Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play

[Carlos E. R.]

Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.


<https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>


I noticed the other day that my phone said that ES App locker was using
battery in background but I ignored it.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[John McGaw]

Yeah. I had been becoming less and less happy with that app and after
reading related articles about it I uninstalled it this weekend. Now I'm
trying to become comfortable with X-plore. It would be hard to
overemphasize how different they are but I'll keep trying. At least X-plore
handles assets on my network which Google Files seems completely unaware of.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:25:13 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

> Yeah. I had been becoming less and less happy with that app and after
> reading related articles about it I uninstalled it this weekend. Now I'm
> trying to become comfortable with X-plore. It would be hard to
> overemphasize how different they are but I'll keep trying. At least X-plore
> handles assets on my network which Google Files seems completely unaware of.

I have to agree with the fact that we all loved ES File Explorer in the
beginning, but, over time, we all grew to dislike its shenanigans where ES
File Explorer was a classic case of why you want to auto-archive all your
APKs automatically at the time of installation (so you can go back to an
earlier version if the newer version gets obnoxious).

I have about ten things I want in a file explorer, but I haven't yet found
the best.

I currently use, mostly SimpleMobileTools' "File Explorer":
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.simplemobiletools.filemanager>
Although I just googled for that to give you the URL where I see there is
also something called "SimpleMobileTools File Manager" freeware:
<https://github.com/SimpleMobileTools/Simple-File-Manager>

So I'm confused what the difference is, offhand, but I'm reasonably happy
with SimpleMobileTools' File Explorer

It would be nice, I think, to have a thread on what are the five or ten
things we most want from a file explorer app, where I'll list a couple that
are on my list, but I suspect no one app has them all.
o Free, ad free, obnoxious free, etc.
o Navigates the entire file system simply, just like any other common file explorer does
o Creates both files and folders easily
o Shows hidden files if desired
o Creates desktop links (aka shortcuts) to both files & folders
o Sorts by date, size, filename, etc.
o Can 'act' on files such as installing APKs or playing music, viewing pics, or video
o Searches for files/folders by name
o Has shortcuts for common folders (e.g., Downloads)
o Saves a path to the clipboard for use in other apps (useful to change
defaults in app storage such as map app databases)
o Some folks want encryption (but I'd use EDS Lite for encrypted containers)
o Some folks might want a file shredder or free-space shredder (although Termux does that AFAIK)
o Anything else?

I note that I have only one other freeware file explorer installed, which
is called "Total Commander", but I remember now that I installed it only to
get the plugins, such as the Samba/CIFs plugins, for viewing Windows LAN
shares on Android.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.android.TotalCommander>

In short, I'd love to ask folks here what other than what I listed is
something YOU need in a file explorer, and which file explorer do you know
of that has those 10 things?

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 16:39:53 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
> Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.
>
>
> <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>

Hi Carlos,
I didn't see ES File Explorer mentioned by name in the article, but it did
seem to disappear from Google Play.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.estrongs.android.pop>

This explains a bit of the history:
<http://www.aadhu.com/quickpic-is-back-on-google-play-store-while-es-file-explorer-disappears/>

Apparently DO Global had over 100 apps on the play store, with half of them
being recently removed by Google.

I removed Cheetah Mobile's browser based on this helpful news from you
where this article has more details.
<https://www.xda-developers.com/cheetah-mobile-ad-fraud-android-apps/>

[Carlos E. R.]

On 30/04/2019 02.46, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 16:39:53 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
>> Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.
>>
>>
>> <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>
>
> Hi Carlos,
> I didn't see ES File Explorer mentioned by name in the article, but it did
> seem to disappear from Google Play.
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.estrongs.android.pop>

Because the article that I really read were local sources in Spanish, so
I looked for an English source for posting here but did not read it in
full. Apparently that article was the initiator of the issue.

