android.os.FileUriExposedException: file:///storage/emulated/0/test.txt exposed beyond app through...
The app is crashing when I'm trying to open a file. It works below Android Nougat, but on Android Nougat it crashes. It only crashes when I try to open a file from the SD card, not from the system partition. Some permission problem?
Sample code:
File file = new File("/storage/emulated/0/test.txt");
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(file), "text/*");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent); // Crashes on this line
Log:
android.os.FileUriExposedException:
file:///storage/emulated/0/test.txt exposed beyond app through
Intent.getData()
Edit:
When targeting Android Nougat, file://
URIs are not allowed anymore. We should use content://
URIs instead. However, my app needs to open files in root directories. Any ideas?
android android-file android-7.0-nougat
add a comment |
The app is crashing when I'm trying to open a file. It works below Android Nougat, but on Android Nougat it crashes. It only crashes when I try to open a file from the SD card, not from the system partition. Some permission problem?
Sample code:
File file = new File("/storage/emulated/0/test.txt");
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(file), "text/*");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent); // Crashes on this line
Log:
android.os.FileUriExposedException:
file:///storage/emulated/0/test.txt exposed beyond app through
Intent.getData()
Edit:
When targeting Android Nougat, file://
URIs are not allowed anymore. We should use content://
URIs instead. However, my app needs to open files in root directories. Any ideas?
android android-file android-7.0-nougat
5
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29
add a comment |
The app is crashing when I'm trying to open a file. It works below Android Nougat, but on Android Nougat it crashes. It only crashes when I try to open a file from the SD card, not from the system partition. Some permission problem?
Sample code:
File file = new File("/storage/emulated/0/test.txt");
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(file), "text/*");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent); // Crashes on this line
Log:
android.os.FileUriExposedException:
file:///storage/emulated/0/test.txt exposed beyond app through
Intent.getData()
Edit:
When targeting Android Nougat, file://
URIs are not allowed anymore. We should use content://
URIs instead. However, my app needs to open files in root directories. Any ideas?
android android-file android-7.0-nougat
The app is crashing when I'm trying to open a file. It works below Android Nougat, but on Android Nougat it crashes. It only crashes when I try to open a file from the SD card, not from the system partition. Some permission problem?
Sample code:
File file = new File("/storage/emulated/0/test.txt");
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(file), "text/*");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent); // Crashes on this line
Log:
android.os.FileUriExposedException:
file:///storage/emulated/0/test.txt exposed beyond app through
Intent.getData()
Edit:
When targeting Android Nougat, file://
URIs are not allowed anymore. We should use content://
URIs instead. However, my app needs to open files in root directories. Any ideas?
android android-file android-7.0-nougat
android android-file android-7.0-nougat
edited Feb 2 '18 at 17:32
Thomas Vos
asked Jul 5 '16 at 9:51
Thomas VosThomas Vos
4,27541748
4,27541748
5
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29
add a comment |
5
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29
5
5
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29
add a comment |
18 Answers
18
active
oldest
votes
If your targetSdkVersion >= 24
, then we have to use FileProvider
class to give access to the particular file or folder to make them accessible for other apps. We create our own class inheriting FileProvider
in order to make sure our FileProvider doesn't conflict with FileProviders declared in imported dependencies as described here.
Steps to replace file://
URI with content://
URI:
Add a class extending
FileProvider
public class GenericFileProvider extends FileProvider {}
Add a FileProvider
<provider>
tag inAndroidManifest.xml
under<application>
tag. Specify a unique authority for theandroid:authorities
attribute to avoid conflicts, imported dependencies might specify${applicationId}.provider
and other commonly used authorities.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
...
<application
...
<provider
android:name=".GenericFileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.my.package.name.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
</application>
</manifest>
- Then create a
provider_paths.xml
file inres/xml
folder. Folder may be needed to created if it doesn't exist. The content of the file is shown below. It describes that we would like to share access to the External Storage at root folder(path=".")
with the name external_files.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
The final step is to change the line of code below in
Uri photoURI = Uri.fromFile(createImageFile());
to
Uri photoURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".my.package.name.provider", createImageFile());
Edit: If you're using an intent to make the system open your file, you may need to add the following line of code:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Please refer, full code and solution has been explained here.
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.
– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise useandroid:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…
– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
|
show 18 more comments
Besides the solution using the FileProvider
, there is another way to work around this. Simply put
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder();
StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
in Application.onCreate()
. In this way the VM ignores the file URI
exposure.
Method
builder.detectFileUriExposure()
enables the file exposure check, which is also the default behavior if we don't setup a VmPolicy.
I encountered a problem that if I use a content://
URI
to send something, some apps just can't understand it. And downgrading the target SDK
version is not allowed. In this case my solution is useful.
Update:
As mentioned in the comment, StrictMode is diagnostic tool, and is not supposed to be used for this problem. When I posted this answer a year ago, many apps can only receive File uris. They just crash when I tried to send a FileProvider uri to them. This is fixed in most apps now, so we should go with the FileProvider solution.
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a newVmPolicy
.
– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.
– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
|
show 6 more comments
If your app targets API 24+, and you still want/need to use file:// intents, you can use hacky way to disable the runtime check:
if(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT>=24){
try{
Method m = StrictMode.class.getMethod("disableDeathOnFileUriExposure");
m.invoke(null);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Method StrictMode.disableDeathOnFileUriExposure
is hidden and documented as:
/**
* Used by lame internal apps that haven't done the hard work to get
* themselves off file:// Uris yet.
*/
Problem is that my app is not lame, but rather doesn't want to be crippled by using content:// intents which are not understood by many apps out there. For example, opening mp3 file with content:// scheme offers much fewer apps than when opening same over file:// scheme. I don't want to pay for Google's design faults by limiting my app's functionality.
Google wants developers to use content scheme, but the system is not prepared for this, for years apps were made to use Files not "content", files can be edited and saved back, while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?).
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.ContentResolver
has bothopenInputStream()
andopenOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable thefile
Uri
rule.
– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
|
show 20 more comments
If targetSdkVersion
is higher than 24, then FileProvider is used to grant access.
Create an xml file(Path: resxml) provider_paths.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
Add a Provider in AndroidManifest.xml
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
and replace
Uri uri = Uri.fromFile(fileImagePath);
to
Uri uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(MainActivity.this, BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID + ".provider",fileImagePath);
Edit: While you're including the URI with an Intent
make sure to add below line:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
and you are good to go. Hope it helps.
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
|
show 9 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion
is 24 or higher, you can not use file:
Uri
values in Intents
on Android 7.0+ devices.
Your choices are:
Drop your
targetSdkVersion
to 23 or lower, orPut your content on internal storage, then use
FileProvider
to make it available selectively to other apps
For example:
Intent i=new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, AUTHORITY, f));
i.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
startActivity(i);
(from this sample project)
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However,FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from/system
. You could create a custom strategy for myStreamProvider
, or roll your ownContentProvider
, to get past the problem.
– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (/data
,/system
), because of this "good change".
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
|
show 12 more comments
First you need to add a provider to your AndroidManifest
<application
...>
<activity>
....
</activity>
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="com.your.package.fileProvider"
android:grantUriPermissions="true"
android:exported="false">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/file_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
now create a file in xml resource folder (if using android studio you can hit Alt + Enter after highlighting file_paths and select create a xml resource option)
Next in the file_paths file enter
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths>
<external-path path="Android/data/com.your.package/" name="files_root" />
<external-path path="." name="external_storage_root" />
</paths>
This example is for external-path you can refere here for more options.
This will allow you to share files which are in that folder and its sub-folder.
Now all that's left is to create the intent as follows:
MimeTypeMap mime = MimeTypeMap.getSingleton();
String ext = newFile.getName().substring(newFile.getName().lastIndexOf(".") + 1);
String type = mime.getMimeTypeFromExtension(ext);
try {
Intent intent = new Intent();
intent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Uri contentUri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(getContext(), "com.your.package.fileProvider", newFile);
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, type);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(newFile), type);
}
startActivityForResult(intent, ACTIVITY_VIEW_ATTACHMENT);
} catch (ActivityNotFoundException anfe) {
Toast.makeText(getContext(), "No activity found to open this attachment.", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();
}
EDIT: I added the root folder of the sd card in the file_paths. I have tested this code and it does work.
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.
– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
I was getting the following exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was<files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of<external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.
– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
add a comment |
@palash k answer is correct and worked for internal storage files, but in my case I want to open files from external storage also, my app crashed when open file from external storage like sdcard and usb, but I manage to solve the issue by modifying provider_paths.xml from the accepted answer
change the provider_paths.xml like below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
<root-path
name="root"
path="/" />
</paths>
and in java class(No change as the accepted answer just a small edit)
Uri uri=FileProvider.getUriForFile(getActivity(), BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID+".provider", File)
This help me to fix the crash for files from external storages, Hope this will help some one having same issue as mine
:)
1
Where did you find about<root-path
please ? It's working.<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.
– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meantAndroid/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.
– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
|
show 1 more comment
Using the fileProvider is the way to go.
But you can use this simple workaround:
WARNING: It will be fixed in next Android release -
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37122890#comment4
replace:
startActivity(intent);
by
startActivity(Intent.createChooser(intent, "Your title"));
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
add a comment |
My Solution was to 'Uri.parse' the File Path as String, instead of using Uri.fromFile().
String storage = Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().toString() + "/test.txt";
File file = new File(storage);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT < 24) {
uri = Uri.fromFile(file);
} else {
uri = Uri.parse(file.getPath()); // My work-around for new SDKs, causes ActivityNotFoundException in API 10.
}
Intent viewFile = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
viewFile.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain");
startActivity(viewFile);
Seems that fromFile() uses A file pointer, which I suppose could be insecure when memory addresses are exposed to all apps. But A file path String never hurt anybody, so it works without throwing FileUriExposedException.
Tested on API levels 9 to 26! Does not require FileProvider, nor the Android Support Library at all.
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
add a comment |
I used Palash's answer given above but it was somewhat incomplete, I had to provide permission like this
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, getPackageName() + ".provider", new File(path));
List<ResolveInfo> resInfoList = getPackageManager().queryIntentActivities(intent, PackageManager.MATCH_DEFAULT_ONLY);
for (ResolveInfo resolveInfo : resInfoList) {
String packageName = resolveInfo.activityInfo.packageName;
grantUriPermission(packageName, uri, Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION | Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
}
}else {
uri = Uri.fromFile(new File(path));
}
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "application/vnd.android.package-archive");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent);
add a comment |
I don't know why, I did everything exactly the same as Pkosta (https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040 ) but kept getting error:
java.lang.SecurityException: Permission Denial: opening provider redacted from ProcessRecord{redacted} (redacted) that is not exported from uid redacted
I wasted hours on this issue. The culprit? Kotlin.
val playIntent = Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, uri)
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION)
intent
was actually setting getIntent().addFlags
instead of operating on my newly declared playIntent.
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Happy coding :-)
add a comment |
For downloading pdf from server , add below code in your service class. Hope this is helpful for you.
File file = new File(Environment.getExternalStoragePublicDirectory(Environment.DIRECTORY_DOWNLOADS), fileName + ".pdf");
intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
//Log.e("pathOpen", file.getPath());
Uri contentUri;
contentUri = Uri.fromFile(file);
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP | Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 24) {
Uri apkURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".provider", file);
intent.setDataAndType(apkURI, "application/pdf");
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, "application/pdf");
}
And yes , don't forget to add permissions and provider in your manifest.
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<application
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
what is@xml/provider_paths
?
– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
add a comment |
@Pkosta 's answer is one way of doing this.
Besides using FileProvider
, you can also insert the file into MediaStore
(especially for image and video files), because files in MediaStore are accessible to every app:
The MediaStore is primarily aimed at video, audio and image MIME types, however beginning with Android 3.0 (API level 11) it can also store non-media types (see MediaStore.Files for more info). Files can be inserted into the MediaStore using scanFile() after which a content:// style Uri suitable for sharing is passed to the provided onScanCompleted() callback. Note that once added to the system MediaStore the content is accessible to any app on the device.
For example, you can insert a video file to MediaStore like this:
ContentValues values = new ContentValues();
values.put(MediaStore.Video.Media.DATA, videoFilePath);
Uri contentUri = context.getContentResolver().insert(
MediaStore.Video.Media.EXTERNAL_CONTENT_URI, values);
contentUri
is like content://media/external/video/media/183473
, which can be passed directly to Intent.putExtra
:
intent.setType("video/*");
intent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, contentUri);
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
activity.startActivity(intent);
This works for me, and save the hassles of using FileProvider
.
add a comment |
https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040/395097 this answer is complete.
This answer is for - you already have an app which was targeting below 24, and now you are upgrading to targetSDKVersion >= 24.
In Android N, only the file uri exposed to 3rd party app is changed. (Not the way we were using it before). So change only the places where you are sharing the path with 3rd party app (Camera in my case)
In our app we were sending uri to Camera app, in that location we are expecting the camera app to store the captured image.
- For android N, we generate new Content:// uri based url pointing to
file. - We generate usual File api based path for the same (using older method).
Now we have 2 different uri for same file. #1 is shared with Camera app. If the camera intent is success, we can access the image from #2.
Hope this helps.
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
add a comment |
Xamarin.Android
Note: The path xml/provider_paths.xml (.axml) couldn't be resolved, even after making the xml folder under Resources (maybe it can be put in an existing location like Values, didn't try), so I resorted to this which works for now. Testing showed that it only needs to be called once per application run (which makes sense being that it changes the operational state of the host VM).
Note: xml needs to be capitalized, so Resources/Xml/provider_paths.xml
Java.Lang.ClassLoader cl = _this.Context.ClassLoader;
Java.Lang.Class strictMode = cl.LoadClass("android.os.StrictMode");
System.IntPtr ptrStrictMode = JNIEnv.FindClass("android/os/StrictMode");
var method = JNIEnv.GetStaticMethodID(ptrStrictMode, "disableDeathOnFileUriExposure", "()V");
JNIEnv.CallStaticVoidMethod(strictMode.Handle, method);
add a comment |
In my case I got rid of the exception by replacing SetDataAndType
with just SetData
.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f38200282%2fandroid-os-fileuriexposedexception-file-storage-emulated-0-test-txt-exposed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
18 Answers
18
active
oldest
votes
18 Answers
18
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If your targetSdkVersion >= 24
, then we have to use FileProvider
class to give access to the particular file or folder to make them accessible for other apps. We create our own class inheriting FileProvider
in order to make sure our FileProvider doesn't conflict with FileProviders declared in imported dependencies as described here.
Steps to replace file://
URI with content://
URI:
Add a class extending
FileProvider
public class GenericFileProvider extends FileProvider {}
Add a FileProvider
<provider>
tag inAndroidManifest.xml
under<application>
tag. Specify a unique authority for theandroid:authorities
attribute to avoid conflicts, imported dependencies might specify${applicationId}.provider
and other commonly used authorities.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
...
<application
...
<provider
android:name=".GenericFileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.my.package.name.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
</application>
</manifest>
- Then create a
provider_paths.xml
file inres/xml
folder. Folder may be needed to created if it doesn't exist. The content of the file is shown below. It describes that we would like to share access to the External Storage at root folder(path=".")
with the name external_files.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
The final step is to change the line of code below in
Uri photoURI = Uri.fromFile(createImageFile());
to
Uri photoURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".my.package.name.provider", createImageFile());
Edit: If you're using an intent to make the system open your file, you may need to add the following line of code:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Please refer, full code and solution has been explained here.
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.
– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise useandroid:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…
– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
|
show 18 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion >= 24
, then we have to use FileProvider
class to give access to the particular file or folder to make them accessible for other apps. We create our own class inheriting FileProvider
in order to make sure our FileProvider doesn't conflict with FileProviders declared in imported dependencies as described here.
Steps to replace file://
URI with content://
URI:
Add a class extending
FileProvider
public class GenericFileProvider extends FileProvider {}
Add a FileProvider
<provider>
tag inAndroidManifest.xml
under<application>
tag. Specify a unique authority for theandroid:authorities
attribute to avoid conflicts, imported dependencies might specify${applicationId}.provider
and other commonly used authorities.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
...
<application
...
<provider
android:name=".GenericFileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.my.package.name.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
</application>
</manifest>
- Then create a
provider_paths.xml
file inres/xml
folder. Folder may be needed to created if it doesn't exist. The content of the file is shown below. It describes that we would like to share access to the External Storage at root folder(path=".")
with the name external_files.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
The final step is to change the line of code below in
Uri photoURI = Uri.fromFile(createImageFile());
to
Uri photoURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".my.package.name.provider", createImageFile());
Edit: If you're using an intent to make the system open your file, you may need to add the following line of code:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Please refer, full code and solution has been explained here.
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.
– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise useandroid:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…
– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
|
show 18 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion >= 24
, then we have to use FileProvider
class to give access to the particular file or folder to make them accessible for other apps. We create our own class inheriting FileProvider
in order to make sure our FileProvider doesn't conflict with FileProviders declared in imported dependencies as described here.
Steps to replace file://
URI with content://
URI:
Add a class extending
FileProvider
public class GenericFileProvider extends FileProvider {}
Add a FileProvider
<provider>
tag inAndroidManifest.xml
under<application>
tag. Specify a unique authority for theandroid:authorities
attribute to avoid conflicts, imported dependencies might specify${applicationId}.provider
and other commonly used authorities.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
...
<application
...
