Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Android Google Operating Systems Privacy Security Software

Android 11 Is Taking Away the Camera Picker, Forcing People To Only Use the Built-In Camera (androidpolice.com) 156

Posted by BeauHD from the upsetting-changes dept.
In the name of security and privacy, Google is taking away the ability for users to select third-party camera apps in Android 11, forcing users to rely on the built-in camera app. Android Police reports: At the heart of this change is one of the defining traits of Android: the Intent system. Let's say you need to take a picture of a novelty coffee mug to sell through an auction app. Since the auction app wasn't built for photography, the developer chose to leave that up to a proper camera app. This where the Intent system comes into play. Developers simply create a request with a few criteria and Android will prompt users to pick from a list of installed apps to do the job.

However, things are going to change with Android 11 for apps that ask for photos or videos. Three specific intents will cease to work like they used to, including: VIDEO_CAPTURE, IMAGE_CAPTURE, and IMAGE_CAPTURE_SECURE. Android 11 will now automatically provide the pre-installed camera app to perform these actions without ever searching for other apps to fill the role. Google describes the change in a list of new behaviors in Android 11, and further confirmed it in the Issue Tracker. Privacy and security are cited as the reason, but there's no discussion about what exactly made those intents dangerous. Perhaps some users were tricked into setting a malicious camera app as the default and then using it to capture things that should have remained private.

Not only does Android 11 take the liberty of automatically launching the pre-installed camera app when requested, it also prevents app developers from conveniently providing their own interface to simulate the same functionality. I ran a test with some simple code to query for the camera apps on a phone, then ran it on devices running Android 10 and 11 with the same set of camera apps installed. Android 10 gave back a full set of apps, but Android 11 reported nothing, not even Google's own pre-installed Camera app.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Android 11 Is Taking Away the Camera Picker, Forcing People To Only Use the Built-In Camera More

Android 11 Is Taking Away the Camera Picker, Forcing People To Only Use the Built-In Camera

Comments Filter:

  • In Soviet valley... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @08:55PM (#60416831)

    Google captures YOU!

    • Re:In Soviet valley... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arglebargle_xiv ( 2212710 ) on Wednesday August 19, 2020 @01:12AM (#60417375)
      Generic form of this headline:

      Android version $version is taking away $feature, forcing you to use $google-only-app to access it".

      for all past and future versions of Android. Looks like Huawei's loss of access to the Google deadly embrace is a feature, not a flaw.

      • Yes, if EMUI wasn't such an immature piece of shit.
        For example, I there is no way to use any other than the default camera app from the lock screen. But I want OpenCamera or GTFO!
        It simply lacks many settings. But I suspect that might also be the base Android 10's fault, as EMUI 9 had a bit more.

        Then again, the backup feature is quite nice, and doesn't use "the cloud". I only wish the accompanying PC application would run on Linux. (It runs, but can't find the phone via USB. "special driver", need I say mor

        • Yes, if EMUI wasn't such an immature piece of shit.

          Granted, but given them time. They can make it a bigger piece of sh.... I mean, better with time.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The headline seems to have confused a lot of people. They are not taking away the ability to use a 3rd party camera app, you can still use any one you choose.

        What they are doing is making it so that apps which rely on the camera app to capture images always use the manufacturer supplied one for security. That makes a lot of sense because many apps use the camera for sensitive information, e.g. enrolling your credit card for Google Pay or paying a cheque into your bank account by taking a photo of it. As mac

        • Re:In Soviet valley... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MeNeXT ( 200840 ) on Wednesday August 19, 2020 @07:36AM (#60417881)

          And yet it's a computer and there is a better option which is allowing the user to set their default app. Time and time again features are being removed with the excuse that it is to protect the user while destroying functionality. We don't need more baby sitters who use this information as they see fit.

          • Oh christ, like Apple could have a setting to open the filesystem if they wanted. Whatever Android is doing here is way less draconian than what Apple has done.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Dixie_Flatline ( 5077 )

            It's one thing to set a default camera app for snapping photos in the main camera interface, and another thing entirely when it's embedded in something else. Like, if you have a hardware button for the camera, maybe you should be able to set the default camera app, and I understand that. Many camera apps that you would use this way have a lot of extra exposure/focus/whatever features. They're 'pro' camera apps, for lack of a better term.