>
> This explains a bit of the history:
> <http://www.aadhu.com/quickpic-is-back-on-google-play-store-while-es-file-explorer-disappears/>
>
> Apparently DO Global had over 100 apps on the play store, with half of them
> being recently removed by Google.

Yes.

> I removed Cheetah Mobile's browser based on this helpful news from you
> where this article has more details.
> <https://www.xda-developers.com/cheetah-mobile-ad-fraud-android-apps/>

There must be a lot of articles, ES File Explorer is very popular. And
as it mentions or uses other apps from the same dev, I have more than
one installed.

I have one article with a list of substitutes for the file explorer, but
it is also in Spanish.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 30/04/2019 13.34, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> I have one article with a list of substitutes for the file explorer, but
> it is also in Spanish.

There is the new "Google Files" (old "Files Go").

MK Explorer 4.6* Stalled since 2016, but good.
Amaze File Manager 4.3* Open Source.
Solid Explorer 4.6* Similar to ES F.E. Chromecast sprt.
MiXPlorer N/A
https://labs.xda-developers.com/store/app/com.mixplorer
Google Files 4,6 Can share files with others.




--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 14:27:35 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> There is the new "Google Files" (old "Files Go").

Hi Carlos,

Thanks for the helpful news that a huge amount of apps were breaking Google
Play rules, where I had read the article and then _looked_ for those apps
on my phone.

I searched for a _list_ of the apps banned, but I could only find a
handful, even though we know the list is rather large of banned apps.

On my phone, I had installed a couple of them in the past (e.g., ES File
Explorer),

All I can find are clickbait of bits and pieces of banned apps where they
all copy each other (welcome to the Internet), where the canonical article
may be this BuzzFeed:
<https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/in-banner-video-ad-fraud>

The only app that has been 'implicated' that I had was the CM browser,
which is confusing, since it's _still_ on Google Play, but I removed it
nonetheless.

In the past, I had tested _some_ of the removed apps from DO Global, but I
found them worthless, so, I removed them long ago (but I remember
installing them for testing, particulalry purported "cleaners" and
"battery" apps, none of which stayed on my phone for long.

So the only app I had installed, was the Chettah Mobile web browser:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Cheetah+Mobile>

The advertising part of the scam least worries me (it worries Google, of
course), where a web browser which is sending your data to China is
particularly pernicious, so, we should all be wary of that kind of scam.

As for a good file explorer, as I noted, I'm currently using the
SimpleMobileTools File Explorer (aka File Manager?), which works 'ok', but
not great.

I'll check out MiXplorer, that you found where it seems to have "more"
stuff than I really want in a file browser, but maybe that's good.
MiXplorer is not on F-Droid, apparently, which is strange for this type of
open-source app, is it not?

Also, MiXplorer seems to have a variety of related apps which are confusing
to me upon first inspection, e.g., MiX Archive. MiXplorer Silver, etc.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mixplorer.addon.archive>

But it is found on the net, as you noted:
<https://mixplorer.com/#intro>
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1523691>

This site says: "Downloads from any other source are not recommended"
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=23109280&postcount=2>

Which brings us to the link you purposefully helpfully provided:
<https://labs.xda-developers.com/store/app/com.mixplorer>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mixplorer.silver>

The main issue here, for general use purposes, is the MixPlorer Standard
apparently requires a login to XDA Developers, and the Mixplorer Silver
apparently requires money.

To test, I just wish it was on F-Droid, which requires neither:
<https://search.f-droid.org/?q=mixplorer>

So someone else will need to test mixplorer for us who has a login to the
XDA Developers web site.

[Piet]

Carlos E. R. wrote:

> Arlen G. Holder wrote:
>> This explains a bit of the history:
>> <http://www.aadhu.com/quickpic-is-back-on-google-play-store-while-es-file-explorer-disappears/>
>>
>> Apparently DO Global had over 100 apps on the play store, with half of them
>> being recently removed by Google.
>
> Yes.

