-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 943
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Initial Startup: Verify Detection & Protection #269
Comments
Maybe change the title of this one? It's very ambiguous to know what you mean with "Phone Support". That sound like a completely different thing to me... |
@E3V3A, what is very ambiguous with it? Since we have set our goal to support as many phones as possible, we should add a prompt as proposed here that shows the user if his phone is indeed making use of all detection functions of our App, or if there is stuff missing. How would they know otherwise? |
I agree completely, but I was just saying that "Phone Support" is usually understood as a place to call for support, and that's not what you meant. In addition we might wanna add that it should be an initial event that runs automatically on first start/install and then can be run manually from about page or something... |
I have been re-thinking this Issue and would now like @banjaxbanjo and @DimaKoz to have a word in here: Is it even a good idea running a small set of tests when initially installing our app to make sure it works properly? If it does not work and/or is not a good proposal, I might as well close this. Thanks.
|
Since you're calling for more general comments, & since I'm a bit more "user"-level than most everyone here (& sorry in advance if my 2¢ is irrelevant =), I think this is a fantastic idea, given excellent heuristics, especially re: my trouble with #457 . |
Hi sorry for jumping in very late too. I think this is a tremendously good idea. Unfortunately, I'm not very sure how to implement it. Does anybody know how complex it might be? |
Thanks for jumping in, @marvinmarnold. I know that our project seemed "dead" the past few weeks, I'm working hard to catch up again. My initial thought was to basically quickly test the functions of the phone where our app is installed on, all of this could be done during initial setup in #181, I guess. @DJaeger, are you able to tell us how the things proposed in here could be accomplished without writing a huge code-overload? Not sure if there exist any scripts or Android routines for tasks like this. |
What functions specifically would need to be tested? I'm going to two conferences soon (ARIN 36 & ITU World Telecom) that I want to have AIMSICD running during. I'm not even really sure if my phone is compatible at this point. |
Its a while since I had time to look at the current code, but last time the most of the tests, what is available to the app, were at the places the features were used. |
@DJaeger what do you mean by tests? There are no technical tests in the app https://github.com/SecUpwN/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detector/tree/development/app/src/androidTest/java/com/SecUpwN/AIMSICD/test |
I mean for example a simply IF condition if the CDMA class of the TelephonyManager is available. |
@larsgrefer, do you have any good ideas how we can implement a functionality test so that the user of our app knows which functions will work on his specific device? This test should be done during #181. |
Folks, I know we're currently piling up on Issues, sorry about that. But trust me, this is good since this conveys we're having very clear ideas about how our App shall work and what needs to be addressed.
Since our project has set a high goal to provide broad support for current consumer smartphones out there, it is important to verify to the user if our App is really working as supposed to on their specific phone. Of course, we currently have our Requirements, but I do want to avoid people thinking that our App works on their new smartphone while in fact it does nothing else than showing a green Status Icon.
Proposal:
Preferences
Should this Issue be in fact a duplicate of #173 (which was declined here), let me know.
Want to back this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via Bountysource.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: