free apps. While we won't allow uploading a free APK that uses the CHECK_LICENSE permission to the Market publisher console, *requests* for these applications currently will always return LICENSED. However, since (again) you can't upload these APKs, this isn't something that should happen often. -- Trevor Johns On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 1:30 AM, ojpdev wrote: > I'm getting the same problem. It works on two phones (Nexus One and > HTC Hero). Fails on a HTC Legend. Not sure whether that's important or > not! > > I don't understand how it can say it's licensed. > > > On Aug 1, 11:46 am, sblantipodi wrote: > > I opened a similar thread recently but I doesn't let me enter any new > > post on it so I opened a new one. > > > > I'm having problem with LVL, I'm using the MainActivity.java > > from the LVL sample. > > > > When I call the check() method from LVL it always returns LICENSED. > > The strange things is that with my developer account it works well, I > > got licensed, unlicensed etc > > on the base of what I set on the developer console. > > With dummy email settings I got always LICENSED. > > > > It's strange, It always return LICENSED also if I log into different > > GMAIL account > > into the "account and sync" in the emulator. > > - I deleted AVD, > > - recreated a new one, > > - logged into the emulator with a gmail account with no rights, > > - setted NOT LICENSED form my developer console, > > - installed the software on the new avd. > > > > In this way, If I login the emulator with the developer account it > > works well, > > if I login with an anonimous email address it always return LICENSED. > > > > Is this a bug? I have no idea on how to go forward. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: LVL - A Massive Concern
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Mark Carter wrote: > When the user makes a purchase, he usually does not know whether the app is > LVL-secured or not. Certainly, consider all purchases made before last week > - the users did not know anything about LVL. If a developer uses the LVL, they must request the CHECK_LICENSE permission. The user will be informed of this, just like any other permission. So yes, it's possible to tell at purchase time that an application is using the LVL. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Application is not licensed...
It doesn't need to be "published", but it does need to be uploaded to Android Market. (It can be in the "unpublished" or "draft" state.) This is because Android Market needs a way to look up the RSA key for the application, as well as the list of authorized testers. (Technical note: We return ERROR_NOT_MARKET_MANAGED if we don't recognize the package name. If you really wanted, you could write a custom policy that treated this as a LICENSED response for testing purposes.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 3:43 PM, sblantipodi wrote: > Do you know if the application must be published to try LVL on the > emulator? > My application is saved, but never published. > > On Jul 29, 12:01 am, Trevor Johns wrote: > > Check the logcat output, there should be some hints in there to tell you > why > > the license check is failing. > > > > -- > > Trevor Johns > > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:27 AM, sblantipodi > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > I'm trying the code sample bundled with LVL library... > > > > > I builted that code into my software changing the public key with the > > > one taken from my developer console. > > > > > Now when the "MainActivity" start, code without modification from the > > > initial sample, it tell me that the application is not licensed also > > > if I setted the test response to licensed in my profile settings from > > > developer console... > > > Any idea? > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to > android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Thoughts on this LenientPolicy implementation of an LVL Policy?
No, we could just store some key in the preferences to make sure that the
preference file hasn't been blindly deleted. It's not perfect, it's just
meant to be a deterrent. (If we're providing an initial grace period, we've
already established that the application isn't highly concerned about the
security of the license check -- and a deterrent is still better than the
alternative.)
--
Trevor Johns
Google Developer Programs, Android
http://developer.android.com
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Mark Carter wrote:
> How does that trip wire work? If the user clears the app data, then surely
> the only way you could tell is by storing something outside of the app's
> scope (like on the server or in the Market app).
>
> I'd be happy to contribute LenientPolicy. Actually modified it today so
> that it caches LICENSED and NOT_LICENSED responses (in the same way as
> ServerManagedPolicy) so that it doesn't have to call the server every time.
