| email thread
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/aerogear/7YxGzlHeIJM/R_VAv58rBAAJ proposed solution There are 2 separate concerns here. One is about the environment of the device, it is a fact and we can provide information about it from the SDK POV. The other concern is if the device is secure or not, which is a little bit tricky to answer from the SDK POV, as for some of the checks it is obvious, but for some of them, it will depend on the app, and it is a decision should be made by developers. So in this proposal, the SDK should only be responsible for reporting the fact of the device environment, and we can provide some recommendations through docs and showcase apps, but ultimately let the developers decide which is more "secure" for their apps. With this approach, we will also change the class from "SecurityChecks" to "DeviceChecks" which is more accurate. changing from "self defense" to "device trust" make sure all the method names are consistent across platforms, use "isSomething" See https://trello.com/c/ipEo4Dta/85-as-a-consumer-of-the-device-security-sdk-i-want-consistent-method-names-and-return-values-across-all-checks-and-platform-sdks?menu=filter&filter=label:Sprint%208 |
