Google disabling non play-store apps in future through "developer verification". How to mitigate?

[OREllis]

Checklist

• I made sure that there are no existing issues or discussions - open or closed - which I could contribute my information to.
• I have read the FAQ and my question isn't listed.
• I have taken the time to fill in all the required details. I understand that the question will be dismissed otherwise.
• I have read and understood the contribution guidelines.

What is/are your question(s)?

I know it's early days for this, but given that google is evidently trying to either squash apps that do a better job than they do (such as yourselves) on the basis of 'security' (this may be ringing bells to fellow Brits), what potential mitigation could be done to prevent this from effecting newpipe? E.g. instructions for locally compiling and installing through android studio.

"To be clear, developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or to use any app store they prefer."

This is Google by the way. They did remove, "don't be evil", as their motto. Don't trust that they won't misuse this.

Additional information

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/08/elevating-android-security.html?m=1

[orazioedoardo]

Assuming Google will likely not accept or revoke a developer account that tries to distribute a YouTube client without ads, NewPipe will only work on non GMS-certified Android OSes.

[orazioedoardo]

this'll be enforced at the OS level somehow

According to former DivestOS developer: https://divested.dev/pages/blog#2025-08-27-android-issues

This would likely be enforced by the proprietary Google Package Installer which they mandate for certified Android devices. This works by having (government ID verified) developers register their app package ID and associated signing key via the Play console.

Hopefully it's just a terribly advertised version of giving developers the option to certify their apps, and developer mode has an "Unsafe mode" or something like that.

Unfortunately I don't think it will be the case, they really seem to want to crack down on sideloading.

[OREllis]

Unfortunately I don't think it will be the case, they really seem to want to crack down on sideloading.

Yeah, but one can hope. Is there anything on how this relates to android studio?

I doubt they could lock down the ability to test apps by installing them on physical devices without distributing them. If that's the case it'll just be business as usual but with more effort.

[orazioedoardo]

Yeah, but one can hope. Is there anything on how this relates to android studio?

It's unclear now. Likely they can't stop installing via ADB but can stop starting the app. Maybe development builds will fall under the limited install and app ids option for hobbyist and students.

If that's the case it'll just be business as usual but with more effort.

Really determined users will surely find a way in even on the stock OS but the implications for the broader audience will be significant.

[hudson282]

Can I just get a degoogle phone with graphene os or perhaps the fairphone e/os. I've heard they both work fine with f droid

[Siddiq2772]

Can I just get a degoogle phone with graphene os or perhaps the fairphone e/os. I've heard they both work fine with f droid

Yes, but for now, some Android components rely on Google services, and they might make them mandatory in the future.

[nktnet1]

Adding some more resources to this for those interested

• F-Droid's Official Article: https://f-droid.org/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration-decree.html

• Video context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRvqdLsnsKY

[Julmik647]

Check out "NewPipe lite version" #1224

[OREllis]

Google has partially dropped the primary concern of this issue by allowing users to override their "protections" by allowing untrusted sources. Be vigilant though, this is a compromise, not an admission of amy wrongdoing.

[nktnet1]

Source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-developer-verification-early.html

Empowering experienced users

While security is crucial, we’ve also heard from developers and power users who have a higher risk tolerance and want the ability to download unverified apps.

Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.

[OREllis]

Source: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/11/android-developer-verification-early.html

Empowering experienced users

While security is crucial, we’ve also heard from developers and power users who have a higher risk tolerance and want the ability to download unverified apps.

Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.

Thanks, was just getting the source on that.
To add onto this, I am concerned about the, "...advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified.", mentioned in the article though.

Might be them, "sideloading", what they actually want out of this; means of tracking who's using what.

No way of finding out until they impl it tho, and even then that's a privacy issue, not a functionality one for the time being.