<provider
android:name=".GenericFileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.my.package.name.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
</application>
</manifest>
- Then create a
provider_paths.xml
file inres/xml
folder. Folder may be needed to created if it doesn't exist. The content of the file is shown below. It describes that we would like to share access to the External Storage at root folder(path=".")
with the name external_files.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
The final step is to change the line of code below in
Uri photoURI = Uri.fromFile(createImageFile());
to
Uri photoURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".my.package.name.provider", createImageFile());
Edit: If you're using an intent to make the system open your file, you may need to add the following line of code:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Please refer, full code and solution has been explained here.
If your targetSdkVersion >= 24
, then we have to use FileProvider
class to give access to the particular file or folder to make them accessible for other apps. We create our own class inheriting FileProvider
in order to make sure our FileProvider doesn't conflict with FileProviders declared in imported dependencies as described here.
Steps to replace file://
URI with content://
URI:
Add a class extending
FileProvider
public class GenericFileProvider extends FileProvider {}
Add a FileProvider
<provider>
tag inAndroidManifest.xml
under<application>
tag. Specify a unique authority for theandroid:authorities
attribute to avoid conflicts, imported dependencies might specify${applicationId}.provider
and other commonly used authorities.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
...
<application
...
<provider
android:name=".GenericFileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.my.package.name.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
</application>
</manifest>
- Then create a
provider_paths.xml
file inres/xml
folder. Folder may be needed to created if it doesn't exist. The content of the file is shown below. It describes that we would like to share access to the External Storage at root folder(path=".")
with the name external_files.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
The final step is to change the line of code below in
Uri photoURI = Uri.fromFile(createImageFile());
to
Uri photoURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".my.package.name.provider", createImageFile());
Edit: If you're using an intent to make the system open your file, you may need to add the following line of code:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Please refer, full code and solution has been explained here.
edited Oct 30 '18 at 1:38
jachguate
15.4k14585
15.4k14585
answered Aug 9 '16 at 18:33
PkostaPkosta
10.4k157
10.4k157
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.
– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise useandroid:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…
– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
|
show 18 more comments
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.
– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise useandroid:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…
– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
45
45
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
I just needed to add intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– alorma
Nov 22 '16 at 15:11
19
19
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
Will it work for all Android versions, or just from API 24?
– android developer
Nov 24 '16 at 17:43
4
4
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
this article helped me medium.com/@ali.muzaffar/…
– AbdulMomen عبدالمؤمن
Mar 18 '17 at 16:41
9
9
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the
(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
@rockhammer I just tested this with Android 5.0, 6.0, 7.1 and 8.1, it works in all cases. So the
(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT > M)
condition is useless.– Sébastien
Dec 13 '17 at 17:20
35
35
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise use android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
FileProvider
should be extended only if you want to override any of the default behavior, otherwise use android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
. See developer.android.com/reference/android/support/v4/content/…– JP Ventura
Jan 15 '18 at 21:56
|
show 18 more comments
Besides the solution using the FileProvider
, there is another way to work around this. Simply put
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder();
StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
in Application.onCreate()
. In this way the VM ignores the file URI
exposure.
Method
builder.detectFileUriExposure()
enables the file exposure check, which is also the default behavior if we don't setup a VmPolicy.
I encountered a problem that if I use a content://
URI
to send something, some apps just can't understand it. And downgrading the target SDK
version is not allowed. In this case my solution is useful.
Update:
As mentioned in the comment, StrictMode is diagnostic tool, and is not supposed to be used for this problem. When I posted this answer a year ago, many apps can only receive File uris. They just crash when I tried to send a FileProvider uri to them. This is fixed in most apps now, so we should go with the FileProvider solution.
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a newVmPolicy
.
– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.
– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
|
show 6 more comments
Besides the solution using the FileProvider
, there is another way to work around this. Simply put
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder();
StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
in Application.onCreate()
. In this way the VM ignores the file URI
exposure.
Method
builder.detectFileUriExposure()
enables the file exposure check, which is also the default behavior if we don't setup a VmPolicy.
I encountered a problem that if I use a content://
URI
to send something, some apps just can't understand it. And downgrading the target SDK
version is not allowed. In this case my solution is useful.
Update:
As mentioned in the comment, StrictMode is diagnostic tool, and is not supposed to be used for this problem. When I posted this answer a year ago, many apps can only receive File uris. They just crash when I tried to send a FileProvider uri to them. This is fixed in most apps now, so we should go with the FileProvider solution.
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a newVmPolicy
.
– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.
– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
|
show 6 more comments
Besides the solution using the FileProvider
, there is another way to work around this. Simply put
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder();
StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
in Application.onCreate()
. In this way the VM ignores the file URI
exposure.
Method
builder.detectFileUriExposure()
enables the file exposure check, which is also the default behavior if we don't setup a VmPolicy.
I encountered a problem that if I use a content://
URI
to send something, some apps just can't understand it. And downgrading the target SDK
version is not allowed. In this case my solution is useful.
Update:
As mentioned in the comment, StrictMode is diagnostic tool, and is not supposed to be used for this problem. When I posted this answer a year ago, many apps can only receive File uris. They just crash when I tried to send a FileProvider uri to them. This is fixed in most apps now, so we should go with the FileProvider solution.
Besides the solution using the FileProvider
, there is another way to work around this. Simply put
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder();
StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
in Application.onCreate()
. In this way the VM ignores the file URI
exposure.
Method
builder.detectFileUriExposure()
enables the file exposure check, which is also the default behavior if we don't setup a VmPolicy.
I encountered a problem that if I use a content://
URI
to send something, some apps just can't understand it. And downgrading the target SDK
version is not allowed. In this case my solution is useful.
Update:
As mentioned in the comment, StrictMode is diagnostic tool, and is not supposed to be used for this problem. When I posted this answer a year ago, many apps can only receive File uris. They just crash when I tried to send a FileProvider uri to them. This is fixed in most apps now, so we should go with the FileProvider solution.
edited Jan 6 '18 at 10:56
answered Nov 18 '16 at 10:31
hqzxzwbhqzxzwb
2,6671512
2,6671512
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a newVmPolicy
.
– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.
– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
|
show 6 more comments
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a newVmPolicy
.
– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.
– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
1
1
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a new
VmPolicy
.– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
@LaurynasG From API 18 to 23, android does not check for file uri exposure by default. Calling this method enables this check. From API 24, android does this check by default. But we can disable it by setting a new
VmPolicy
.– hqzxzwb
Jul 19 '17 at 18:31
1
1
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
@hqzxzwb Thanks you saved my time. +1 vote for u.
– Sagar Aghara
Dec 23 '17 at 5:47
1
1
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
How this can solve this problem however , StrictMode is a diagnostic tools that should be enabled in developer mode not release mode ???
– Imene Noomene
Jan 4 '18 at 15:02
1
1
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
@ImeneNoomene Actually we are disabling StrictMode here. It seems reasonable that StrictMode should not be enabled in release mode, but in fact Android enables some StrictMode options by default regardless of debug mode or release mode. But one way or another, this answer was meant only to be a workaround back when some target apps were not prepared for receiving content uris. Now that most apps have added support for content uris, we should use the FileProvider pattern.
– hqzxzwb
Jan 4 '18 at 15:54
2
2
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!
StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
@ImeneNoomene I am totally with you in your outrage. You're right, this is a diagnostic tool, or at least it was ages ago when I added it to my projects. This is super frustrating!
StrictMode.enableDefaults();
, which I run only on my development builds keeps this crash from happening - so I now have a production application which crashes but it doesn't crash when in development. So basically, enabling a diagnostic tool here hides a serious issue. Thanks @hqzxzwb for helping me demystify this.– Jon
Jan 5 '18 at 19:08
|
show 6 more comments
If your app targets API 24+, and you still want/need to use file:// intents, you can use hacky way to disable the runtime check:
if(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT>=24){
try{
Method m = StrictMode.class.getMethod("disableDeathOnFileUriExposure");
m.invoke(null);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Method StrictMode.disableDeathOnFileUriExposure
is hidden and documented as:
/**
* Used by lame internal apps that haven't done the hard work to get
* themselves off file:// Uris yet.
*/
Problem is that my app is not lame, but rather doesn't want to be crippled by using content:// intents which are not understood by many apps out there. For example, opening mp3 file with content:// scheme offers much fewer apps than when opening same over file:// scheme. I don't want to pay for Google's design faults by limiting my app's functionality.
Google wants developers to use content scheme, but the system is not prepared for this, for years apps were made to use Files not "content", files can be edited and saved back, while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?).
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.ContentResolver
has bothopenInputStream()
andopenOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable thefile
Uri
rule.
– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
|
show 20 more comments
If your app targets API 24+, and you still want/need to use file:// intents, you can use hacky way to disable the runtime check:
if(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT>=24){
try{
Method m = StrictMode.class.getMethod("disableDeathOnFileUriExposure");
m.invoke(null);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Method StrictMode.disableDeathOnFileUriExposure
is hidden and documented as:
/**
* Used by lame internal apps that haven't done the hard work to get
* themselves off file:// Uris yet.
*/
Problem is that my app is not lame, but rather doesn't want to be crippled by using content:// intents which are not understood by many apps out there. For example, opening mp3 file with content:// scheme offers much fewer apps than when opening same over file:// scheme. I don't want to pay for Google's design faults by limiting my app's functionality.
