Google is cracking down on what users will be able to side load on their Android phones, going forward. New plans laid out by Android developers have announced that by 2027, Google will require app developers to register with Google and verify their developer identity, for side loading APKs, even outside of the Google Play Store. Currently, users can freely install any app they find online, even to their own detriment. As a measure to improve security for the bulk of its customer base, Google is getting rid of that, which could notably impact how a lot of gamers use their phones as emulation devices.

Starting next year, Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed by users on certified Android devices. This creates crucial accountability, making it much harder for malicious actors to quickly distribute another harmful app after we take the first one down. Think of it like an ID check at the airport, which confirms a traveler's identity but is separate from the security screening of their bags; we will be confirming who the developer is, not reviewing the content of their app or where it came from. This change will start in a few select countries specifically impacted by these forms of fraudulent app scams, often from repeat perpetrators.

Registering with a developer on Google would require app-makers to give their personal information to Google in order to release an app, including in some cases, official government identification. The initial changes will roll out to Indonesia, Singapore, Brazil, and Thailand, in September 2026, with other countries switching over in "2027 and beyond".

Source

 

[Skelletonike]

But it is not being stupid, like on some other comments said, is about control, and that they will implement that on Windows as well, is just a matter of time.

Microsoft would not do that since people could just opt to use an older version of windows or end up moving to Linux.
While I still prefer windows, some distros are pretty good and way more similar to windows than they used to be.

 

[Jayro]

Microsoft would not do that since people could just opt to use an older version of windows or end up moving to Linux.
While I still prefer windows, some distros are pretty good and way more similar to windows than they used to be.

I think comparatively, this would be like if Microsoft blocked all app installers on Windows, and only allowed anything from the Windows Store to be installed. They won't be stupid enough to do that, but that's the comparison.

 

[IRUZZ]

I think comparatively, this would be like if Microsoft blocked all app installers on Windows, and only allowed anything from the Windows Store to be installed. They won't be stupid enough to do that, but that's the comparison.

cough Windows 10 S cough Windows RT

 

[Jayro]

cough Windows 10 S cough Windows RT

Fair, though nobody really uses those anymore.

 

[MrQQ]

Ahhhh the tears of android users finally dropping....they taste so sweet

 

[handy333]

Considering the last few times this has gone with companies clowning on Apple for removing the headphone jack AND a charger from their phones later following suit the NEXT phone, I'm starting to think we aren't gonna be able to shop our way out this. Especially when people might have their own reasons for putting up with some things. Shockingly contrary to internet comment common consensus portraying everyone as mindless drones

If only there were things we could do we're already seeing case examples of being mobilized as we speak... some things about... game-killing? And a... lawsuit against Mahjong?

Maybe someday, when people are done dunking on each other for their 5 second dopamine hits of superiority.

Speaking my language.

 

[rsc-pl]

In theory, I'm kind of okay with this.

If all it requires is a developer account and then you're able to sign any APK, without each APK needing to be individually approved, then this sounds okay. A developer account is only 20 bucks and most people developing Android apps already have one.

The risk is that Google will use this power to start requiring approval of each individual app, similar to Play Store apps.
Many apps aren't allowed on the Play Store for various reasons, users have legitimate reasons to want to use these apps and if similar rules start being enforced for sideloaded apps then that's going to upset every power user and many are likely to switch to iOS, since the openness of Android is the primary thing keeping many of us Android fans to begin with.

Or, even if they don't go that far, they could still choose to blacklist developers just for doing things they don't like, even if it's not malicious.

The power should *ONLY* be used to blacklist malicious developers. The moment it gets used for anything else, the system is broken. Seeing that uBlock Origin has been removed from Chrome, I don't trust Google not to misuse this power. They will likely use it to blacklist developers of root apps, system modifications or whatever else they don't agree with.