QuickPic is a strange case:

The aadhu.com article says: "QuickPic, one of these infamous apps
owned by Cheetah Mobile has also been resubmitted to the Play Store,
even though the company has not been very vocal about it."

That "not very vocal" can be said of Google too: when you now search
the Play Store for "QuickPic", you won't find it; just tons of other
gallery apps. But if you click on the QuickPic icon in the aadhu.com
article, you do end up on the CM QuickPic page, but under its app ID:
com.alensw.PicFolder. That's a new version, but the comments make it
very clear that it's badly broken.

-p

[Carlos E. R.]

On 30/04/2019 17.59, Arlen G. Holder wrote:

>
> In the past, I had tested _some_ of the removed apps from DO Global, but I
> found them worthless, so, I removed them long ago (but I remember
> installing them for testing, particulalry purported "cleaners" and
> "battery" apps, none of which stayed on my phone for long.

I use(d) ES App Locker. It requests a pin or pattern to access some
apps, so that a user that borrows or grabs my phone can not access it. I
used it for some sensitive apps that don't have such an entry control -
say, email.

And this is one of those that have been found run in background doing
clicks (using battery).

> As for a good file explorer, as I noted, I'm currently using the
> SimpleMobileTools File Explorer (aka File Manager?), which works 'ok', but
> not great.

I use(d) ES File Explorer for things that others don't have. Like
accessing the phone via FTP. I hate its advert nuisances, the app was
much better on the past.

For instance, I use Ghost Commander, but it doesn't have an FT server.

> I'll check out MiXplorer, that you found where it seems to have "more"
> stuff than I really want in a file browser, but maybe that's good.
> MiXplorer is not on F-Droid, apparently, which is strange for this type of
> open-source app, is it not?

In general, I don't install apps outside of Google Play, unless I have
reasons to the contrary for some app.

I will try "Amaze File Manager" and the new "Google Files".


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[John McGaw]

X-Plore seems to be quite useful but it doesn't seem to have FTP
capability. It does have everything else that I would expect and operates
smoothly although the interface is a bit quirky -- haven't decided if that
is a good or bad thing but I've gotten used to it quite easily. Its
handling of networked resources such as media files seems to be especially
good.

[123456789]

Carlos E. R. wrote:

> In general, I don't install apps outside of Google Play

For security reasons Chromebooks make it difficult though
not impossible to use Android apps other than from Google
Play. In my case to sideload apps I would have to completely
wipe the device and then turn on developer mode. Besides
being a pain I would lose Google security support. Not worth it.

The only problem for me is that I can't use any of my old
archived Android apps such as the Groundhog newsreader which
isn't in Google Play anymore. However with a recent upgrade
to Android 9 (on another device) I got a warning that
Groundhog may no longer work. And indeed it has lost some
function. So perhaps the loss of this sideloading old apps
ability is becoming somewhat moot anyway...

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Thu, 2 May 2019 13:40:42 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> I use(d) ES File Explorer for things that others don't have. Like
> accessing the phone via FTP.

Hi Carlos,

Usenet is a potluck picnic where I thank you for bringing something of
value for everyone to share on this thread, so I will try to add back some
value myself.

I have a looooooooong history with FTP servers on Android, where, I used to
use "Primitive FTP' and then I started using "FTP Server (Free)" but there
are plenty of others to choose from. Mine are all from F-Droid, but I
think most are also on Google Play (although they may be payware there).