Google wants developers to use content scheme, but the system is not prepared for this, for years apps were made to use Files not "content", files can be edited and saved back, while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?).
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.ContentResolver
has bothopenInputStream()
andopenOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable thefile
Uri
rule.
– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
|
show 20 more comments
If your app targets API 24+, and you still want/need to use file:// intents, you can use hacky way to disable the runtime check:
if(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT>=24){
try{
Method m = StrictMode.class.getMethod("disableDeathOnFileUriExposure");
m.invoke(null);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Method StrictMode.disableDeathOnFileUriExposure
is hidden and documented as:
/**
* Used by lame internal apps that haven't done the hard work to get
* themselves off file:// Uris yet.
*/
Problem is that my app is not lame, but rather doesn't want to be crippled by using content:// intents which are not understood by many apps out there. For example, opening mp3 file with content:// scheme offers much fewer apps than when opening same over file:// scheme. I don't want to pay for Google's design faults by limiting my app's functionality.
Google wants developers to use content scheme, but the system is not prepared for this, for years apps were made to use Files not "content", files can be edited and saved back, while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?).
If your app targets API 24+, and you still want/need to use file:// intents, you can use hacky way to disable the runtime check:
if(Build.VERSION.SDK_INT>=24){
try{
Method m = StrictMode.class.getMethod("disableDeathOnFileUriExposure");
m.invoke(null);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Method StrictMode.disableDeathOnFileUriExposure
is hidden and documented as:
/**
* Used by lame internal apps that haven't done the hard work to get
* themselves off file:// Uris yet.
*/
Problem is that my app is not lame, but rather doesn't want to be crippled by using content:// intents which are not understood by many apps out there. For example, opening mp3 file with content:// scheme offers much fewer apps than when opening same over file:// scheme. I don't want to pay for Google's design faults by limiting my app's functionality.
Google wants developers to use content scheme, but the system is not prepared for this, for years apps were made to use Files not "content", files can be edited and saved back, while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?).
edited Feb 24 '17 at 11:29
answered Feb 24 '17 at 11:21
Pointer NullPointer Null
28.7k126997
28.7k126997
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.ContentResolver
has bothopenInputStream()
andopenOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable thefile
Uri
rule.
– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
|
show 20 more comments
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.ContentResolver
has bothopenInputStream()
andopenOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable thefile
Uri
rule.
– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
3
3
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.
ContentResolver
has both openInputStream()
and openOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable the file
Uri
rule.– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
"while files served over content scheme can't be (can they?)." -- sure, if you have write access to the content.
ContentResolver
has both openInputStream()
and openOutputStream()
. A less-hacky way of doing this is to just configure the VM rules yourself, and do not enable the file
Uri
rule.– CommonsWare
Feb 25 '17 at 17:13
1
1
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
Exactly. It is hard work when you built your entire app, then find out after targeting 25 all of your camera methods break. This works for me until I get time to do it the right way.
– Matt W
May 25 '17 at 23:11
5
5
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
Works on Android 7. Thanks
– Anton Kizema
May 29 '17 at 14:18
4
4
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
Works on Android 8 too, tested on Huawei Nexus 6P.
– Gonzalo Ledezma Torres
Aug 7 '17 at 15:40
3
3
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
I confirm this is working on production (I have more then 500,000 users), currently version 8.1 is the highest version, and it works on it.
– Eli
Apr 22 '18 at 12:26
|
show 20 more comments
If targetSdkVersion
is higher than 24, then FileProvider is used to grant access.
Create an xml file(Path: resxml) provider_paths.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
Add a Provider in AndroidManifest.xml
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
and replace
Uri uri = Uri.fromFile(fileImagePath);
to
Uri uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(MainActivity.this, BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID + ".provider",fileImagePath);
Edit: While you're including the URI with an Intent
make sure to add below line:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
and you are good to go. Hope it helps.
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
|
show 9 more comments
If targetSdkVersion
is higher than 24, then FileProvider is used to grant access.
Create an xml file(Path: resxml) provider_paths.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
Add a Provider in AndroidManifest.xml
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
and replace
Uri uri = Uri.fromFile(fileImagePath);
to
Uri uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(MainActivity.this, BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID + ".provider",fileImagePath);
Edit: While you're including the URI with an Intent
make sure to add below line:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
and you are good to go. Hope it helps.
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
|
show 9 more comments
If targetSdkVersion
is higher than 24, then FileProvider is used to grant access.
Create an xml file(Path: resxml) provider_paths.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
Add a Provider in AndroidManifest.xml
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
and replace
Uri uri = Uri.fromFile(fileImagePath);
to
Uri uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(MainActivity.this, BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID + ".provider",fileImagePath);
Edit: While you're including the URI with an Intent
make sure to add below line:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
and you are good to go. Hope it helps.
If targetSdkVersion
is higher than 24, then FileProvider is used to grant access.
Create an xml file(Path: resxml) provider_paths.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path name="external_files" path="."/>
</paths>
Add a Provider in AndroidManifest.xml
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths"/>
</provider>
and replace
Uri uri = Uri.fromFile(fileImagePath);
to
Uri uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(MainActivity.this, BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID + ".provider",fileImagePath);
Edit: While you're including the URI with an Intent
make sure to add below line:
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
and you are good to go. Hope it helps.
edited Jan 23 at 11:34
answered Aug 18 '17 at 7:58
Pankaj LilanPankaj Lilan
2,0731433
2,0731433
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
|
show 9 more comments
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
1
1
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
@MaksimKniazev Can you describe your error in brief? So that I can help you.
– Pankaj Lilan
Nov 16 '17 at 11:47
1
1
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
@PankajLilan, I did exactly what did you said. But everytime that I open my pdf in the other application it appears blank (its saving correctly). Should I need to edit the xml? I already added the FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION as well;
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 18:14
1
1
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
My mistake, I was adding the permission to the wrong intent. This is the best and the simpliest right answer. Thank you!
– Felipe Castilhos
Mar 7 '18 at 19:10
2
2
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
It throws exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root that contains / My file path is /storage/emulated/0/GSMManage_DCIM/Documents/Device7298file_74.pdf. can you please help ?
– Jagdish Bhavsar
Mar 8 '18 at 13:07
1
1
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
Don't know why but I had to add both READ and WRITE permissions : target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION) target.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION)
– box
Oct 22 '18 at 8:54
|
show 9 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion
is 24 or higher, you can not use file:
Uri
values in Intents
on Android 7.0+ devices.
Your choices are:
Drop your
targetSdkVersion
to 23 or lower, orPut your content on internal storage, then use
FileProvider
to make it available selectively to other apps
For example:
Intent i=new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, AUTHORITY, f));
i.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
startActivity(i);
(from this sample project)
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However,FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from/system
. You could create a custom strategy for myStreamProvider
, or roll your ownContentProvider
, to get past the problem.
– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (/data
,/system
), because of this "good change".
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
|
show 12 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion
is 24 or higher, you can not use file:
Uri
values in Intents
on Android 7.0+ devices.
Your choices are:
Drop your
targetSdkVersion
to 23 or lower, orPut your content on internal storage, then use
FileProvider
to make it available selectively to other apps
For example:
Intent i=new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, AUTHORITY, f));
i.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
startActivity(i);
(from this sample project)
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However,FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from/system
. You could create a custom strategy for myStreamProvider
, or roll your ownContentProvider
, to get past the problem.
– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (/data
,/system
), because of this "good change".
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
|
show 12 more comments
If your targetSdkVersion
is 24 or higher, you can not use file:
Uri
values in Intents
on Android 7.0+ devices.
Your choices are:
Drop your
targetSdkVersion
to 23 or lower, orPut your content on internal storage, then use
FileProvider
to make it available selectively to other apps
For example:
Intent i=new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, AUTHORITY, f));
i.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
startActivity(i);
(from this sample project)
If your targetSdkVersion
is 24 or higher, you can not use file:
Uri
values in Intents
on Android 7.0+ devices.
Your choices are:
Drop your
targetSdkVersion
to 23 or lower, orPut your content on internal storage, then use
FileProvider
to make it available selectively to other apps
For example:
Intent i=new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, AUTHORITY, f));
i.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
startActivity(i);
(from this sample project)
answered Jul 5 '16 at 12:42
CommonsWareCommonsWare
770k13818791931
770k13818791931
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However,FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from/system
. You could create a custom strategy for myStreamProvider
, or roll your ownContentProvider
, to get past the problem.
– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (/data
,/system
), because of this "good change".
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
|
show 12 more comments
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However,FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from/system
. You could create a custom strategy for myStreamProvider
, or roll your ownContentProvider
, to get past the problem.
– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (/data
,/system
), because of this "good change".
– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the
/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
Thanks for the answer. What happens when I use this with files on the
/system
partition? Every app should be able to acces this partition without root.– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 12:56
2
2
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in
/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However, FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from /system
. You could create a custom strategy for my StreamProvider
, or roll your own ContentProvider
, to get past the problem.– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
@SuperThomasLab: I would not count on everything in
/system
being world-readable. That being said, my guess is that you will still get this exception. I suspect that they are just checking the scheme and are not trying to determine if the file truly is world-readable. However, FileProvider
will not help you, as you cannot teach it to serve from /system
. You could create a custom strategy for my StreamProvider
, or roll your own ContentProvider
, to get past the problem.– CommonsWare
Jul 5 '16 at 13:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (
/data
, /system
), because of this "good change".– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
Still thinking how I'm going to solve this.. The app I am updating with Android N support is a root browser. But now you can't open any files anymore in root directories. (
/data
, /system
), because of this "good change".– Thomas Vos
Jul 5 '16 at 16:11
1
1
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
what are the most important drawbacks to dropping targetSdkVersion to 23? thnx
– rommex
Jun 29 '17 at 14:06
2
2
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
@rommex: I do not know what qualifies as "most important". For example, users who work in split-screen mode or on freeform multi-window devices (Chromebooks, Samsung DeX) will be told that your app may not work with multi-window. Whether that is important or not is up to you.
– CommonsWare
Jun 29 '17 at 14:34
|
show 12 more comments
First you need to add a provider to your AndroidManifest
<application
...>
<activity>
....
</activity>
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="com.your.package.fileProvider"
android:grantUriPermissions="true"
android:exported="false">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/file_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
now create a file in xml resource folder (if using android studio you can hit Alt + Enter after highlighting file_paths and select create a xml resource option)
Next in the file_paths file enter
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths>
<external-path path="Android/data/com.your.package/" name="files_root" />
<external-path path="." name="external_storage_root" />
</paths>
This example is for external-path you can refere here for more options.
This will allow you to share files which are in that folder and its sub-folder.
Now all that's left is to create the intent as follows:
MimeTypeMap mime = MimeTypeMap.getSingleton();
String ext = newFile.getName().substring(newFile.getName().lastIndexOf(".") + 1);
String type = mime.getMimeTypeFromExtension(ext);
try {
Intent intent = new Intent();
intent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Uri contentUri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(getContext(), "com.your.package.fileProvider", newFile);
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, type);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(newFile), type);
}
startActivityForResult(intent, ACTIVITY_VIEW_ATTACHMENT);
} catch (ActivityNotFoundException anfe) {
Toast.makeText(getContext(), "No activity found to open this attachment.", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();
}
EDIT: I added the root folder of the sd card in the file_paths. I have tested this code and it does work.
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.
– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
I was getting the following exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was<files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of<external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.
– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
add a comment |
First you need to add a provider to your AndroidManifest
<application
...>
<activity>
....
</activity>
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="com.your.package.fileProvider"
android:grantUriPermissions="true"
android:exported="false">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/file_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
now create a file in xml resource folder (if using android studio you can hit Alt + Enter after highlighting file_paths and select create a xml resource option)
Next in the file_paths file enter
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths>
<external-path path="Android/data/com.your.package/" name="files_root" />
<external-path path="." name="external_storage_root" />
</paths>
This example is for external-path you can refere here for more options.
This will allow you to share files which are in that folder and its sub-folder.
Now all that's left is to create the intent as follows:
MimeTypeMap mime = MimeTypeMap.getSingleton();
String ext = newFile.getName().substring(newFile.getName().lastIndexOf(".") + 1);
String type = mime.getMimeTypeFromExtension(ext);
try {
Intent intent = new Intent();
intent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Uri contentUri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(getContext(), "com.your.package.fileProvider", newFile);
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, type);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(newFile), type);
}
startActivityForResult(intent, ACTIVITY_VIEW_ATTACHMENT);
} catch (ActivityNotFoundException anfe) {
Toast.makeText(getContext(), "No activity found to open this attachment.", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();
}
EDIT: I added the root folder of the sd card in the file_paths. I have tested this code and it does work.
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.
– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
I was getting the following exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was<files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of<external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.
– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
add a comment |
First you need to add a provider to your AndroidManifest
<application
...>
<activity>
....
</activity>
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="com.your.package.fileProvider"
android:grantUriPermissions="true"
android:exported="false">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/file_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
now create a file in xml resource folder (if using android studio you can hit Alt + Enter after highlighting file_paths and select create a xml resource option)
Next in the file_paths file enter
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths>
<external-path path="Android/data/com.your.package/" name="files_root" />
<external-path path="." name="external_storage_root" />
</paths>
This example is for external-path you can refere here for more options.
This will allow you to share files which are in that folder and its sub-folder.
Now all that's left is to create the intent as follows:
MimeTypeMap mime = MimeTypeMap.getSingleton();
String ext = newFile.getName().substring(newFile.getName().lastIndexOf(".") + 1);
String type = mime.getMimeTypeFromExtension(ext);
try {
Intent intent = new Intent();
intent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Uri contentUri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(getContext(), "com.your.package.fileProvider", newFile);
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, type);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(newFile), type);
}
startActivityForResult(intent, ACTIVITY_VIEW_ATTACHMENT);
} catch (ActivityNotFoundException anfe) {
Toast.makeText(getContext(), "No activity found to open this attachment.", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();
}
EDIT: I added the root folder of the sd card in the file_paths. I have tested this code and it does work.
First you need to add a provider to your AndroidManifest
<application
...>
<activity>
....
</activity>
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="com.your.package.fileProvider"
android:grantUriPermissions="true"
android:exported="false">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/file_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
now create a file in xml resource folder (if using android studio you can hit Alt + Enter after highlighting file_paths and select create a xml resource option)
Next in the file_paths file enter
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths>
<external-path path="Android/data/com.your.package/" name="files_root" />
<external-path path="." name="external_storage_root" />
</paths>
This example is for external-path you can refere here for more options.
This will allow you to share files which are in that folder and its sub-folder.
Now all that's left is to create the intent as follows:
MimeTypeMap mime = MimeTypeMap.getSingleton();
String ext = newFile.getName().substring(newFile.getName().lastIndexOf(".") + 1);
String type = mime.getMimeTypeFromExtension(ext);
try {
Intent intent = new Intent();
intent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
Uri contentUri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(getContext(), "com.your.package.fileProvider", newFile);
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, type);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(Uri.fromFile(newFile), type);
}
startActivityForResult(intent, ACTIVITY_VIEW_ATTACHMENT);
} catch (ActivityNotFoundException anfe) {
Toast.makeText(getContext(), "No activity found to open this attachment.", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show();
}
EDIT: I added the root folder of the sd card in the file_paths. I have tested this code and it does work.
edited Aug 12 '16 at 19:59
answered Aug 12 '16 at 19:45
Karn PatelKarn Patel
431310
431310
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.
– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
I was getting the following exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was<files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of<external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.
– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
add a comment |
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.
– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
I was getting the following exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was<files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of<external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.
– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
1
1
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.
String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
Thank you for this. I also want to let you know that there is a better way to get the file extension.
String extension = android.webkit.MimeTypeMap.getFileExtensionFromUrl(Uri.fromFile(file).toString());
Also, I recommend anyone looking for answers to read through FileProvider first and understand what you are dealing with here with file permissions in Android N and above. There are options for internal storage vs. external storage and also for regular files-path vs. cache-paths.– praneetloke
Dec 31 '16 at 16:57
1
1
I was getting the following exception:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was <files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of <external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
I was getting the following exception:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to find configured root ...
and the only thing that worked was <files-path path="." name="files_root" />
on the xml file instead of <external-path ...
. My file was saved in the internal storage.– MScott
Jun 30 '17 at 20:07
add a comment |
@palash k answer is correct and worked for internal storage files, but in my case I want to open files from external storage also, my app crashed when open file from external storage like sdcard and usb, but I manage to solve the issue by modifying provider_paths.xml from the accepted answer
change the provider_paths.xml like below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
<root-path
name="root"
path="/" />
</paths>
and in java class(No change as the accepted answer just a small edit)
Uri uri=FileProvider.getUriForFile(getActivity(), BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID+".provider", File)
This help me to fix the crash for files from external storages, Hope this will help some one having same issue as mine
:)
1
Where did you find about<root-path
please ? It's working.<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.
– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meantAndroid/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.
– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
|
show 1 more comment
@palash k answer is correct and worked for internal storage files, but in my case I want to open files from external storage also, my app crashed when open file from external storage like sdcard and usb, but I manage to solve the issue by modifying provider_paths.xml from the accepted answer
change the provider_paths.xml like below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
<root-path
name="root"
path="/" />
</paths>
and in java class(No change as the accepted answer just a small edit)
Uri uri=FileProvider.getUriForFile(getActivity(), BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID+".provider", File)
This help me to fix the crash for files from external storages, Hope this will help some one having same issue as mine
:)
1
Where did you find about<root-path
please ? It's working.<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.
– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meantAndroid/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.
– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
|
show 1 more comment
@palash k answer is correct and worked for internal storage files, but in my case I want to open files from external storage also, my app crashed when open file from external storage like sdcard and usb, but I manage to solve the issue by modifying provider_paths.xml from the accepted answer
change the provider_paths.xml like below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
<root-path
name="root"
path="/" />
</paths>
and in java class(No change as the accepted answer just a small edit)
Uri uri=FileProvider.getUriForFile(getActivity(), BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID+".provider", File)
This help me to fix the crash for files from external storages, Hope this will help some one having same issue as mine
:)
@palash k answer is correct and worked for internal storage files, but in my case I want to open files from external storage also, my app crashed when open file from external storage like sdcard and usb, but I manage to solve the issue by modifying provider_paths.xml from the accepted answer
change the provider_paths.xml like below
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<paths xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android">
<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
<root-path
name="root"
path="/" />
</paths>
and in java class(No change as the accepted answer just a small edit)
Uri uri=FileProvider.getUriForFile(getActivity(), BuildConfig.APPLICATION_ID+".provider", File)
This help me to fix the crash for files from external storages, Hope this will help some one having same issue as mine
:)
edited Feb 20 '17 at 21:24
Vini.g.fer
4,88893459
4,88893459
answered Jan 15 '17 at 11:59
RamzRamz
5,33164982
5,33164982
1
Where did you find about<root-path
please ? It's working.<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.
– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meantAndroid/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.
– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
|
show 1 more comment
1
Where did you find about<root-path
please ? It's working.<external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.
– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meantAndroid/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.
– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
1
1
Where did you find about
<root-path
please ? It's working. <external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
Where did you find about
<root-path
please ? It's working. <external-path path="Android/data/${applicationId}/" name="files_root" />
had no effect for open files from external storage.– t0m
Mar 16 '17 at 11:23
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
i find this from various search results, let me check again and get back to u asap
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:40
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
also the external storage you mention is sd card or inbuilt storage?
– Ramz
Mar 16 '17 at 11:41
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meant
Android/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
Sorry for inaccuracy. I meant
Android/data/${applicationId}/
in SDcard.– t0m
Mar 20 '17 at 8:36
1
1
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
Need to add this to the intent: intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
– s-hunter
Feb 17 '18 at 15:25
|
show 1 more comment
Using the fileProvider is the way to go.
But you can use this simple workaround:
WARNING: It will be fixed in next Android release -
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37122890#comment4
replace:
startActivity(intent);
by
startActivity(Intent.createChooser(intent, "Your title"));
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
add a comment |
Using the fileProvider is the way to go.
But you can use this simple workaround:
WARNING: It will be fixed in next Android release -
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37122890#comment4
replace:
startActivity(intent);
by
startActivity(Intent.createChooser(intent, "Your title"));
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
add a comment |
Using the fileProvider is the way to go.
But you can use this simple workaround:
WARNING: It will be fixed in next Android release -
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37122890#comment4
replace:
startActivity(intent);
by
startActivity(Intent.createChooser(intent, "Your title"));
Using the fileProvider is the way to go.
But you can use this simple workaround:
WARNING: It will be fixed in next Android release -
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37122890#comment4
replace:
startActivity(intent);
by
startActivity(Intent.createChooser(intent, "Your title"));
edited Apr 14 '17 at 7:59
Maksim Ostrovidov
5,74732752
5,74732752
answered Feb 8 '17 at 3:02
SimonSimon
578619
578619
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
add a comment |
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
7
7
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
The chooser will be patched soon by Google to contain same check. This is not a solution.
– Pointer Null
Feb 24 '17 at 11:31
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
This one works but will not work in future android versions.
– Diljeet
Apr 25 '17 at 7:28
2
2
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this dont work on android 8 and upper
– ArMo 372
Apr 9 '18 at 6:25
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
this work for me. Thanks
– Sujeet Kumar
Aug 10 '18 at 11:19
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
answered Jan 16 '18 at 6:50
Kaushal SachanKaushal Sachan
22734
22734
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
add a comment |
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
It works perfectly fine
– Sushant Garg
Jan 24 '18 at 9:49
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
this is one of the solutions but not the standard one. Stil people who downvoted the answers are wrong as the this is also working code with the working solution.
– saksham
Apr 18 '18 at 10:16
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
worked for me,thanks
– Meerz
Sep 2 '18 at 19:48
1
1
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
Simple yet perfect.
– Nikita Vishwakarma
Oct 15 '18 at 8:32
1
1
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
Simply a genius.... Thanks!!! Less code more solutions!! :D
– Blasco73
Oct 17 '18 at 10:13
add a comment |
My Solution was to 'Uri.parse' the File Path as String, instead of using Uri.fromFile().
String storage = Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().toString() + "/test.txt";
File file = new File(storage);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT < 24) {
uri = Uri.fromFile(file);
} else {
uri = Uri.parse(file.getPath()); // My work-around for new SDKs, causes ActivityNotFoundException in API 10.
}
Intent viewFile = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
viewFile.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain");
startActivity(viewFile);
Seems that fromFile() uses A file pointer, which I suppose could be insecure when memory addresses are exposed to all apps. But A file path String never hurt anybody, so it works without throwing FileUriExposedException.
Tested on API levels 9 to 26! Does not require FileProvider, nor the Android Support Library at all.
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
add a comment |
My Solution was to 'Uri.parse' the File Path as String, instead of using Uri.fromFile().
String storage = Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().toString() + "/test.txt";
File file = new File(storage);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT < 24) {
uri = Uri.fromFile(file);
} else {
uri = Uri.parse(file.getPath()); // My work-around for new SDKs, causes ActivityNotFoundException in API 10.
}
Intent viewFile = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
viewFile.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain");
startActivity(viewFile);
Seems that fromFile() uses A file pointer, which I suppose could be insecure when memory addresses are exposed to all apps. But A file path String never hurt anybody, so it works without throwing FileUriExposedException.
Tested on API levels 9 to 26! Does not require FileProvider, nor the Android Support Library at all.
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
add a comment |
My Solution was to 'Uri.parse' the File Path as String, instead of using Uri.fromFile().
String storage = Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().toString() + "/test.txt";
File file = new File(storage);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT < 24) {
uri = Uri.fromFile(file);
} else {
uri = Uri.parse(file.getPath()); // My work-around for new SDKs, causes ActivityNotFoundException in API 10.
}
Intent viewFile = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
viewFile.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain");
startActivity(viewFile);
Seems that fromFile() uses A file pointer, which I suppose could be insecure when memory addresses are exposed to all apps. But A file path String never hurt anybody, so it works without throwing FileUriExposedException.
Tested on API levels 9 to 26! Does not require FileProvider, nor the Android Support Library at all.
My Solution was to 'Uri.parse' the File Path as String, instead of using Uri.fromFile().
String storage = Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().toString() + "/test.txt";
File file = new File(storage);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT < 24) {
uri = Uri.fromFile(file);
} else {
uri = Uri.parse(file.getPath()); // My work-around for new SDKs, causes ActivityNotFoundException in API 10.
}
Intent viewFile = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
viewFile.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain");
startActivity(viewFile);
Seems that fromFile() uses A file pointer, which I suppose could be insecure when memory addresses are exposed to all apps. But A file path String never hurt anybody, so it works without throwing FileUriExposedException.
Tested on API levels 9 to 26! Does not require FileProvider, nor the Android Support Library at all.
edited Nov 21 '18 at 18:24
answered Oct 22 '18 at 9:15
CrazyJ36CrazyJ36
12913
12913
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
add a comment |
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
I wish I'd seen this first. I didn't prove it worked for me, but it's so much less cumbersome than FileProvider.
– Dale
Nov 20 '18 at 16:52
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
A note on why this actually works: It's not the File pointer that casues the issue, but the fact that the exception only occurs if you have a path with 'file://', which is automatically prepended with fromFile, but not with parse.
