GoKawiilJoe Maring / Android Authority
TL;DR Google currently allows users to interact with some Quick Settings tiles from locked devices.
In Android 17 QPR1 Beta 5, we see initial signs of work on an option to lock down access.
When locked, only the flashlight would be accessible to unauthorized users.
When Google delivered Android 17 QPR1 Beta 5 late yesterday afternoon, the release initially looked like it mostly focused on a whole lot of bug fixes. But as we spend a little more time with the code, we’re noticing more and more functional additions. Right now we’re checking out one that almost seems a little crazy that we haven’t had all along, as Android gets ready to let users lock Quick Settings tiles.
You’re reading an Authority Insights story. Authority Insights brings you all the latest exclusive reports, app teardowns, leaks, and in-depth tech coverage from the Android Authority team that you won’t find anywhere else.
Right now, Android provides a fair amount of access to Quick Settings tiles, even from a locked device. While there are obviously some sensible precautions in place, forcing you to unlock your phone to use Wallet or Quick Share, for instance, other tiles let you instantly toggle them on or off with no additional authentication.
But what if you don’t want someone picking up your phone and turning off Bluetooth, or killing your hotspot? So far, Quick Settings haven’t offered any protection against unauthorized access here. But in Android 17 QPR1 Beta 5, we’re spotting new text strings in the code that sure hint that Google is working to change that:
Code Copy Text <string name="lockscreen_privacy_tiles_switch_title">Require unlock for Quick Settings</string> <string name="lockscreen_privacy_tiles_switch_summary">To prevent unauthorized changes, you must unlock your device to use any Quick Settings tile except the Flashlight</string>
As you can see, when this option is active, Quick Settings won’t be accessible on locked devices — with the sole exception of being able to use the flashlight. That feels like a largely reasonable exemption, although we suppose there could be situations where a bad actor was tying to drain a locked phone’s battery as quickly as possible for some nefarious purpose.
... continue reading