            But if you're trying to take a photo for an auction app, or you're usin

          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            People do a lot of private stuff on their phones, like banking and dick pics. I think you will have a hard time convincing them that it's worth being able to change the app that other apps use to take photos if it puts that stuff at risk.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Merk42 ( 1906718 )

        Generic form of this headline:

        Android version $version is taking away $feature, forcing you to use $google-only-app to access it".

        For Slashdot, can be even simpler:
        $company does $thing, it's bad because $company is always wrong and bad.

  • and it's stupid users installing malware. I would guess you've got people installing dodgy camera apps and then finding their nude pics on a porn site said app uploaded them to.

    • Probably, but they should give app developers the chance to allow it. I suspect they will do that eventually.

    • Why blame the "stupid users" for the design decisions that make it so easy to malware oneself on Android?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Not knowing how this works in Android, what's the UI when one of these apps takes over? In my mind, something like this should work something like this:

        • An app registers itself to be a camera app.
        • The app pops up a dialog that says, "Do you want this to be the default camera app?"
        • If the user taps "Yes", it issues a "system open" action.
        • The OS itself switches away from the app to a settings page that is easily discoverable from the system settings app, with a name that would be obvious to an end user.
        • That p

        • Not very. Actually, Android displays a dialog panel in the bottom part of the screen that shows the icon of every app that intercepts an intent and that dialog says "run once" or "run always". Once you click "run always", you're not prompted again, and the place you should open to reset the flag is buried deep down in the settings page of that particular app, and bundled with "clear all defaults" for that app.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Xenx ( 2211586 )
          Different versions and vendor specific flavors can change things somewhat. I'm using Samsung S20 with Android 10.

          Apps assert their ability to perform certain functions(camera, home screen, file managers, etc) silently when installed. When you install a new app covering a function, it clears the defaults and will prompt you to select an app the next time the function is called. It'll ask whether to use the app once, or always. It does not open a settings page, it just does what you say and continues on to t

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by kbg ( 241421 )

            And if you don't know which app has the current default, it's very hard to clear the default. It's things like this in the Android system that are just badly designed.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Xenx ( 2211586 )
              I wouldn't go as far as to say it's very hard to clear. You just have to see what app does load and clear it. If for some reason you cannot do that, then just go through and clear defaults on any apps that it could be. But, it definitely requires more effort than if there was just a page that included any app that had itself configured to be the default for anything.

    • Re:I can guess what prompted this change (Score:4, Insightful)

      by maglor_83 ( 856254 ) on Wednesday August 19, 2020 @12:34AM (#60417305)

      I would guess you've got people installing dodgy camera apps and then finding their nude pics on a porn site said app uploaded them to.

      Which would be easily fixed by making the internet permission revocable, but that would allow people to opt out of ads...

      • by making the internet permission revocable

        Internet permission is revocable. Just go into the the "Data Usage" section of the app settings, disable "Background data", and enable "Disabled WiFi" and "Disabled DataUsage". Voila, no Internet access. And yes, if you do this before you start the app the first time (and it doesn't actually need Internet access to function) then it will usually work normally without displaying any ads.

    • So this is precisely the same reasoning as the Nazis used: *some* Jews yaddayadda, so we'll yaddayadda *all* Jews.

      If the morons do moronic things with a knife, you take away the knife from the morons!
      But you don't ban *all* knives from all of the universe forever! That's moronic! *takes away feature removal knife from you, and on you*

      And let's not even talk about not being a fucking asshole nanny for people you haven't even met. It is actually a moron's good right to give himself.a Darwin award with a knife

  • Back to Lineage OS again? (Score:3)

    by RJFerret ( 1279530 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @09:38PM (#60416923)

    They'd incorporated so many CyanogenMod improvements I didn't feel the need for Lineage on my latest phone, and the whole A/B Bootloader and bricking a phone once makes me less motivated, but I need OpenCamera and will never use a manufacturers camera app.