> This means LenientPolicy now uses the Obfuscator and no longer stores any
> non-obfuscated prefs. I'm happy to do the Javadoc but don't really have time
> to do the JUnit tests. Anyway, shouldn't someone other than the implementer
> do those? ;)
>
> On 29 July 2010 00:43, Trevor Johns wrote:
>
>> 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 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 (mLastRespons
Re: [android-developers] Thoughts on this LenientPolicy implementation of an LVL Policy?
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 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Application is not licensed...
Check the logcat output, there should be some hints in there to tell you why the license check is failing. -- Trevor Johns On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:27 AM, sblantipodi wrote: > Hi all, > I'm trying the code sample bundled with LVL library... > > I builted that code into my software changing the public key with the > one taken from my developer console. > > Now when the "MainActivity" start, code without modification from the > initial sample, it tell me that the application is not licensed also > if I setted the test response to licensed in my profile settings from > developer console... > Any idea? > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
A third-party obfuscator is not strictly required, but it certainly adds an additional level of security. We even mention it in our developer docs: The LVL provides a full Obfuscator implementation called AESObfuscator that > uses AES encryption to obfuscate data. You can use AESObfuscator in your > application without modification or you can adapt it to your needs. For more > information, see the next section. > Alternatively, you can write a custom Obfuscator based on your own code or > use an obfuscator program such as ProGuard for additional security. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:44 PM, sblantipodi wrote: > I haven't understood if using this library external obfuscation > (proguard for example) is needed > for security reason or if we can avoid using external obfuscator, it's > quite a pain using proguard in netbeans plus android sdk. > > On Jul 27, 10:24 pm, Sebastian Rodriguez wrote: > > I agree with Anton Persson. When will Google realize that opening the > paid > > market to all the other countries is crucial for the market environment > :( > > We don't have access to them here in Singapore either. > > > > But this is a major step already, let's hope for even better! > > > > Seb > > > > On 28 July 2010 04:19, Kaj Bjurman wrote: > > > > > > > > > I saw that entry, and have a question. > > > > > What will happen if the user doesn't have network connectivity? Many > > > users turn of data traffic when they travel to other countries, but > > > the probably still want to use the licensed applications. > > > > > On 27 Juli, 19:55, Trevor Johns wrote: > > > > Android fans, > > > > For those of you who haven't already heard through our blog, we've > > > > just launched the Android Market licensing service: > > > > > > > http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/07/licensing-service-for-... > > > > > > From the above blog post: > > > > > > "This simple and free service provides a secure mechanism to manage > > > > access to all Android Market paid applications targeting Android 1.5 > > > > or higher. At run time, with the inclusion of a set of libraries > > > > provided by us, your application can query the Android Market > > > > licensing server to determine the license status of your users. It > > > > returns information on whether your users are authorized to use the > > > > app based on stored sales records." > > > > > > Developer documentation is available here: > > > > > >http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html > > > > > > Happy coding! > > > > > > -- > > > > Trevor Johns > > > > Google Developer Programs, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to > android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > > > > -- > > Sebastien Rodriguez > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Licensing
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Ken wrote: > it's very new and i just notice it this morning. i want to know how > google handle something like dns fraud? > > for example, if google is connecting to licensing.google.com for > licensing checking, what if the one manually point the host name to > his server which can providing fake licensing result? > > Regards, > Ken That's why we use public-key cryptography to sign license responses. The fake licensing server wouldn't have access to the private key. As a result, the forged license response would fail verification. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
It's implemented in the library. Cache contents are protected using a swappable Obfuscator class. We include a standard obfuscator implementation that encrypts cache data using AES-256 and an application-specific key, along with a copy of the device ID. This prevents tampering with cache data, or replaying it across applications/devices. Developers are also free to implement their own Obfuscator if they so choose. (The cache itself contains timestamp data, so there's no point in replaying the cache data for the same application on the same device.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > Is caching implemented in the library or in the Market app? > > I am concerned about potential abuse, such as replacing cache contents. > > -- > Kostya Vasilyev -- http://kmansoft.wordpress.com > > 28.07.2010 0:23 пользователь "Trevor Johns" > написал: > > > Developers can chose whether to implement response caching or not. > > Assuming caching is enabled, we require a network connection for the first > license check, but then the user can go offline for a period of time before > requiring another license check. > > -- > Trevor Johns > Google Developer Programs, Android > http://developer.android.com > > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Kaj Bjurman > wrote: > > > > I saw that entry, ... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" g... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
Developers can chose whether to implement response caching or not. Assuming caching is enabled, we require a network connection for the first license check, but then the user can go offline for a period of time before requiring another license check. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Kaj Bjurman wrote: > I saw that entry, and have a question. > > What will happen if the user doesn't have network connectivity? Many > users turn of data traffic when they travel to other countries, but > the probably still want to use the licensed applications. > > > > On 27 Juli, 19:55, Trevor Johns wrote: > > Android fans, > > For those of you who haven't already heard through our blog, we've > > just launched the Android Market licensing service: > > > > http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/07/licensing-service-for-... > > > > From the above blog post: > > > > "This simple and free service provides a secure mechanism to manage > > access to all Android Market paid applications targeting Android 1.5 > > or higher. At run time, with the inclusion of a set of libraries > > provided by us, your application can query the Android Market > > licensing server to determine the license status of your users. It > > returns information on whether your users are authorized to use the > > app based on stored sales records." > > > > Developer documentation is available here: > > > > http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html > > > > Happy coding! > > > > -- > > Trevor Johns > > Google Developer Programs, Androidhttp://developer.android.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Free copies of LVL protected apps
(One clarification: If this is a beta app, you could also get NOT_MARKET_MANAGED, so watch out for that.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Trevor Johns wrote: > Yes, in this case, I think this is the best approach. Subclass > ServerManagedPolicy, and on getting a NOT_LICENSED response from the Market > licensing service, query your own server to see if the user is authorized to > bypass the license check. You'll probably want to sign the response from > your server as well, just to make sure it's not being spoofed. > > -- > Trevor Johns > Google Developer Programs, Android > http://developer.android.com > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Open wrote: > >> I just finished reading the docs on Google's new Android License >> Verification Library. >> >> I often give out free copies of my applications to beta testers. I >> don't, however, want the beta testers to share the app with their >> friends. What's the best way to give out a device-specific license >> free version? >> >> From what I can tell I will need to create a custom policy and then >> maintain a list of authorized devices/accounts in my own backend that >> I can check. >> >> Is that what other devs are doing? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Free copies of LVL protected apps
Yes, in this case, I think this is the best approach. Subclass ServerManagedPolicy, and on getting a NOT_LICENSED response from the Market licensing service, query your own server to see if the user is authorized to bypass the license check. You'll probably want to sign the response from your server as well, just to make sure it's not being spoofed. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Open wrote: > I just finished reading the docs on Google's new Android License > Verification Library. > > I often give out free copies of my applications to beta testers. I > don't, however, want the beta testers to share the app with their > friends. What's the best way to give out a device-specific license > free version? > > From what I can tell I will need to create a custom policy and then > maintain a list of authorized devices/accounts in my own backend that > I can check. > > Is that what other devs are doing? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
Yes. There's a code sample that's bundled as part of the library download. You'll find it in $SDK_ROOT/market_licensing/sample. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:55 AM, sblantipodi wrote: > excellent, is there some code sample on how to use this new apis? > > On Jul 27, 8:42 pm, Kostya Vasilyev wrote: > > What's great is that it's available on all Android versions starting > > with 1.5 (i.e. it's not a Froyo only feature). > > > > -- Kostya > > > > 27.07.2010 21:55, Trevor Johns пишет: > > > > > > > > > Android fans, > > > For those of you who haven't already heard through our blog, we've > > > just launched the Android Market licensing service: > > > > >http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/07/licensing-service-for-. > .. > > > > > > From the above blog post: > > > > > "This simple and free service provides a secure mechanism to manage > > > access to all Android Market paid applications targeting Android 1.5 > > > or higher. At run time, with the inclusion of a set of libraries > > > provided by us, your application can query the Android Market > > > licensing server to determine the license status of your users. It > > > returns information on whether your users are authorized to use the > > > app based on stored sales records." > > > > > Developer documentation is available here: > > > > >http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html > > > > > Happy coding! > > > > > -- > > > Trevor Johns > > > Google Developer Programs, Android > > >http://developer.android.com > > > > -- > > Kostya Vasilev -- WiFi Manager + pretty widget -- > http://kmansoft.wordpress.