Searching just now for you, this one is also OK and it's on Google Play:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.ftpserver>

Once I figured out that WebDAV servers allow us to easily "mount" the
Android file system as a removable drive on Windows, I pretty much stopped
using the FTP server on Android for bidirectional access to the Android
file system & Windows over WiFi:
C:\> net use Z: \\android-ip-address\ftp-share /persistent

For connecting to your own phone over wifi, I find WebDAV better than FTP
because of this ability to mount it as a driver letter more easily than you
can mount as a drive letter using FTP.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.webdavserver>

Of course, we'd all prefer SMB/CIFs, but that's just not in the cards,
given the limitations on ports sans rooting.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 02/05/2019 19.40, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2019 13:40:42 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> I use(d) ES File Explorer for things that others don't have. Like
>> accessing the phone via FTP.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Usenet is a potluck picnic where I thank you for bringing something of
> value for everyone to share on this thread, so I will try to add back some
> value myself.
>
> I have a looooooooong history with FTP servers on Android, where, I used to
> use "Primitive FTP' and then I started using "FTP Server (Free)" but there
> are plenty of others to choose from. Mine are all from F-Droid, but I
> think most are also on Google Play (although they may be payware there).
>
> Searching just now for you, this one is also OK and it's on Google Play:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.ftpserver>
>
> Once I figured out that WebDAV servers allow us to easily "mount" the
> Android file system as a removable drive on Windows, I pretty much stopped
> using the FTP server on Android for bidirectional access to the Android
> file system & Windows over WiFi:
> C:\> net use Z: \\android-ip-address\ftp-share /persistent

But I use Linux. I prefer plain FTP.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Thu, 2 May 2019 20:35:21 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> But I use Linux. I prefer plain FTP.

Hi Carlos,
I don't disagree with your choice of FTP for Linux, where this post is
simply to bring more value to the Potluck Picnic of the file explorer
topic.

The good news, for SMB/CIFs is that Samba works well on Linux.

Back on topic, if anyone finds a _list_ of the apps that were banned, it
would be useful since I'd like to check my phone for any of them.

In general, any obnoxious app is only on my phone when I'm creating the
test folder, be4cuase my process of testing any type of functionality is:
1. Research the functionality (see note below)
2. Load a dozen or so apps that claim to have that functionality
3. Test them, and delete instantly, if not sooner, obnoxious apps

On researching the functionality, what's worrisome is that often I google
for "10 best file explorers 2019" or something like that, where the
clickbait is phenomenal in that sometimes I can read a dozen different
articles where almost none of the apps are in the same lists.

Obviously what I want is to see the same apps consistently in the lists,
where the ones that come out on top in most lists are generally the ones to
start with for testing.

A real life example of this process is these hits just now:
o 5 Best ES Eplorer alternatives
<https://allandroiddevices.com/best-es-file-explorer-alternatives>
o Top 5 best file explorer android 2019
<https://uphilltechno.com/top-5-best-file-explorer-android-2019/>
o Best Android File Managers
<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/pictures-story/518-best-android-file-managers.html>
o 10 Best File Manager for Android In 2019
<https://alltipsfinder.com/best-android-file-manager/>
o 10 Best File Manager for Android (April 2019)
<https://www.appsblaze.com/best-file-manager-apps-for-android/>

Where the list is, respectively:
o Marshmallow native file manager
o File Commander
o FX File Explorer (ad free)
o ASUS Document Manager
o Total Commander

o Google Go Files
o Cx File Explorer
o Xiaomi File Manager
o ASUS File Manager (File Explorer)
o Solid Explorer File Manager

o File Go (Free)
o MiXplorer Silver ($5)
o Astro (Free)
o Solid Explorer ($2)
o DiskUsage (Free)
o File Commander (Free)
o OI File Manager (Free)
o Moto File Manager (Motorola stock)
o Folder Sync (Free)
o Ghost Commander (Free)
o File Manager (Free)
o Amaze File Manager (Free)
o Tetra Filer (Free)
o File Manager + (Free)
o Root Explorer ($4)
o Total Commander (Free)
o ASUS File Manager (Free)
o X-plore File Manager (Free)
o File Explorer FX (Free)
o etc.

As always, the cost of freeware is in the effort to find the best apps.