    *pouts and disables updating

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

      Aren't they simply saying 3rd party apps can't use other camera apps?

      Or are they effectively banning all camera apps other than the google camera app? That right there sounds creepy to me. Who knows whether the google camera has a background mode for law enforcement and secret services to use.

      The user should be able to set the default camera.

      Also, won't this break all augmented reality apps, some of those are quite fun.

      • >Aren't they simply saying 3rd party apps can't use other camera apps?

        That was also my impression. Using separately installed camera apps as standalone apps shouldn't be an issue.

        What concerns me is the way intents are used for shortcuts, such as opening the camera with a double-tap of the power button or home button, if the phone has one - or whatever solution Google has come up with for gestures in newer versions (I'm still stuck on 8.x). On my phone, I can pick which camera app to launch using the sho

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      You can still use OpenCamera for taking photos, just not for in-app stuff. The work-around is to take the photo in OpenCamera and then open it in the app instead of taking the photo inside the app itself.

      And that's only for apps which don't have their own camera system built in, most of the big ones do.

      • I presume they're making this change specifically to prevent users from supplying their own photo in the case where an app wants you to take a photo.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          That's not how it works on Android though, the app has to ask if you want to use the camera or select a file, there is no API for having the OS ask.

          • That's not how it works on Android though, the app has to ask if you want to use the camera or select a file, there is no API for having the OS ask.

            You could install an app which picks a photo instead of taking one. I don't know if one even exists but I suspect it does because it would be so simple.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Ah, I see. Not sure it's worth the bother though, you could just display a photo on a screen and take a photo of that.

              • You could, but there would be a quality penalty. And probably you could detect that algorithmically.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • *pouts and disables updating

      Wait... you had updates?

  • Bait and switch (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @09:48PM (#60416945)

    Android was sold as an open source, open platform yada yada. A 3rd party ecosystem has thrived around it. Now that it's ubiquitous and unavoidable, Google reverses it to their own fenced garden they always wanted it to be, Apple-style.

    Didn't see that one coming. I'm shocked. SHOCKED I tell you!

    • The summary is clickbait trash. You'll still be able to install your "Peeping Tom's Upskirt Paradise" camera App.

      • >"The summary is clickbait trash. You'll still be able to install your "Peeping Tom's Upskirt Paradise" camera App."

        But you won't be able to use your camera app of choice with any other application. Sure, you can launch it to just take photos. But for many, that is not enough.

        An example would be if they locked you into their browser- so any link you click on in ANY app forced you to use Chrome. Yes, you could go through all the extra effort of copying the link, launching a different browser manually,

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

      Didn't see that one coming. I'm shocked. SHOCKED I tell you!

      That's because you're a conspiracy theorist. The number of current phones on the market which happily run Android Google free (such as every phone in China), the ability to install open alternative Google free Android images, to say nothing of the ability to actually install anything you want on your phone through sideloading or even alternate app stores if you so wish like the ever popular open source F-droid https://f-droid.org/ [f-droid.org] are all a very clear counterpoint to your arguement.

      Speaking of counterpoints

  • Looks like it's time for the PinePhone....

    Seriously, the moment the PinePhone gets a semi-reliable Android compatibility layer, I'm there.

    • Looks like it's time for the PinePhone....

      Seriously, the moment the PinePhone gets a semi-reliable Android compatibility layer, I'm there.

      Mine is on the way.

    • I'll wait a bit for my old phone(s) to die before looking again at the PinePhone. Perhaps by then, both software and hardware will be stable. Plus, their will likely be more than a dozen useful add-ons, (not to mention dozens more fringe or less useful add-ons).

      If my existing phone(s) last long enough, I might even see Pine64 develop a PinePhone II or Pro.

      Back to Android. It never really worked out. You buy a phone or tablet, and it gets OS side updates for a year or 2. Then nothing. Their are exception

    • Looks like it's time for the PinePhone....

