> You really think you are going to ask a child what are they doing every second and what they talked about and they are going to tell the truth?
Of course not, but usually adults can force a passcode out (or take the device altogether) or force the child to sign in for them to see at regular intervals, in which case they can observe everything. I would agree that this is excessive for a parent to do, but clearly the parent you are talking about is already taking excessive measures.
> What’s stopping someone also from surreptitiously installing the same snooping software on another adult’s phone?
Presumably, an attacker will not have access to the device and not be freely given the password or access with the ability to install an app. If they do, then there's nothing stopping the attacker from just going through the phone. Installing a app without the person's knowledge would either require you to have inside access or have a zero day.
> It’s not less clear. There is no reason to allow this type of software to be installed on a phone without a clear indication that it is on there.
A lot of the permissions individually make sense and this software could just be composed by a significant number of them. I'm not sure exactly how the software you are referring to works and its scope, so I'll take a narrow example.
In the case of messages, users may legitimately want a different messaging app. If the adult just side loads an arbitrary SMS app, how is that supposed to be distinguishable to the OS whether the app additionally happens to sync these messages to a third party?
In the case of screen capture, that's a perfectly normal use case to stream your screen. Android does warn you when this is occuring.
Or for that matter, many Android devices permit side loading an entire OS. This could be used by the adult to basically bypass any restrictions on apps altogether. This has a completely legitimate use case. Should we block that as well?
Even if the parent “forces a passcode”, they can’t remotely listen in on conversations and see exactly what their child is doing at any given minute.
> Presumably, an attacker will not have access to the device and not be freely given the password or access with the ability to install an app.
Are you really unaware of what a jealous partner can do?
> A lot of the permissions individually make sense
In what world does a permission to “remotely monitor your screen and intercept your voice and hide that the app is installed make sense”?
> A lot of the permissions individually make sense and this software could just be composed by a significant number of them. I'm not sure exactly how the software you are referring to works and its scope, so I'll take a narrow example.
Maybe it’s a bad idea to allow a third party app to have access to your SMS messages especially seeing they are often used for 2FA?
> In the case of screen capture, that's a perfectly normal use case to stream your screen. Android does warn you when this is occuring.
And yet there are plenty of apps for Android that can do this surreptitiously…
You realize you aren’t making a great case for Android here don’t you?
Of course not, but usually adults can force a passcode out (or take the device altogether) or force the child to sign in for them to see at regular intervals, in which case they can observe everything. I would agree that this is excessive for a parent to do, but clearly the parent you are talking about is already taking excessive measures.
> What’s stopping someone also from surreptitiously installing the same snooping software on another adult’s phone?
Presumably, an attacker will not have access to the device and not be freely given the password or access with the ability to install an app. If they do, then there's nothing stopping the attacker from just going through the phone. Installing a app without the person's knowledge would either require you to have inside access or have a zero day.
> It’s not less clear. There is no reason to allow this type of software to be installed on a phone without a clear indication that it is on there.
A lot of the permissions individually make sense and this software could just be composed by a significant number of them. I'm not sure exactly how the software you are referring to works and its scope, so I'll take a narrow example.
In the case of messages, users may legitimately want a different messaging app. If the adult just side loads an arbitrary SMS app, how is that supposed to be distinguishable to the OS whether the app additionally happens to sync these messages to a third party?
In the case of screen capture, that's a perfectly normal use case to stream your screen. Android does warn you when this is occuring.
Or for that matter, many Android devices permit side loading an entire OS. This could be used by the adult to basically bypass any restrictions on apps altogether. This has a completely legitimate use case. Should we block that as well?