Best Practices for App Permissions in Android

Permission requests protect sensitive information available from a device and should only be used when access to information is necessary for the functioning of your app. This document provides tips on ways you might be able to achieve the same (or better) functionality without requiring access to such information; it is not an exhaustive discussion of how permissions work in the Android operating system.

For a more general look at Android permissions, please see Permissions and User Data. For details on how to work with permissions in your code, see Working with System Permissions. For best practices for working with unique identifiers, please see Best Practices for Unique Identifiers.

Tenets of Working with Android Permissions

We recommend following these tenets when working with Android permissions:

#1: Only use the permissions necessary for your app to work. Depending on how you are using the permissions, there may be another way to do what you need (system intents, identifiers, backgrounding for phone calls) without relying on access to sensitive information.

#2: Pay attention to permissions required by libraries. When you include a library, you also inherit its permission requirements. You should be aware of what you’re including, the permissions they require, and what those permissions are used for.

#3: Be transparent. When you make a permissions request, be clear about what you’re accessing, and why, so users can make informed decisions. Make this information available alongside the permission request including install, runtime, or update permission dialogues.

#4: Make system accesses explicit. Providing continuous indications when you access sensitive capabilities (for example, the camera or microphone) makes it clear to users when you’re collecting data and avoids the perception that you’re collecting data surreptitiously.

The remaining sections of this guide elaborate on these rules in the context of developing Android applications.

Permissions in Android 6.0+

Android 6.0 Marshmallow introduced a new permissions model that lets apps request permissions from the user at runtime, rather than prior to installation. Apps that support the new model request permissions when the app actually requires the services or data protected by the services. While this doesn’t (necessarily) change overall app behavior, it does create a few changes relevant to the way sensitive user data is handled:

Increased situational context: Users are prompted at runtime, in the context of your app, for permission to access the functionality covered by those permission groups. Users are more sensitive to the context in which the permission is requested, and if there’s a mismatch between what you are requesting and the purpose of your app, it’s even more important to provide detailed explanation to the user as to why you’re requesting the permission; whenever possible, you should provide an explanation of your request both at the time of the request and in a follow-up dialog if the user denies the request.

Greater flexibility in granting permissions: Users can deny access to individual permissions at the time they’re requested and in settings, but they may still be surprised when functionality is broken as a result. It’s a good idea to monitor how many users are denying permissions (e.g. using Google Analytics) so that you can either refactor your app to avoid depending on that permission or provide a better explanation of why you need the permission for your app to work properly. You should also make sure that your app handles exceptions created when users deny permission requests or toggle off permissions in settings.

Increased transactional burden: Users will be asked to grant access for permission groups individually and not as a set. This makes it extremely important to minimize the number of permissions you’re requesting because it increases the user burden for granting permissions and increases the probability that at least one of the requests will be denied.

Avoid Requesting Unnecessary Permissions

This section provides alternatives to common use-cases that will help you limit the number of permission requests you make. Since the number and type of user-surfaced permissions requested affects downloads compared to other similar apps requesting fewer permissions, it’s best to avoid requesting permissions for unnecessary functionality.

Camera/contact access with realtime user requests

In this case, you need occasional access to the device’s camera or contact information and don’t mind the user being asked every time you need access.

If your requirement for access to user data is infrequent — in other words, it’s not unacceptably disruptive for the user to be presented with a runtime dialogue each time you need to access data — you can use an intent based request. Android provides some system intents that applications can use without requiring permissions because the user chooses what, if anything, to share with the app at the time the intent based request is issued.

For example, an intent action type of MediaStore.ACTION_IMAGE_CAPTURE or MediaStore.ACTION_VIDEO_CAPTURE can be used to capture images or videos without directly using the Camera object (or requiring the permission). In this case, the system intent will ask for the user’s permission on your behalf every time an image is captured.

Running in the background after losing audio focus

In this case, your application needs to go into the background when the user gets a phone call and refocus only once the call stops.

The common approach in these cases – for example, a media player muting or pausing during a phone call – is to listen for changes in the call state using PhoneStateListener or listening for the broadcast of android.intent.action.PHONE_STATE. The problem with this solution is that it requires theREAD_PHONE_STATE permission, which forces the user to grant access to a wide cross section of sensitive data such as their device and SIM hardware IDs and the phone number of the incoming call.