Revanced would 100% be one of the first things to be blacklisted, since it directly affects their bottom line. For non root users, that means everybody will need to sign the apk with their own developer account (but likely this can be automated on device similar to how things are on iOS)
Root users wouldn't be affected much, since Magisk will probably bypass this automatically or with a simple toggle. But not every device can be rooted.

Really? Do you really think it's about user safety? Is it really possible to be THIS naive?

 

[Ondrashek06]

Exactly. It's lose-lose.

We can only hope that the EU blocks this decision.

99% they won't, after all it's the EU that pushed for more "secure" phones.

Post automatically merged: Aug 27, 2025

I think comparatively, this would be like if Microsoft blocked all app installers on Windows, and only allowed anything from the Windows Store to be installed. They won't be stupid enough to do that, but that's the comparison.

They already did that, it's called "S mode". It's possible to switch out of S mode in some cases, but I've heard of many cases where the app to switch out refuses to work.

 

[YoureALoser]

I like how all the clowns here continue ignoring the ruling on Epic Games v. Google. By law Google is required to allow 3rd party app stores to be installed on Android devices. By law these 3rd party app stores can be side loaded. By law these 3rd party app stores do not have to be listed in Google Play Store. This isn't about removing side loading. It is literally about preventing malicious apps from being distributed on Google Play Store. Google is responsible for the apps listed on their store & they can face legal action for malicious apps.

 

[Kioku]

I like how all the clowns here continue ignoring the ruling on Epic Games v. Google. By law Google is required to allow 3rd party app stores to be installed on Android devices. By law these 3rd party app stores can be side loaded. By law these 3rd party app stores do not have to be listed in Google Play Store. This isn't about removing side loading. It is literally about preventing malicious apps from being distributed on Google Play Store. Google is responsible for the apps listed on their store & they can face legal action for malicious apps.

Way to completely ignore the fact that the Play Store already has these checks in place and that this is specifically for apps distributed outside of Google Play. Should probably read the article before spouting off some pompous bullshit, eh?

 

[KleinesSinchen]

It looks like bait, but it is better to debunk fake arguments with facts than ignoring.

It is literally about preventing malicious apps from being distributed on Google Play Store.

This is literally about apps distributed outside the Google Play Store.

Also: Working great so far for the Play Store where these "ID checks" are already in place. ← News like this pop up regularly, but the timing for the article could not be better.

I like how all the clowns […]

Name calling is not a basis for discussion and doesn't amplify your arguments.

This isn't about removing side loading.

A developer with no relationship/contract with Google is forced to identify ("Like on the airport for Security™ ") towards Google in order to have their app being installable on end user devices while their app is not on Play Store. This is and stays fishy.

This means that I can't compile a Hello World app on my offline PC and sideload it on certified Android devices without Google's blessing.

A developer who never agreed to "terms of use" is forced to sign up on Google in order to have their app whitelisted. Sideloading outside Play Store will still exist. Somehow. Factually Google can gatekeep what apps are allowed and revoke access any time (while right now promising openness and to not look at the app contents, only collecting IDs for the case of malware distribution).

What Apple did in the EU to allow "sideloading" by third-party app stores is nothing more than the bare minimum using any legal loophole to show malicious compliance. This move will put Android effectively on a similar level.
===============
===============

I repeat and elaborate what I said in my first reply on first page of this thread:
The days of free/open personal computers are numbered. Gradually we *will* be forced into closed systems. First very indirectly ("Sorry, this does not work on your device for security™ reasons.") then less indirectly ("Sorry, devices like you want aren't for sale anymore… due to low customer demand.") and lastly directly ("Using an open computer is illegal!")

 

[SeltzerMist]

I was considering getting a Retroid Pocket Flip 2 in the near future but now it might not be worth it if side loaded emulators are going to end up blocked.

 

[console]

I know a lot of people will get very angry and upset if emulators apps are blocked. Hope not block Nintendo NES up to GameCube/Wii emulator (Dolphin) and GameBoy to Nintendo 3DS emulator.

