Android 11 Is Taking Away the Camera Picker, Forcing People To Only Use the Built-In Camera (androidpolice.com) 156
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.
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.
In Soviet valley... (Score:5, Funny)
Google captures YOU!
Re:In Soviet valley... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: In Soviet valley... (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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)
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.
Re: In Soviet valley... (Score:2)
Re: In Soviet valley... (Score:2)
Where did Apple come into picture? Strawman much?
Re: In Soviet valley... (Score:2)
Where did Apple come into picture? Strawman much?
flufferNUTTER is a notorious Apple Hater.
Which is absolutely hysterical; considering he makes his living as an IOS Developer!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re:In Soviet valley... (Score:4, Funny)
I can guess what prompted this change (Score:2)
Re: I can guess what prompted this change (Score:2)
Probably, but they should give app developers the chance to allow it. I suspect they will do that eventually.
Re: (Score:2)
Why blame the "stupid users" for the design decisions that make it so easy to malware oneself on Android?
Re: (Score:2)
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:
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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)
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)
Re:I can guess what prompted this change (Score:4, Insightful)
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...
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: I can guess what prompted this change (Score:2)
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)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
>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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
You could, but there would be a quality penalty. And probably you could detect that algorithmically.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
*pouts and disables updating
Wait... you had updates?
Bait and switch (Score:4, Interesting)
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!
Re: Bait and switch (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
>"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:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Time for the PinePhone (Score:2)
Looks like it's time for the PinePhone....
Seriously, the moment the PinePhone gets a semi-reliable Android compatibility layer, I'm there.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like it's time for the PinePhone....
Because you read a clickbait headline? Man marketing is easy these days!
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Time to embrace Tizen? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh Christ no. You're going to trust an entire OS Samsung wrote [vice.com]?
Re: Time to embrace Tizen? (Score:2)
Not.an entire OS. It is 90% GNU/Linux, 9% Maemo/Nokia/Intel, and 1% Samsung. No?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Excellent (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? Your phone uploads every photo to someone's server by default? What brand is it? I want to avoid it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm out (Score:2)
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)
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.
I wonder if revenge is a part of it (Score:2)
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
Can't be all of it (Score:2)
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
those low spec pinephones (Score:2)
i guess i abandoned my android phones and google's services at the right time, fsck google
Not such a big deal (Score:2)
Idiots... (Score:2)
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!
This sounds like... (Score:2)
Perhaps if enough people make themselves heard...
Re: (Score:2)
I think this has more to do with the fact that Google wants more control over the camera activity. For example, if you say "Ok Google, take a picture" it should work the same on every phone. Vendor apps and 3rd party apps can break this.
Re: (Score:3)
Why should anyone assume how things "work" on a particular brand or model? The point of the abstraction is to allow easy customization that makes the customer happy. After over a decade, killing this feature and replacing it with the crapfest that the google camera is on most good phones is... A regression, let's say.
It seems that Alphabet would like to follow the bold leadership of Huawei in locking down the phone as much as the customer will bear.
Re: Workaround with root permissions? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I just went to check out OpenCamera and the blurb stated "contains ads" :-( No thank-you!
It does not contain ads, you must have stumbled on a name-squatter. The legit one is "net.sourceforge.opencamera". Its description states "Completely free, and no third party ads in the app (I only run third party ads on the website). Open Source."
Re: Workaround with root permissions? (Score:2)
Thank you for saying that. I am still angry that WhatsApp doesn't use opencamera.
Re: (Score:2)
It does not contain ads, you must have stumbled on a name-squatter. The legit one is "net.sourceforge.opencamera". Its description states "Completely free, and no third party ads in the app (I only run third party ads on the website). Open Source."
To my surprise the google play page does say 'Contains Ads' right at the top. However, the permissions does not include any network nor wifi access, so maybe it is an error. I've never seen any ads but I got it from f-droid. https://play.google.com/store/... [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Just get it from f-droid.
Re: (Score:2)
google's "ok google" thing can go ahead and use the camera software *it* wants
that can be accomplished while leaving other software to use the camera software *they* want
Re: (Score:2)
I think this has more to do with the fact that Google wants more control over the camera activity. For example, if you say "Ok Google, take a picture" it should work the same on every phone. Vendor apps and 3rd party apps can break this.
Yeah, well, I can see the argument for vendor apps but I downloaded and installed my 3rd party app and I want it to work the way I want it to work.
Re: (Score:2)
What will be interesting is if you will still be able to install the GCam packages that people export from Pixel phones and make work on other devices (OnePlus, etc.)
Google putting rules in place that prevent people from using Google's camera software by choice would be an interesting irony.
Re:Workaround with root permissions? (Score:4, Informative)
I am not sure about the implementation but I suspect the difference is now that only system apps (installed in the /system partition) can register themselves as a camera app (i.e. some intents are restricted). The same thing happens with permissions.
A solution, as root, would be to install your alternative camera app as a system app. Magisk can do that.
Again, it is only speculation.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just going to launch the system camera directly, it won't have to go through any picker.
But I bet a Magisk module could override it... Or if not that, an Xposed module running under Magisk
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, Android, the freedom for the googlites to invade your privacy and control the device to control you. I think there should be a demand for a completely unlocked Android phone, user free to install what ever they want on that device, not restricted by a corporation. A corporation setting laws for what you can and can not do with a device you bought, how you can use it and how it can use you.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you're thinking of Lineage OS with fdroid
Re: (Score:2)
Did I miss something about Android freedom?
All apps are free, but some apps are more free than others.
Re: (Score:2)
Typical Google bait-n-switch.