[VanguardLH]

I gave up on ES Explorer when noticing fullscreen ads that it generated
while it was still loaded in the background. If it killed its process,
no ads. With it left in the background, it would randomly spew ads onto
my screen. Since I "unloaded" it (put in background until its memory
was needed for something else), I couldn't figure out my phone had
become an adware platform. Tracked the ads to ES Explorer, uninstalled
ES Explorer, and the mysterious ads disappeared. Never again went back
to using that app. Bad enough to have ads in apps, but as a banner at
the bottom of *its* window is tolerable. Ads outside the app's own
window are intolerable, and ads shown outside the app's window that is
no longer displayed (the app is background) are MALWARE as they
interfere with the use of *MY* phone which is NOT their property.

To me, ads outside the app's window that took over my screens and
interfered with my use of my phone qualified that app as malicious.
I've used other apps that practiced the same malicious behavior. After
contacting their authors, some changed from showing the ads external to
their app's window when it was background. Others just want the
click-through revenue and don't give a shit about the safety of their
users (the fullscreen apps can pretend to be the nav buttons at the
bottom of the real screen, and exiting them can run more scripts).

If Google barred *all* of DO Gobal's apps might be a wake-up call to
other app developers that still show ads external to the app's window
and especially if they continue to do so while the app is backgrounded.

Pity it takes a 3rd party to identify the abusive and corrosive apps
rather than Google enforcing their own policing. Hopefully Google will
investigate the other DU apps to check for violations. Any ad content
that appears outside the app's window qualifies that app as malicious.
The app authors disclaim any responsibility regarding the ad content,
and some fullscreen ads pretend to have the phone's nav buttons at the
bottom, and some will run further scripts if you close the ad using its
"X" button instead of using the phone's real Back button.

Guess users are still ignorant that the Chinese gov't demands that
software authors collect data from users (China's Cybersecurity Law
introduced June 2016), and do so covertly. The law mandates that
network operators store data on their servers physically located within
the country, monitor and record network operations, and maintain related
logs for not fewer than six months. Well, over here we have Google.

https://www.scmp.com/tech/article/2126714/heres-what-happens-your-data-when-you-use-chinese-messaging-app
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law#Controversies

[Carlos E. R.]

On 04/05/2019 20.52, VanguardLH wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
>> Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.
>>
>> <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>
>>
>> I noticed the other day that my phone said that ES App locker was using
>> battery in background but I ignored it.
>
> I gave up on ES Explorer when noticing fullscreen ads that it generated
> while it was still loaded in the background.

That was an option that you can easily find and disable.

> If Google barred *all* of DO Gobal's apps might be a wake-up call to
> other app developers that still show ads external to the app's window
> and especially if they continue to do so while the app is backgrounded.

I believe they did just that, but not for the reason you expose.

> Guess users are still ignorant that the Chinese gov't demands that
> software authors collect data from users (China's Cybersecurity Law
> introduced June 2016), and do so covertly. The law mandates that
> network operators store data on their servers physically located within
> the country, monitor and record network operations, and maintain related
> logs for not fewer than six months. Well, over here we have Google.

And the CIA.

> https://www.scmp.com/tech/article/2126714/heres-what-happens-your-data-when-you-use-chinese-messaging-app
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law#Controversies
>


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[VanguardLH]

Carlos E. R. wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>> Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
>>> Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.
>>>
>>> <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>
>>>
>>> I noticed the other day that my phone said that ES App locker was using
>>> battery in background but I ignored it.
>>
>> I gave up on ES Explorer when noticing fullscreen ads that it generated
>> while it was still loaded in the background.
>
> That was an option that you can easily find and disable.

I'm quite used to digging into options to determine how to configure a
program or alter its behavior. I do not remember any such option back
then to disable ads. After all, it was claimed "freeware" that was
actually adware. They wanted their revenue to compensate for their
effort to produce the app.