You can avoid this by requesting AudioFocus for your app, which doesn’t require explicit permissions (because it does not access sensitive information). Simply put the code required to background your audio in the onAudioFocusChange() event handler and it will run automatically when the OS shifts its audio focus. More detailed documentation on how to do this can be found here.

Determine the device your instance is running on

In this case, you need a unique identifier to determine which device the instance of your app is running on.

Applications may have device-specific preferences or messaging (e.g., saving a device-specific playlist for a user in the cloud so that they can have a different playlist for their car and at home). A common solution is to leverage device identifiers such as Device IMEI, but this requires the Device ID and call information permission group (PHONE in M+). It also uses an identifier which cannot be reset and is shared across all apps.

There are two alternatives to using these types of identifiers:

  1. Use the InstanceID API. getInstance(Context context).getID() will return a unique device identifier for your application instance. The result is an app instance scoped identifier that can be used as a key when storing information about the app and is reset if the user re-installs the app.
  2. Create your own identifier that’s scoped to your app’s storage using basic system functions like randomUUID().

Create a unique identifier for advertising or user analytics

In this case, you need a unique identifier for building a profile for users who are not signed in to your app (e.g., for ads targeting or measuring conversions).

Building a profile for advertising and user analytics sometimes requires an identifier that is shared across other applications. Common solutions for this involve leveraging device identifiers such as Device IMEI, which requires the Device ID and call information permission group (PHONE in API level 23+) and cannot be reset by the user. In any of these cases, in addition to using a non-resettable identifier and requesting a permission that might seem unusual to users, you will also be in violation of the Play Developer Program Policies.

Unfortunately, in these cases using the InstanceID API or system functions to create an app-scoped ID are not appropriate solutions because the ID may need to be shared across apps. An alternative solution is to use the Advertising Identifier available from the AdvertisingIdClient.Info class via the getId() method. You can create an AdvertisingIdClient.Info object using thegetAdvertisingIdInfo(Context) method and call the getId() method to use the identifier. Note that this method is blocking, so you should not call it from the main thread; a detailed explanation of this method is available here.

Know the Libraries You’re Working With

Sometimes permissions are required by the libraries you use in your app. For example, ads and analytics libraries may require access to the Location orIdentity permissions groups to implement the required functionality. But from the user’s point of view, the permission request comes from your app, not the library.

Just as users select apps that use fewer permissions for the same functionality, developers should review their libraries and select third-party SDKs that are not using unnecessary permissions. For example, try to avoid libraries that require the Identity permission group unless there is a clear user-facing reason why the app needs those permissions. In particular, for libraries that provide location functionality, make sure you are not required to request theFINE_LOCATION permission unless you are using location-based targeting functionality.

Be Transparent

You should inform your users about what you’re accessing and why. Research shows that users are much less uncomfortable with permissions requests if they know why the app needs them. A user study showed that:

…a user’s willingness to grant a given permission to a given mobile app is strongly influenced by the purpose associated with such a permission. For instance a user’s willingness to grant access to his or her location will vary based on whether the request is required to support the app’s core functionality or whether it is to share this information with an advertising network or an analytics company.1

Based on his group’s research, Professor Jason Hong from CMU concluded that, in general:

…when people know why an app is using something as sensitive as their location — for example, for targeted advertising — it makes them more comfortable than when simply told an app is using their location.1

As a result, if you’re only using a fraction of the API calls that fall under a permission group, it helps to explicitly list which of those permissions you’re using, and why. For example:

  • If you’re only using coarse location, let the user know this in your app description or in help articles about your app.
  • If you need access to SMS messages to receive authentication codes that protect the user from fraud, let the user know this in your app description and/or the first time you access the data.

Under certain conditions, it’s also advantageous to let users know about sensitive data accesses in real-time. For example, if you’re accessing the camera or microphone, it’s usually a good idea to let the user know with a notification icon somewhere in your app, or in the notification tray (if the application is running in the background), so it doesn’t seem like you’re collecting data surreptitiously.

Ultimately, if you need to request a permission to make something in your app work, but the reason is not clear to the user, find a way to let the user know why you need the most sensitive permissions.


[1] Modeling Users’ Mobile App Privacy Preferences: Restoring Usability in a Sea of Permission Settings, by J. Lin B. Liu, N. Sadeh and J. Hong. In Proceedings of SOUPS 2014.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *