No doubt that using a DRM solution that is not based on forward-locking is the right long-term approach. We know what it would take to implement it. There just wasn't enough time to do it.
JBQ On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote: > > JBQ, > > You can do both (after all apps on Windows, DOS, Linux, etc., etc., etc. > have been doing this for years). > > The solution we offer at > http://andappstore.com/AndroidPhoneApplications/licensing.jsp works > irrespective of whether the 'phone is rooted, non-rooted, copied, spun > dry, etc., etc., etc., because it does not prevent circulation of the > apk but instead uses a DRM mechanism to ensure the user has obtained the > rights to access features within an application. This is the "modern" > way of doing things where the distribution media isn't protected, but > the software requires a product key or similar to offer unhindered > functionality. > > At the London Dev day last year I gave Mike Jennings an idea on creating > "trusted" applications to alleviate the problem of "How does a user > trust an app isn't malicious", and I got the impression that crypto was > not a strong point of the team, so I'd be happy to go over how the > AndAppStore licensing system works with one of more of you guys so that > we can get a viable, working solution deployed. > > Al. > > Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote: >> The problem is that you're fighting between two conflicting goals here: >> >> -the need to have a root-capable debuggable and custom-flashable >> device like the ADP1 for application development. >> >> -the need to have a non-root-capable non-debuggable >> non-custom-flashable device like a consumer device in order to >> maintain forward-locking guarantees. >> >> Intuitively, it should be theoretically possible to implement a design >> that can switch between the two modes with the proper guarantees (i.e. >> wiping the relevant partitions clean when going from a >> forward-locking-capable build to a non-forward-locking capable one). >> That'd require resources, of course, which would then have to be >> pulled from other tasks. >> >> That being said, from the point of view of application development, >> you need to expect that the differences from one consumer device to >> another (e.g. which apps are installed by each user) will be greater >> than the differences between an ADP1 and consumer devices like the G1 >> (ignoring for now the issues about 1.0 vs 1.1 on ADP1 that we're >> working on). Worrying about the differences between e.g. one ADP1 and >> one G1 seems to be ignoring the differences between the thousands of >> G1s out there. >> >> JBQ >> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Steve Barr <barr8...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:48 PM, vendor.net <vendor....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > JBQ, will ADP1 support copy-protected apps in the future? >>>> >>> On 2/26/09, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I'd say that the current design would make this hard, but I have no >>>> visibility over what the future plans might be. >>>> >>> I think a lot of us just want their Dev Phone to be as close as >>> possible to a customer's phone so we can test and have confidence in >>> our Java apps before putting them out on the Market. Should we go to >>> Holiday and be done with it? It would be great if there was some >>> official blessed "upgrade" that would let us have a customer-like >>> phone. I'm willing to nuke whatever's currently on the my phone to >>> get it to that point. >>> >>> Otherwise, perhaps some return/refund program should be put in place. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > > -- Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru Android Engineer, Google. Please don't contact me directly. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
