(link) antifeature description

[sankhababu]

Hi dev

Thanks for this beautiful work.

It is my default F-droid app.

Could you please add a feature to open specific descriptions of anti features, when we click the 'Antifeature' button on the top bar?
In official F-droid it specified and redirects to the link of tutorial.
Such options will be very helpful indeed with Neo Store.

Regards

[machiav3lli]

Next time you update an issue topic, update the title too please

[sankhababu]

Next time you update an issue topic, update the title too please

Got it.
Sorry for mistake.

[IzzySoft]

@machiav3lli let me amend to this as it's the same topic: would be nice if not only the so-called "anti-feature reasons" were shown in NeoStore (next to their "generic description", they can also be detailed per-app with the app's metadata) – but also custom anti-features be supported.

If you use the v2-index, all anti-features used by a repository are listed together with their descriptions, so you have that data right in the index. My repo e.g. has NonFreeComp (the little deviation from F-Droid.org: "app contains non-free components", here usually libraries, is something F-Droid.org does not permit at all and thus does not have that AF declared – my repo allows it "within limits", but then it's clearly marked).

As a side.note: custom categories are also possible, and configured per-repo. You find them in the same place. See here for example JSON, and here for some documentation.

And PS: Took me a little to find the anti-features in NeoStore. Maybe they should be placed a bit more prominently? I'd expect them next to the permissions-and-trackers right on top of the app details page (if space permits), as they are quite core-information (especially thinking of Trackers (how do you tell if and how many of those are in an app from F-Droid?), but also of NonFreeDep).

[machiav3lli]

@IzzySoft hey! thanks for linking all those stuff, v2-index is planned for 1.1.0 - which admittedly still ca. 3-6 months away.

NS already handles the different custom categories (e.g. some of the funny ones defined by KDE), it's just that they don't have a custom icon in the side bar, but will defining some for most of the ones defined by the preset repos. This will come with the upcoming alpha06 the next days.

The anti-features thingy is "kinda deliberate". Conceptualized originally in my research, the provided raw anti-features were things most common users can't begin with, which is why they were "translated" to code-related, rights-related and other, but I'll consider providing one place for all of them for experienced users.

Right now I'm working on two papers concerning:

• privacy visualization: In this context I'll be creating a page were basic guides on what-is-what in this privacy visualization (e.g. grading system behind the gauges). After this is finished and public I'll be writing the f-droid wider community, as the current form of the research paper is not too capacity/time-friendly.

• privacy-by-design guidelines: I was planning to contact you as soon as I'm finished from first stage, to see if you'd be interested on an interview.

[IzzySoft]

v2-index is planned for 1.1.0

Ah, so my guess was correct that NS uses v1 instead – which explains why "custom AFs" are shown as "unknown" (v1 does not know about them, which is why I rolled them out only recently, now that v2 is around for quite a while and the "official F-Droid client" finally supports them).

NS already handles the different custom categories

Those are included with v1 already, so you could see them (categories.txt, which is still available). With v2 all those things are part of the index itself, as pointed out. They can (or rather must) be configured by the repo admin now, who can give them custom icons, descriptions etc. You might wish to consider that as well when implementing v2; it's basically the same structure for AFs as for categories (you've got the documentation now; the latter was written by me when I implemented v2 for my site and the php-fdroid library, so if you have any questions… 😉).

Conceptualized originally in my research

Thanks for linking me that, will have a look ASAP! And unknowingly you gave me a reminder: I wanted to implement checking Exodus for F-Droid apps as well with my app listings (which have that implemented for Play already) – and see if I can do that for my repo browser, too (for the F-Droid repo only, as that's what Exodus would cover). Need to finally make myself an issue for that, so I don't forget.

the provided raw anti-features

Yes, their "generic" description left much to wish for. We (the F-Droid team) got lots of positive feedback once the first "AntiFeature Reasons" (describing why an AF was added to this app specifically – that was quite a batch run to add them all, took me about a week and I still didn't cover all) went online. So at the app level, you can now also find that – in addition to the "generic AF description" on the repo level.

privacy visualization

Sounds great, looking forward to that! 😃

privacy-by-design guidelines

Sure, please drop me a note then! IIRC we're both not only in the same time zone but even in the same country, so you can choose then from 2 languages for the interview. If you wish, we can have that e.g. on Jitsi; I can prepare a room then on the server F-Droid uses normally.

[IzzySoft]

PS: Just browsing the linked paper (not yet deep into it, just at the description, so this might already be considered): Please keep in mind that Exodus and F-Droid have overlapping ideas on the privacy focus, where F-Droid's opinion is a bit stronger. To give an example: Exodus would not list Firebase (or FCM), as they consider that "normal" – while F-Droid wouldn't even allow such an app in (proprietary, so adding an Anti-Feature would not be enough; this special case is covered by my repo with the custom AF NonFreeComp, i.e. contains a proprietary component/library).

The first problem is that F-Droid ’s privacy metadata is limited to Anti-Features, which lack depth and use technical terms that are of no use to the majority of users.

This is now addressed by said "Anti-Feature Reasons", where it's clearly outlined what the "offense" is. To give an example (screenshot from my repo-browser):

which should give a much better idea to the non-tech-savvy.

Have the PDF downloaded now. Not sure how long it will take me to go through it, as there are plenty of other tasks on my desk (plus $dayjob 🙈)

[IzzySoft]

PS @machiav3lli I just wanted to send you a mail related to your BA (and this topic), but the address given in it no longer works. You find mine on my website, maybe you can drop me a mail I can respond to? Thanks!

[machiav3lli]

This issue is now fixed on 1.0.0 but I'd like to keep the discussion for later.