This post is part of AppLovin Nonconsensual Installs. See important disclosures.
My work follows six prior critiques in which others questioned AppLovin practices, both as to app installations and beyond. I organize those critiques here, in chronological order, to assist those who wish to reread them. I emphasize those reports and sections that, like my post today, consider nonconsensual installations.
Culper 1 – pages 7-25 about installs
Fuzzy Panda – Part II discusses Direct Downloads and other methods of gaming installs (citing my work), among other subjects
Culper 2 – broader topics: misrepresentation of Chinese ties, national security concerns
Muddy Waters – focused on tracking and persistent identifiers
Mike Shields – on installs (citing me)
Olivia Solon (Bloomberg) – reporting an SEC probe of AppLovin’s data-collection practices
Compared with prior reports, I provide a more detailed technical analysis. For example Solon’s report of SEC inquiry does not provide any source code, screenshots, packet logs, or other direct evidence of data collection violations. I also provide greater proof relative to prior reports of nonconsensual installations. For example, the prior reports about nonconsensual installs present snippets of code, whereas I trace the full execution chain from ad delivery all the way to installation. Similarly, prior reports offer a few complaints about nonconsensual installations, but I offer hundreds, plus I explore patterns of complaints across devices and situations, and I cross-check complaints against details in decompiled AppLovin code.