I asked the same question a few years ago, and the answer I arrived at is that the app has, by default, more permissions (not only technical but also conventional) to collect data, send push notifications, and otherwise harass the user.

▲

tcoff91 5 hours ago | parent [-]

iOS apps have to request permission from user to send push and for basically every other problematic permission.

▲

saltcured 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm only familiar with Android, and it bothers me that I cannot exert complete sandbox control over every app.

I think I should be able to completely cut it off from the network and/or local storage; prevent it from running even though it is installed; and prevent it from having any personalizing information about me, my movements, my network connectivity status or patterns, my device usage (i.e. screen on versus locked, any proxy like battery state of charge), etc.

I am very reluctant to install apps because I see that the platform is designed for needs and a mindset that is not my own. I do not see it as essential or preferable that an app be able to monetize my usage or really gather any telemetry at all.

	▲	fer 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In terms of the usual data collection, I'm very happy with TrackerControl[0]. It's basically meant to run as an always on VPN (it isn't one) which allows it to block ads, social media, trackers, etc with quite reasonable granularity. I'm surprised at the amount of apps that fail to work correctly unless they have access to their data harvesting endpoints. In terms for pure access to the data/permissions, GrapheneOS seems to be the main (only?) choice. The default permissions apps get in current day Android allow to group activities and tie them to a single user across apps/sites. [0]https://f-droid.org/packages/net.kollnig.missioncontrol.fdro...