– Xmister
Jan 24 at 9:53
add a comment |
I used Palash's answer given above but it was somewhat incomplete, I had to provide permission like this
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, getPackageName() + ".provider", new File(path));
List<ResolveInfo> resInfoList = getPackageManager().queryIntentActivities(intent, PackageManager.MATCH_DEFAULT_ONLY);
for (ResolveInfo resolveInfo : resInfoList) {
String packageName = resolveInfo.activityInfo.packageName;
grantUriPermission(packageName, uri, Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION | Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
}
}else {
uri = Uri.fromFile(new File(path));
}
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "application/vnd.android.package-archive");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent);
add a comment |
I used Palash's answer given above but it was somewhat incomplete, I had to provide permission like this
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, getPackageName() + ".provider", new File(path));
List<ResolveInfo> resInfoList = getPackageManager().queryIntentActivities(intent, PackageManager.MATCH_DEFAULT_ONLY);
for (ResolveInfo resolveInfo : resInfoList) {
String packageName = resolveInfo.activityInfo.packageName;
grantUriPermission(packageName, uri, Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION | Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
}
}else {
uri = Uri.fromFile(new File(path));
}
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "application/vnd.android.package-archive");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent);
add a comment |
I used Palash's answer given above but it was somewhat incomplete, I had to provide permission like this
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, getPackageName() + ".provider", new File(path));
List<ResolveInfo> resInfoList = getPackageManager().queryIntentActivities(intent, PackageManager.MATCH_DEFAULT_ONLY);
for (ResolveInfo resolveInfo : resInfoList) {
String packageName = resolveInfo.activityInfo.packageName;
grantUriPermission(packageName, uri, Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION | Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
}
}else {
uri = Uri.fromFile(new File(path));
}
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "application/vnd.android.package-archive");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent);
I used Palash's answer given above but it was somewhat incomplete, I had to provide permission like this
Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
Uri uri;
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= Build.VERSION_CODES.N) {
uri = FileProvider.getUriForFile(this, getPackageName() + ".provider", new File(path));
List<ResolveInfo> resInfoList = getPackageManager().queryIntentActivities(intent, PackageManager.MATCH_DEFAULT_ONLY);
for (ResolveInfo resolveInfo : resInfoList) {
String packageName = resolveInfo.activityInfo.packageName;
grantUriPermission(packageName, uri, Intent.FLAG_GRANT_WRITE_URI_PERMISSION | Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
}
}else {
uri = Uri.fromFile(new File(path));
}
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "application/vnd.android.package-archive");
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
startActivity(intent);
answered Dec 11 '16 at 16:05
MaxMax
7,06133551
7,06133551
add a comment |
add a comment |
I don't know why, I did everything exactly the same as Pkosta (https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040 ) but kept getting error:
java.lang.SecurityException: Permission Denial: opening provider redacted from ProcessRecord{redacted} (redacted) that is not exported from uid redacted
I wasted hours on this issue. The culprit? Kotlin.
val playIntent = Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, uri)
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION)
intent
was actually setting getIntent().addFlags
instead of operating on my newly declared playIntent.
add a comment |
I don't know why, I did everything exactly the same as Pkosta (https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040 ) but kept getting error:
java.lang.SecurityException: Permission Denial: opening provider redacted from ProcessRecord{redacted} (redacted) that is not exported from uid redacted
I wasted hours on this issue. The culprit? Kotlin.
val playIntent = Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, uri)
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION)
intent
was actually setting getIntent().addFlags
instead of operating on my newly declared playIntent.
add a comment |
I don't know why, I did everything exactly the same as Pkosta (https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040 ) but kept getting error:
java.lang.SecurityException: Permission Denial: opening provider redacted from ProcessRecord{redacted} (redacted) that is not exported from uid redacted
I wasted hours on this issue. The culprit? Kotlin.
val playIntent = Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, uri)
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION)
intent
was actually setting getIntent().addFlags
instead of operating on my newly declared playIntent.
I don't know why, I did everything exactly the same as Pkosta (https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040 ) but kept getting error:
java.lang.SecurityException: Permission Denial: opening provider redacted from ProcessRecord{redacted} (redacted) that is not exported from uid redacted
I wasted hours on this issue. The culprit? Kotlin.
val playIntent = Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW, uri)
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION)
intent
was actually setting getIntent().addFlags
instead of operating on my newly declared playIntent.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 12:59
jimbo1qazjimbo1qaz
725824
725824
add a comment |
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Happy coding :-)
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Happy coding :-)
add a comment |
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Happy coding :-)
Just paste the below code in activity onCreate()
StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder builder = new StrictMode.VmPolicy.Builder(); StrictMode.setVmPolicy(builder.build());
It will ignore URI exposure
Happy coding :-)
answered Sep 20 '18 at 9:15
Ripdaman SinghRipdaman Singh
993
993
add a comment |
add a comment |
For downloading pdf from server , add below code in your service class. Hope this is helpful for you.
File file = new File(Environment.getExternalStoragePublicDirectory(Environment.DIRECTORY_DOWNLOADS), fileName + ".pdf");
intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
//Log.e("pathOpen", file.getPath());
Uri contentUri;
contentUri = Uri.fromFile(file);
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP | Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 24) {
Uri apkURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".provider", file);
intent.setDataAndType(apkURI, "application/pdf");
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, "application/pdf");
}
And yes , don't forget to add permissions and provider in your manifest.
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<application
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
what is@xml/provider_paths
?
– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
add a comment |
For downloading pdf from server , add below code in your service class. Hope this is helpful for you.
File file = new File(Environment.getExternalStoragePublicDirectory(Environment.DIRECTORY_DOWNLOADS), fileName + ".pdf");
intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
//Log.e("pathOpen", file.getPath());
Uri contentUri;
contentUri = Uri.fromFile(file);
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP | Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 24) {
Uri apkURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".provider", file);
intent.setDataAndType(apkURI, "application/pdf");
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, "application/pdf");
}
And yes , don't forget to add permissions and provider in your manifest.
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<application
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
what is@xml/provider_paths
?
– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
add a comment |
For downloading pdf from server , add below code in your service class. Hope this is helpful for you.
File file = new File(Environment.getExternalStoragePublicDirectory(Environment.DIRECTORY_DOWNLOADS), fileName + ".pdf");
intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
//Log.e("pathOpen", file.getPath());
Uri contentUri;
contentUri = Uri.fromFile(file);
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP | Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 24) {
Uri apkURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".provider", file);
intent.setDataAndType(apkURI, "application/pdf");
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, "application/pdf");
}
And yes , don't forget to add permissions and provider in your manifest.
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<application
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
For downloading pdf from server , add below code in your service class. Hope this is helpful for you.
File file = new File(Environment.getExternalStoragePublicDirectory(Environment.DIRECTORY_DOWNLOADS), fileName + ".pdf");
intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_VIEW);
//Log.e("pathOpen", file.getPath());
Uri contentUri;
contentUri = Uri.fromFile(file);
intent.setFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP | Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
if (Build.VERSION.SDK_INT >= 24) {
Uri apkURI = FileProvider.getUriForFile(context, context.getApplicationContext().getPackageName() + ".provider", file);
intent.setDataAndType(apkURI, "application/pdf");
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
} else {
intent.setDataAndType(contentUri, "application/pdf");
}
And yes , don't forget to add permissions and provider in your manifest.
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE" />
<application
<provider
android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
android:authorities="${applicationId}.provider"
android:exported="false"
android:grantUriPermissions="true">
<meta-data
android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
android:resource="@xml/provider_paths" />
</provider>
</application>
edited Jul 28 '18 at 12:23
answered Jul 28 '18 at 11:57
Bhoomika ChauhanBhoomika Chauhan
313
313
what is@xml/provider_paths
?
– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
add a comment |
what is@xml/provider_paths
?
– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
what is
@xml/provider_paths
?– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
what is
@xml/provider_paths
?– HeisenBrg
Nov 30 '18 at 12:35
add a comment |
@Pkosta 's answer is one way of doing this.
Besides using FileProvider
, you can also insert the file into MediaStore
(especially for image and video files), because files in MediaStore are accessible to every app:
The MediaStore is primarily aimed at video, audio and image MIME types, however beginning with Android 3.0 (API level 11) it can also store non-media types (see MediaStore.Files for more info). Files can be inserted into the MediaStore using scanFile() after which a content:// style Uri suitable for sharing is passed to the provided onScanCompleted() callback. Note that once added to the system MediaStore the content is accessible to any app on the device.
For example, you can insert a video file to MediaStore like this:
ContentValues values = new ContentValues();
values.put(MediaStore.Video.Media.DATA, videoFilePath);
Uri contentUri = context.getContentResolver().insert(
MediaStore.Video.Media.EXTERNAL_CONTENT_URI, values);
contentUri
is like content://media/external/video/media/183473
, which can be passed directly to Intent.putExtra
:
intent.setType("video/*");
intent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, contentUri);
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
activity.startActivity(intent);
This works for me, and save the hassles of using FileProvider
.
add a comment |
@Pkosta 's answer is one way of doing this.
Besides using FileProvider
, you can also insert the file into MediaStore
(especially for image and video files), because files in MediaStore are accessible to every app:
The MediaStore is primarily aimed at video, audio and image MIME types, however beginning with Android 3.0 (API level 11) it can also store non-media types (see MediaStore.Files for more info). Files can be inserted into the MediaStore using scanFile() after which a content:// style Uri suitable for sharing is passed to the provided onScanCompleted() callback. Note that once added to the system MediaStore the content is accessible to any app on the device.
For example, you can insert a video file to MediaStore like this:
ContentValues values = new ContentValues();
values.put(MediaStore.Video.Media.DATA, videoFilePath);
Uri contentUri = context.getContentResolver().insert(
MediaStore.Video.Media.EXTERNAL_CONTENT_URI, values);
contentUri
is like content://media/external/video/media/183473
, which can be passed directly to Intent.putExtra
:
intent.setType("video/*");
intent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, contentUri);
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
activity.startActivity(intent);
This works for me, and save the hassles of using FileProvider
.
add a comment |
@Pkosta 's answer is one way of doing this.
