The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed on user's Android phone

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by jqpabc123 on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @11:17AM (#46445462)

why does Google even allow HSBC to see the list of other installed apps?

Maybe because Google and it's products have little respect for user privacy?

Have you thought about using Aurora Store? You can usually see a list of the permissions the app requires before you install.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by mindcrash on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @12:38PM (#46446319)

Maybe because Google and it's products have little respect for user privacy?

That's incorrect. Querying installed apps has been severely restricted (and thus mostly useless) and also requires a special nuclear-scale permission since Android 11.

I am wondering what exploit HSBC is using because I really don't think they are using official APIs for this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by jqpabc123 on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @12:54PM (#46446495)

I am wondering what exploit HSBC is using

Why was querying installed apps ever allowed? Why is an exploit or permission available now?

Answer --- see the original post above.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by SpicyLemonZest on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @01:23PM (#46446778)

You don’t think your phone should let you run certain programs, even with elevated permissions?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by jqpabc123 on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @01:30PM (#46446845)

Were elevated permissions granted by the user in this case? If so, then this entire discussion is baseless.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by mindslight on Thursday January 01, 2026 @11:32AM (#46455373)

Sure, but framed that way you also need to be able to run programs that think they have higher permissions even though API calls are returning mocked/sanitized data. And more generally, the ability to run programs with high permissions that can completely modify the behavior of other lower-permissions programs (eg HSBC).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by wolvoleo on Wednesday December 31, 2025 @11:51PM (#46451413)

Still, I have had issues with this too. My work uses an antimalware app when you use BYOD. Fine, but that app (lookout for work) installed in the work profile, and it complained that I had a tracking blocker (trackercontrol.org) installed in the MAIN profile :( This really pissed me off. Not only is an app in the work profile not supposed to even look at what I've got installed on the personal side, but it's actually a legit app. There's nothing wrong with tracker control. And it comes from a legit source, the Oxford university. The lookout guys are just being obstinate blocking it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by alex1115alex on Thursday January 01, 2026 @12:27AM (#46451564)

The QUERY_ALL_PACKAGES permission (what an Android app needs to see all the packages installed on your phone) is a little weird. The user doesn’t get prompted and explicitly grant permission for it like they would for something like MICROPHONE- having it in the app’s manifest alone is sufficient to query packages. However, Google Play Console does make you submit a video of how the permission is used in your app in order to publish on Google Play if they detect it in your manifest.

The acceptance criteria made sense for our app (it displays your phone’s notifications on your smart glasses HUD, and users need a way of selecting which apps can/can’t display notifications). I don’t know how HSBC justifies it though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The HSBC app refuses to work if "Bitwarden" is installed ... by jqpabc123 on Thursday January 01, 2026 @08:17AM (#46453856)

The user doesn’t get prompted and explicitly grant permission for it like they would for something like MICROPHONE

Why implement this in such an anti-privacy way that side steps the user?

Answer - see the original post above.

[ Parent | on HN ]