I know my guess about Nintendo Switch emulators are not allowed because of laws. Companies are have greedy of dirty mind businesses to do with them for no reasons to take our and their freedom away.

Best for everyone to move in gaming PC for everyday to use everything like wide to use any emulators without problems. I hope Windows 11 and Windows 12 don't block emulators in the future. I would dislike if Microsoft company do something add very strict rules added to block modern emulators like Switch, Switch 2 and others in near future maybe force everyone to use Microsoft Store. I'm very serious about Microsoft store that what I hate it due to worst DRM locked like required internet all of times are annoy us and people.

If I heard any news about strict rules force everyone to use Microsoft store for apps and games then I will quit it then force to move on Linux and other different operating systems in the future. We will see and how going in the future on the roads.


Anytime very soon then people will going to ruin many big business in near future about security problems, DRM, AI and others problems. Many people will going to destroy many HQs like Facebook, Google, Meta, Microsoft, etc buildings in near future. Maybe they will try to knock off nuclear power plants to cut off eclectic to millions of everyone in near future.

 

[genxor]

I remember when Google was new and their motto was "don't be evil". Oh how far we've come.

 

[handy333]

I like how all the clowns here continue ignoring the ruling on Epic Games v. Google. By law Google is required to allow 3rd party app stores to be installed on Android devices. By law these 3rd party app stores can be side loaded. By law these 3rd party app stores do not have to be listed in Google Play Store. This isn't about removing side loading. It is literally about preventing malicious apps from being distributed on Google Play Store. Google is responsible for the apps listed on their store & they can face legal action for malicious apps.

Dude seems like the type of person that sees children playing in a park and has an issue with that.

 

[previous_member]

Fuck Google.

 

[bonkmaykr]

They're using the exact same excuses Apple did when they pulled this shit.

 

[JORGETECH]

The Google article is specifying that Sideloading won't be changed, only the process of creating APKs/requirements for them to be installed will be. (And this information is targeted toward developers, not consumers)
Now APKs won't install unless they've been verified with the new Google Developer Console by responsibility of the developer. Not because the APK is sideloaded or not. That's all.

This is the part that really confuses me, even after reading several articles. So if I'm reading this correctly, this means that if you want to sideload an APK you compiled yourself on your own computer for your own device, you MUST sign it with Google Developer Console, even if it has no Google Mobile Services dependencies and you don't plan to release it on Play Store.

If I read that correctly, this measure is still bullshit. As far as I'm aware, apps coming for F-Droid are signed by F-Droid themselves, they don't pass through the Google Developer Console, so they can be truly independently distributed. I'm assuming the only way to enforce such requirement would be to change the core of AOSP so it enforces the new app signing requirements, which would be massive overreach for what is an open-source Operating System and a good way to get the attention of anti-trust regulators in EU (reminds me of Epic Games v. Apple case and previous fines to Google by the EU).

I hope in the near future, if this goes on, LineageOS and other AOSP forks remove those requirements since it seems like it would kill F-Droid's ability to be a truly independent source of Android apps. Which is a real concern to me since a lot of the apps I use come from there (and I already have to use the signature spoofing LSPosed module since I use microg). I may as well use an iPhone since it has a "better walled garden" and is more privacy focused.

Imagine if Microsoft enforces a similar policy, you wouldn't be able to open an .exe if it's not signed by Microsoft or a Microsoft-approved developer, a significant portion of the userbase would be pissed. They already half-assed it with Windows S and Microsoft Store, seems like it was poorly received.

EDIT: I forgot while writing the post that iOS users in the EU can sideload apps, so I wonder how EU regulators would react to teh restrictions Google wants to impose.

 

[rg]

To add to this, more companies are requiring 2FA to log into laptops and software. I can't have an unlocked bootloader if I want to work.

Companies should give you a phone in that case

 

[emigre]

Companies should give you a phone in that case

I agree but they're not going to because they don't want to to buy phones for 2000 people.