We’ll be back covering the Epic v. Google trial at 2PM PT / 5PM ET today for Google chief legal officer Kent Walker, who will not appear before the jury — but may be key to what the jury eventually hears.
Protesters shut down all Bay Bridge lanes coming into San Francisco:
Courtroom personnel just told attorneys in Epic v. Google that it’s still not clear when we’ll begin due to the delay. Nor is it clear when we should expect an update, they say.
So for now, I’ll drop in some other tidbits I’ve learned during the trial.
Judge James Donato himself summoned Google’s chief legal officer to explain himself at 3PM PT — and Google spox Dan Jackson confirms to The Verge that he will show.
Walker will be grilled (sans jury) about a controversial issue surrounding the case — how Google appears to have systematically destroyed evidence by setting internal chats to auto-delete after 24 hours, did nothing to change that after being put on legal hold, and used “fake privilege” to keep internal conversations from being forwarded.
“I don’t want any buck passing,” said Donato.
Epic spokesperson Natalie Muñoz confirms to The Verge (and Epic confirmed earlier to WRAL TechWire) that Epic will call CEO Tim Sweeney as a witness today — subject to change.
It’s almost inconceivable that he would not appear if called: he has been sitting in the courtroom galley all day every day, save day 2, in the best seat in the house — the first seat in the front row on Epic’s side, where you get a clear view of the jury, the judge, the witness, and the faces of Google’s lawyers.
Three sources in the courtroom confirm to The Verge that the court has announced a juror is running late. I heard, but have not confirmed, it’s because the San Francisco Bay Bridge has been shut down by protesters during the APEC summit going on today.
On the way to the courthouse this morning, I passed barricades near City Hall, reportedly for an APEC event being held at the next-door Asian Art Museum.
Will you buy Valve’s limited-edition transparent Steam Deck for the US and Canada which has special eligibility rules? A “normal” OLED model that I swear to you is much better than the original where it counts? None at all?
No wrong choices here, but you’ve got under two hours to decide.
We’re looking at this article from Check Point Research, titled “Man-in-the-Disk: A New Attack Surface for Android Apps,” published August 12, 2018, which suggests that several Google apps — including Google Translate and Google Voice Typing — had the same vulnerability.
“We found that the developers failed to validate the integrity of data read from the External Storage. As such, our team was able to compromise certain files required by these apps, resulting in the crash of each of these applications,” wrote Check Point.
Epic suggests Google didn’t bother to publicize these issues the way it publicized the Epic flaw, instead just quietly fixing those apps.
And with that, we’re done for the day.
It’s Epic’s turn with the witness again, and its attorney is pointing out that Google’s sideloading screens still look like they’re designed to scare:
“Your phone and personal data are more vulnerable to attack by unknown apps. By installing apps from this source, you agree that you are responsible for any damage to your phone or loss of data that may result from their use.”
He suggests this makes it sound like Google Play comes with some kind of warranty that you’re waiving — but that Google Play doesn’t keep him from downloading bad apps, and Google won’t buy him a new phone if those bad apps damage it.
No, Kleidermacher didn’t whip out a phone in court — he came with a pair of videos he prerecorded. I started the stopwatch on my laptop as they fired up the video, and it took well under 30 seconds to sideload apps with just a few screens to click through — not 14 or 17 steps like Epic suggested. Google also pointed out that one warning screen came from the browser, not Android.
“Are these screens designed to keep users from sideloading?” asks Google’s lawyer.
No, Kleidermacher replies. He says it would make Android security harder to remove them: “The user doesn’t have a moment to reflect on the risk they’re taking and make an informed decision.”
Google asked the question that Epic knew it shouldn’t:
“As the head of Android security, do you think it would be feasible to provide the same level of protection to apps outside the app store as inside the app store?”
Kleidermacher’s answer: “We can’t make the internet safe.” I’m surprised he didn’t go further, honestly.