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > 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 android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Licensing
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Raymond C. Rodgers < raym...@badlucksoft.com> wrote: > On 7/27/2010 2:31 PM, Shane Isbell wrote: > >> The implementation that Google offers also embeds code, which is >> inherently insecure but the docs also says: "For example, a copy-protected >> application cannot be downloaded from Market to a device that provides root >> access" This would limit the ability of people to pull off the application >> off of a rooted device. Is it possible for third-parties to detect if it is >> a rooted device? >> > I'm not sure that this is inherently insecure. Yes, it does use libraries > and a public key that will be embedded in the application, but public keys > are designed to be shared. All the client side is doing is verifying > information encrypted with the private key which isn't accessible, and > providing that information to the application for it to manage as the > developer decides. I may not have my security "A" game going today, but that > sounds reasonably secure to me. The private key isn't even made available to > the developer as I understand it, so the developer doesn't really have the > option of shooting themselves in the foot with it. In many ways, it's more secure to have the code embedded in the application (which is why we designed the library this way). If the license check was performed solely by the OS, an attacker could just use a modified firmware image to bypass the checks for all applications on the system. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Licensing
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Mark Carter wrote: > I found this line confusing: > > "Adding licensing to an application does not affect the way the > application functions when run on a device that does not offer Android > Market." > > I assume they don't mean that licensing checks are bypassed if there > is no Android Market (!) since this is down to the app's licensing > implementation... > Correct. Licensing checks are not bypassed. However, since this is a runtime check, developers can decide how to handle this failure case. They could, for example, create an single APK that checks with multiple licensing services. -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Android Market Licensing: Now Available!
Android fans, For those of you who haven't already heard through our blog, we've just launched the Android Market licensing service: http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/07/licensing-service-for-android.html >From the above blog post: "This simple and free service provides a secure mechanism to manage access to all Android Market paid applications targeting Android 1.5 or higher. At run time, with the inclusion of a set of libraries provided by us, your application can query the Android Market licensing server to determine the license status of your users. It returns information on whether your users are authorized to use the app based on stored sales records." Developer documentation is available here: http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/licensing.html Happy coding! -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
Re: [android-developers] Re: Device Seeding Program for Top Android Market Developers
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Hekki wrote: > Ok I can confirm, it's a fake. > > The android-market-seed...@google.com returns failure notice and > doesn't exists in google. > > That would have been so good :D > > Yahel > Hello everyone, I've gone ahead and fixed the problems with the email alias used in the announcement email. Our apologies for any confusion. (Like Roman said, please do *not* contact me directly regarding this topic.) -- Trevor Johns Google Developer Programs, Android http://developer.android.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: unsubscribe
Done. For future reference, most mailing lists (including this one) include directions for unsubscribing yourself at the bottom of the message. Following those directions is a lot more reliable and less time consuming than asking a moderator to do it for you. -- Trevor Johns On Jan 16, 3:52 pm, feda al-shahwan wrote: > I would like to subscribe > > -- > Eng. Feda AlShahwan > College of Technology Studies > Puplic Authority for Applied Education & Training -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
[android-developers] Re: UI framework changes in Android 1.6
On Oct 23, 8:44 pm, gulshan karmani wrote: > Is this a spam ? Yup. I've nuked the discussions on the web interface. Going forward, we have moderation on for this group now, which should help cut back on the amount of spam. -- Trevor Johns --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