In the current version of ES Explorer, just where is this option that is
supposed to either immediately unload the app when backgrounded or, more
importantly, disable the app from allowing ads to display outside the
app's own window? That latter option would eliminate fullscreen ads
from interferring even with that app. I think it was the ParKing app
that would allow external ads (outside the app's own window) to display
which interferred with using the app. Those fullscreen ads interfere
with the use of both the app and the phone (and the "X" button in the ad
is NOT a safe way to close it). Fullscreen ads make the app interfere
with the phone use, so border on malicious. Showing fullscreen apps
while backgrounded makes the app as malware.

Since Google barred the app from their store, I cannot re-install it to
hunt around in its latest version to see if the app author became more
polite to his users by offering options to not ever background or
force/block any ads external to the app's own window.

>> If Google barred *all* of DO Gobal's apps might be a wake-up call to
>> other app developers that still show ads external to the app's window
>> and especially if they continue to do so while the app is backgrounded.
>
> I believe they did just that, but not for the reason you expose.

I still see the DU Browser listed at the store.

>> Guess users are still ignorant that the Chinese gov't demands that
>> software authors collect data from users (China's Cybersecurity Law
>> introduced June 2016), and do so covertly. The law mandates that
>> network operators store data on their servers physically located within
>> the country, monitor and record network operations, and maintain related
>> logs for not fewer than six months. Well, over here we have Google.
>
> And the CIA.

You probably meant the NSA. As I recall, the CIA still has to get some
court order (forget its name) to get an ISP or site to hold records, but
the court order is specific to a user, not encompass all users. NSA is
under the DOD. CIA is under the Executive gov't branch, and itself has
no law enforcement function.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 05/05/2019 10.50, VanguardLH wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> Google removes ES File Explorer from Google Play, and all apps from DO
>>>> Global. Apparently they did click on adds on background.
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/google-play-store-ad-fraud-du-group-baidu>
>>>>
>>>> I noticed the other day that my phone said that ES App locker was using
>>>> battery in background but I ignored it.
>>>
>>> I gave up on ES Explorer when noticing fullscreen ads that it generated
>>> while it was still loaded in the background.
>>
>> That was an option that you can easily find and disable.
>
> I'm quite used to digging into options to determine how to configure a
> program or alter its behavior. I do not remember any such option back
> then to disable ads. After all, it was claimed "freeware" that was
> actually adware. They wanted their revenue to compensate for their
> effort to produce the app.
>
> In the current version of ES Explorer, just where is this option that is

I don't remember. I think it was a screen saver feature. I still have
the app installed, and certainly I don't get those adds. I remember
getting them in the past, then seeking till I found the option. I'm not
going to try activate options to get the adds back and find out which! :-D

Maybe "pantalla/desactivar tarjeta de noticias" (screen/deactivate news
card)

I seem to recall that it was a screen saver functionality.

> Since Google barred the app from their store, I cannot re-install it to
> hunt around in its latest version to see if the app author became more
> polite to his users by offering options to not ever background or
> force/block any ads external to the app's own window.
>
>>> If Google barred *all* of DO Gobal's apps might be a wake-up call to
>>> other app developers that still show ads external to the app's window
>>> and especially if they continue to do so while the app is backgrounded.
>>
>> I believe they did just that, but not for the reason you expose.
>
> I still see the DU Browser listed at the store.

I see "DU Browser" but not from "DO Gobal".

>>> Guess users are still ignorant that the Chinese gov't demands that
>>> software authors collect data from users (China's Cybersecurity Law
>>> introduced June 2016), and do so covertly. The law mandates that
>>> network operators store data on their servers physically located within
>>> the country, monitor and record network operations, and maintain related
>>> logs for not fewer than six months. Well, over here we have Google.
>>
>> And the CIA.
>
> You probably meant the NSA. As I recall, the CIA still has to get some
> court order (forget its name) to get an ISP or site to hold records, but
> the court order is specific to a user, not encompass all users. NSA is
> under the DOD. CIA is under the Executive gov't branch, and itself has
> no law enforcement function.

Not abroad.

To us, there is not much difference about being spied by the CIA or the
Chinese.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.