      Because you read a clickbait headline? Man marketing is easy these days!

    • the moment the PinePhone gets a semi-reliable Android compatibility layer

      That might be a long way out, for now it barely lasts by itself a few hours on the battery while doing nothing. At 2GBs RAM we're taking Nexus 5 (2013!) level (the "convergence package" that isn't out yet should come with a 3GB version but it's still marginal, the original Pixel -2016- had 4GBs). It won't have enough oomph to be running its OS plus enough to get Android apps running, not unless it gets popular and we get 2-3 more hardw

    • Could you put SailFish on it and get the compatibility that way?

      • SailFish runs on a very limited number of devices and also it actually boots Sony's (depending on the device but usually it's Sony) kernel and modules (to the point where things like the fingerprint scanner might or might not work depending on how far you upgraded the original Sony Android. After that yes, you could run a chrooted (or similar) Android in Sailfish but whatever problem you started to solve (be it practical or ideological) won't be better just buy sandwiching the Sailfish OS between the Sony k

  • It's time somebody stepped up with an OSS to iOS/Android. Samsung has been toying with Tizen [tizen.org] for years. It's OSS so if anybody wants to free themselves from the lock-downs iOS and Android are now imposing Tizen is already available!
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Apple is the inventor of condescendingphones. They invented this bullshit.

      This why I always say Nokia had the first smartphone, and human livestock always says Apple had the first amartphone.

      • who are these ppl saying apple made the first smart phone?

        I know apple pretend to be the inventor of shit all the time, but I've never heard a user that stupid who thought they invented smart phones?

  • Not quire so dire (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dorianny ( 1847922 ) on Wednesday August 19, 2020 @01:18AM (#60417381) Journal
    I don't believe they are removing the ability to use 3d party camera software to take pictures, only forcing the default camera app on apps that don't handle taking a picture themselves. It makes sense I guess. If a banking app wants a picture of your check you don't want it taken by some dogdy app.

  • I'll have to leave the Android eco-system because of this. I don't use Macs so iOS isn't an option either. I guess I'll have to build a time machine and go back to when smart phones were pretty okayish. I hear most years before 2020 were nicer anyways.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tippen ( 704534 )

      I don't use Macs so iOS isn't an option either.

      No need to have a Mac to use an iPhone. That was more true years ago when you had to use iTunes (gross) to set them up or update them, but thankfully, those days are long gone.

  • When I first read this, there was a lot of android chatter about Marc Levoy, Google's exlead in computational photography leaving and since has been revealed that he has joined Adobe. I suspect it's no secret that if you rely on computational photography, then software can realistically make any potato phone have a better camera, and similarly, make a case for paid apps to improve phone functionality.

    With that said, we're also at a point where the only really distinguishing feature in high margin flagship p

  • Many apps use a camera / video widget in their own interface (e.g. Snapchat / Instagram etc.) so I presume these continue to work. You could even explicitly launch a video / camera app if you wanted with its fancy features / spyware, but that app couldn't usurp the default intents baked into the phone.

    What that means I suppose depends on how sucky the default video / camera apps are in the phone. I would also hope that Android provides a manual way, however deep and buried it is to change the default came

  • are looking better all the time, i would trade performance for freedom any day,
    i guess i abandoned my android phones and google's services at the right time, fsck google
  • This is not such a big deal as some people here seem to think. Third party camera apps will still exist you can still use them to snap pictures. What changes is that if a non-camera app requests a picture it will always be taken with the default camera. I found that third party cameras rarely work in this context anyway, in the rare cases where you really need to use a third party app to snap a quick image, you can do it separately, then pick it from storage
  • Idiot media/users: These Android phones are being taken over by malware! Google does nothing to stop it! Blah Blah Blah Google Bad!

    Google makes it more difficult for malware to infect Android phones.

    Idiot media/users: How dare Google take away my freedom to install malware!! Blah Blah Blah Google Bad!
  • Google announcing a change to see how many developers or users it infuriates.
    Perhaps if enough people make themselves heard...

Slashdot Top Deals

If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.

Close