Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ActualHacker's commentslogin

As a developer, I’ve spent years building and maintaining my app to meet Google’s policies and user expectations. Recently, I discovered today that users logging in with Google see very scary warnings when opening links through in-app browsers in my app.

Here’s the kicker: the warnings are based on the user-agent, as Google quietly admits in the fine print. This means they know the issue is with Samsung, Xiaomi, and custom Android ROMs' in-app browsers not adhering to their ‘secure browsing’ standards. But instead of addressing it, they’re happy to pass the buck and blame the one person who has zero control over the situation: the developer.

I’m already in a high-risk industry, so this has likely caused substantial, unknowable losses—and it could even be argued that it’s defamatory. These warnings unfairly place blame on me, tanking user trust and damaging reputations, even though Google knows it’s not my fault.

By explicitly suggesting that our apps are unsafe, Google is punishing developers for their inability to control Android’s ecosystem fragmentation while forcing users to trust the false narrative that “it’s the app’s fault.”

If any starving lawyers want to start a class action, consider me your first lead.

Base64 + ROT13: em5leC53bnBib2ZyYTc2QGNlYmdiYS56cg==


In case you think this is just me whining: no its impacted plenty of other apps:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40591090/403-error-thats...

The fact that you can "fix" it by forging your user-agent demonstrates that its a useless policy change, and does nothing to protect users, while needlessly casting doubts on apps who comply with policies.


I'm long on this backfiring

Petty, and befitting

WP is trash, always has been

WPEngine is a functional product on the other hand


Says the company with a competing product


How do you like them Apples


Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon should be 500 companies, not 5


But they get to remind everyone that they're the "good guys", and they're "trying"


How generous of them not to brick your phone once you install any unapproved software

It's almost like monopolies are bad for society


iOS isn't even the #1 mobile operating system in the EU. Even in countries where it's the majority, it caps out at around 60%. Characterizing that as a "monopoly" is absurd.


Which is why the DMA created the "gatekeeper" distinction. Monopolies aren't the only bad things for society.


EV market stalling, BYD smells blood in the water & primed to eat Detroit's lunch

Apple is prudent as ever


I was evaluating a SaaS solution just yesterday, and in one of their examples on Github they used jQuery as the primary frontend for the project, with extensive usage.

I passed on the company


Why? What's wrong, if it works well?


There are things that work better.


Seems a weak reason for rejecting a solution and this is subjective.

I prefer native JS but something can be well designed in jQuery.


Define “better”.


More succinct, fewer bugs.


Too bad for you. I'm glad for them they don't have to deal with you as a customer.


With SaaS, the front end might be the least important piece of the application.


Sounds like tweety is in the Xitter


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: