Does MicroG support Google Advertising ID (AAID) or Identifier for Advertising (IDFA)?

I am using eOS without a registered Google Account in MicroG.

Google Device Registration and Google SafetyNet is enabled in MicroG.

Three banking apps are registered with Google Cloud Messaging via MicroG for the push messaging service to work.

  • Is it true that microG does not support Google Advertising ID (AAID) or Identifier for Advertising (IDFA) in any way, or if it does, anonymizes the so-called Advertising ID?

Thank you for a qualified answer.

I don’t think there is an advantage in supporting ad ID, so no it doesn’t support it. If it would, I guess there would be a section for it in which you could reset it.

I think what you are looking for is “Mobile Ads” :

Thanks @Anonyme, but that’s another one of your answers that starts with “I don’t think”.

“Believe” for me is not knowing! Not being able to prove something exactly, only knowing a fact vaguely, always makes us speak of “believe”. Believing is then synonymous with “assuming”.

Knowledge is a form of cognition that is based on facts / facts that can be experienced.

"Mobile Ads"
Crashing - No
Functionality - Not intended

“Not intended” = no clear NOI So interpretations are possible.

Well, right now I’m as smart as I ever was.

If you don’t want the answer, just don’t take it.

Sorry for not being aware of everything.

Isn’t it an affirmation ?

The only thing I can do is guessing, I’m not in the head of MicroG’s dev.

1 Like

Yes, I do, because it’s too speculative for me.

But why are you so insulted? Why don’t you just think of my response as a chance to think about your choice of words?

Speculations are spread too often on the Internet and thus contribute to the insecurity of those seeking help and to false opinion formation. Take as an example the statement of the author of the article

The author wrote among other things:

The following is a paper-based assessment… I hardly believe that the backports the security updates for Android Nougat …

From this the author concludes

Even a paper-based evaluation does not really allow a recommendation for /e/

and gives the tip

Technically experienced users should rather install a LineageOS.

Only verifiable, also. facts, are useful for the /e/ thing.

I won’t change my words because if I’m not sure, I’m not sure.
It would be worse to do an affirmation without telling you aren’t sure.
And it wouldn’t be better to say nothing.

If you are aware that speculations are speculations, then there is no problem.


I’m not surprised to hear that from you.

Instead of beating around the bush - how about straightforwardness and plain language?

Like this: I can’t answer that question one hundred percent. But /e/ are now in very good contact with microG developer Marvin Wißfeld. I will start a query and publish the result here.

1 Like

My lord such a pugnacious attitude for a community forum of /e/ OS users.

Seeing as you are someone for whom linguistic exactitude and directness is an important communicative principle, I humbly suggest that as you require a qualified answer you should ask your question to a qualified source.

The qualified source in this case being the microG Project itself.


A corresponding link would be a constructive contribution.

It is always displeasing to hear one’s qualified suggestion is deemed lacking in constructive contribution.

Furthermore, I’m awfully sorry but I am not in possession of a “corresponding link” to the qualified answer that you are seeking.

I’ve always loved the song Suzie Q, quite the toe tapper.


I still enjoy listening to the LP long version (8:37 min) of CCR with the fistula voice of John Fogerty.