For their new smartphone endeavor 10-15 years ago, they embraced free software at first, bragged about Android as an open platform, got market share, then slowly replaced the free (as in freedom) parts with proprietary parts. They did the same with Google Talk which used XMPP at first. They did the same with "don't be evil".
Re: (Score:2)
They are killing themselves.
Re: Apple Lockin and Android Feedom (Score:2)
Every psycho asshole wants to be Apple nowadays.
Cause sucking your own power boner tastes soooo gooood. --.--
Re: With the lack of alternatives (Score:2)
We already have a law. It's called Copyright Law and gives the base for GPL. You know where to take it from there...
Re: With the lack of alternatives (Score:2)
Without (let's be honest) distributorsprivilegetostealmoney law, the GPL would not even be necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't seem to know what abuse is. Disabling a system feature is not abuse.
Re: With the lack of alternatives (Score:2)
Abuse of power is a form of abuse.
Using that, to cripple our abilities is harm.
You seem like the kind of livestock that enables abusers by being too dumb to tell they are being abused. ...
Like the kind that sees somebody being offered rape or death, and going "What do you complain? You're not being forced to take that cock! You have a choice!"
Tell me I'm misunderstanding you
Re: (Score:2)
I often start a specific camera app via intents from various automation tools. This shit will break my setup like, totally and I'll have to recheck and probably rewrite a lot of them. So, no, we can't.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, specific app set as the default camera. Off to make some covfefe.
Re:Why do you have to use the camera picker? (Score:4, Informative)
This is not about being able to use an installed camera app directly (which is not being changed). This is about if you have an app that wants to take a picture without writing an entire camera software component (e.g. an app that lets you take a picture of yourself for the in-app profile picture). Currently, the app just says "android give me a camera to do this" - and that could be a naughty camera program, they are going to lock this down to only using the built-in android camera program. If that same app lets you just upload a saved picture it won't care how the picture was made.
Re: (Score:2)
What if you just want to be able to supply an image rather than take a new picture, or use an IP camera to take the picture, or something else? This takes away a lot of flexibility. It's not going to affect LINE or WeChat as they don't call out to a camera application anyway, it's only going to affect things that try to do the right thing and allow the user to use their choice of camera app.
QR codes as well? (Score:2)
This is not about being able to use an installed camera app directly (which is not being changed). This is about if you have an app that wants to take a picture without writing an entire camera software component (e.g. an app that lets you take a picture of yourself for the in-app profile picture). Currently, the app just says "android give me a camera to do this" - and that could be a naughty camera program, they are going to lock this down to only using the built-in android camera program. If that same app lets you just upload a saved picture it won't care how the picture was made.
Did not RTFA, but wondering if these changes will no longer use the desired 3rd party app for barcodes as well? They potentially include even more sensitive info than a photograph (eg Google Authenticator keys).
Re:QR codes as well? (Score:5, Informative)
No, the summary is pretty bad.
Basically, let's say ou had an app that needs to acquire an image (or a video). In Android, you can do one of two things to acquire the image or video - you could implement the camera functionality yourself by enumerating the cameras, opening them and offering adjustments, etc. (You also have to provide an interface for the user to acquire an existing image or video).
The alternative way is, if you don't want to do any of this is to send an Intent. Basically you're telling the OS that you want to acquire a video or image, and that until it's done, you're stuck. So you leave it to the OS to figure out which application to launch, let the application take the photo or video, and for the OS to give you the image or video data. You don't care how it's done, you just send the Intent, and you get back the data in literally a few lines of code.
What is happening is that Android 11 will no longer allow 3rd party applications to handle those intents. You may remember if you click on a link, Android pops up an app chooser on which app you want to handle the link - the system browser, a custom browser or other thing. In Android 10 and below, Image and Video capture would pop up that dialog as well, but that's no longer true.
Applications are free to implement camera functionality in them so you are able to use 3rd party camera apps, but they won't be able to be used in lieu of the system camera app for handling the intent. So you will hav e3rd party camera apps. And apps that read barcodes will still exist as they implement camera functionality themselves (this is especially true for barcode apps as they do live decoding - they will capture until they see a valid barcode, or you cancel the operation)
Re: (Score:2)
I love how people assume. There is a simple fix to that. Allow people to choose their default app. Stop being a baby sitter. Nothing is more frustrating than have a computer that won't do as the owner wants. We are slowly being conditioned to accept abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
We are slowly being conditioned to accept abuse.
If you use Windows 10, your conditioning is NOT occuring "slowly", its on fast-forward. I dealt with the Windows ecosystem for 20 years as a sysadmin/"windows janitor". After I retired in 2010, I left the "Windows ecosystem" for the "green pastures" of Linux. After seeing all of the abuse that Microsoft heaps up on those who use its products, like endless broken updates, forced updates whenEVER MS decrees, and of course, don't forget the spyware aspects. I keep wondering how long the computer-using public i
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but that won't send the result back to the calling app.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: This Crap, Again! Likely My Last Android Phone (Score:2)
Yes, and built-in camera apps are generally a complete piece of turd, designed so much to appeal to literally mentally retarded people, that they are almost unusable to anyone with a full working brain. Try OpenCamera. Then try to go back to this shit. It physically hurts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google did away with SD storege?
Not sure what you're talking about here; Android still supports SD storage, both adoptable (which is bound to the device, but can hold apps and app data) and "traditional" (removable but can't contain apps).
I use a 3rd party ap, which made my phone useful as a spare camera.
You can still use a third party camera app for taking photos. But when your banking app needs to take a photo of a check you're depositing it will have to use the default camera app.
BTW, I can confirm that the rationale for this change is user privacy (or maybe security), and the reasoning is sound. I