Besides using FileProvider
, you can also insert the file into MediaStore
(especially for image and video files), because files in MediaStore are accessible to every app:
The MediaStore is primarily aimed at video, audio and image MIME types, however beginning with Android 3.0 (API level 11) it can also store non-media types (see MediaStore.Files for more info). Files can be inserted into the MediaStore using scanFile() after which a content:// style Uri suitable for sharing is passed to the provided onScanCompleted() callback. Note that once added to the system MediaStore the content is accessible to any app on the device.
For example, you can insert a video file to MediaStore like this:
ContentValues values = new ContentValues();
values.put(MediaStore.Video.Media.DATA, videoFilePath);
Uri contentUri = context.getContentResolver().insert(
MediaStore.Video.Media.EXTERNAL_CONTENT_URI, values);
contentUri
is like content://media/external/video/media/183473
, which can be passed directly to Intent.putExtra
:
intent.setType("video/*");
intent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, contentUri);
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
activity.startActivity(intent);
This works for me, and save the hassles of using FileProvider
.
@Pkosta 's answer is one way of doing this.
Besides using FileProvider
, you can also insert the file into MediaStore
(especially for image and video files), because files in MediaStore are accessible to every app:
The MediaStore is primarily aimed at video, audio and image MIME types, however beginning with Android 3.0 (API level 11) it can also store non-media types (see MediaStore.Files for more info). Files can be inserted into the MediaStore using scanFile() after which a content:// style Uri suitable for sharing is passed to the provided onScanCompleted() callback. Note that once added to the system MediaStore the content is accessible to any app on the device.
For example, you can insert a video file to MediaStore like this:
ContentValues values = new ContentValues();
values.put(MediaStore.Video.Media.DATA, videoFilePath);
Uri contentUri = context.getContentResolver().insert(
MediaStore.Video.Media.EXTERNAL_CONTENT_URI, values);
contentUri
is like content://media/external/video/media/183473
, which can be passed directly to Intent.putExtra
:
intent.setType("video/*");
intent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, contentUri);
intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_GRANT_READ_URI_PERMISSION);
activity.startActivity(intent);
This works for me, and save the hassles of using FileProvider
.
answered Jan 25 at 12:02
NeoWangNeoWang
5,372114587
5,372114587
add a comment |
add a comment |
https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040/395097 this answer is complete.
This answer is for - you already have an app which was targeting below 24, and now you are upgrading to targetSDKVersion >= 24.
In Android N, only the file uri exposed to 3rd party app is changed. (Not the way we were using it before). So change only the places where you are sharing the path with 3rd party app (Camera in my case)
In our app we were sending uri to Camera app, in that location we are expecting the camera app to store the captured image.
- For android N, we generate new Content:// uri based url pointing to
file. - We generate usual File api based path for the same (using older method).
Now we have 2 different uri for same file. #1 is shared with Camera app. If the camera intent is success, we can access the image from #2.
Hope this helps.
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
add a comment |
https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040/395097 this answer is complete.
This answer is for - you already have an app which was targeting below 24, and now you are upgrading to targetSDKVersion >= 24.
In Android N, only the file uri exposed to 3rd party app is changed. (Not the way we were using it before). So change only the places where you are sharing the path with 3rd party app (Camera in my case)
In our app we were sending uri to Camera app, in that location we are expecting the camera app to store the captured image.
- For android N, we generate new Content:// uri based url pointing to
file. - We generate usual File api based path for the same (using older method).
Now we have 2 different uri for same file. #1 is shared with Camera app. If the camera intent is success, we can access the image from #2.
Hope this helps.
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
add a comment |
https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040/395097 this answer is complete.
This answer is for - you already have an app which was targeting below 24, and now you are upgrading to targetSDKVersion >= 24.
In Android N, only the file uri exposed to 3rd party app is changed. (Not the way we were using it before). So change only the places where you are sharing the path with 3rd party app (Camera in my case)
In our app we were sending uri to Camera app, in that location we are expecting the camera app to store the captured image.
- For android N, we generate new Content:// uri based url pointing to
file. - We generate usual File api based path for the same (using older method).
Now we have 2 different uri for same file. #1 is shared with Camera app. If the camera intent is success, we can access the image from #2.
Hope this helps.
https://stackoverflow.com/a/38858040/395097 this answer is complete.
This answer is for - you already have an app which was targeting below 24, and now you are upgrading to targetSDKVersion >= 24.
In Android N, only the file uri exposed to 3rd party app is changed. (Not the way we were using it before). So change only the places where you are sharing the path with 3rd party app (Camera in my case)
In our app we were sending uri to Camera app, in that location we are expecting the camera app to store the captured image.
- For android N, we generate new Content:// uri based url pointing to
file. - We generate usual File api based path for the same (using older method).
Now we have 2 different uri for same file. #1 is shared with Camera app. If the camera intent is success, we can access the image from #2.
Hope this helps.
answered Apr 30 '18 at 7:20
AramAram
257117
257117
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
add a comment |
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
1
1
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
You are referencing a answer already posted here, if you need to complete it, comment in the answer plz.
– IgniteCoders
May 9 '18 at 18:12
1
1
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
@IgniteCoders As I clearly mentioned in the message, my answer covers the related use case.
– Aram
May 10 '18 at 6:46
add a comment |
Xamarin.Android
Note: The path xml/provider_paths.xml (.axml) couldn't be resolved, even after making the xml folder under Resources (maybe it can be put in an existing location like Values, didn't try), so I resorted to this which works for now. Testing showed that it only needs to be called once per application run (which makes sense being that it changes the operational state of the host VM).
Note: xml needs to be capitalized, so Resources/Xml/provider_paths.xml
Java.Lang.ClassLoader cl = _this.Context.ClassLoader;
Java.Lang.Class strictMode = cl.LoadClass("android.os.StrictMode");
System.IntPtr ptrStrictMode = JNIEnv.FindClass("android/os/StrictMode");
var method = JNIEnv.GetStaticMethodID(ptrStrictMode, "disableDeathOnFileUriExposure", "()V");
JNIEnv.CallStaticVoidMethod(strictMode.Handle, method);
add a comment |
Xamarin.Android
Note: The path xml/provider_paths.xml (.axml) couldn't be resolved, even after making the xml folder under Resources (maybe it can be put in an existing location like Values, didn't try), so I resorted to this which works for now. Testing showed that it only needs to be called once per application run (which makes sense being that it changes the operational state of the host VM).
Note: xml needs to be capitalized, so Resources/Xml/provider_paths.xml
Java.Lang.ClassLoader cl = _this.Context.ClassLoader;
Java.Lang.Class strictMode = cl.LoadClass("android.os.StrictMode");
System.IntPtr ptrStrictMode = JNIEnv.FindClass("android/os/StrictMode");
var method = JNIEnv.GetStaticMethodID(ptrStrictMode, "disableDeathOnFileUriExposure", "()V");
JNIEnv.CallStaticVoidMethod(strictMode.Handle, method);
add a comment |
Xamarin.Android
Note: The path xml/provider_paths.xml (.axml) couldn't be resolved, even after making the xml folder under Resources (maybe it can be put in an existing location like Values, didn't try), so I resorted to this which works for now. Testing showed that it only needs to be called once per application run (which makes sense being that it changes the operational state of the host VM).
Note: xml needs to be capitalized, so Resources/Xml/provider_paths.xml
Java.Lang.ClassLoader cl = _this.Context.ClassLoader;
Java.Lang.Class strictMode = cl.LoadClass("android.os.StrictMode");
System.IntPtr ptrStrictMode = JNIEnv.FindClass("android/os/StrictMode");
var method = JNIEnv.GetStaticMethodID(ptrStrictMode, "disableDeathOnFileUriExposure", "()V");
JNIEnv.CallStaticVoidMethod(strictMode.Handle, method);
Xamarin.Android
Note: The path xml/provider_paths.xml (.axml) couldn't be resolved, even after making the xml folder under Resources (maybe it can be put in an existing location like Values, didn't try), so I resorted to this which works for now. Testing showed that it only needs to be called once per application run (which makes sense being that it changes the operational state of the host VM).
Note: xml needs to be capitalized, so Resources/Xml/provider_paths.xml
Java.Lang.ClassLoader cl = _this.Context.ClassLoader;
Java.Lang.Class strictMode = cl.LoadClass("android.os.StrictMode");
System.IntPtr ptrStrictMode = JNIEnv.FindClass("android/os/StrictMode");
var method = JNIEnv.GetStaticMethodID(ptrStrictMode, "disableDeathOnFileUriExposure", "()V");
JNIEnv.CallStaticVoidMethod(strictMode.Handle, method);
edited Sep 26 '18 at 14:48
answered Sep 26 '18 at 13:18
samissamis
3,45862151
3,45862151
add a comment |
add a comment |
In my case I got rid of the exception by replacing SetDataAndType
with just SetData
.
add a comment |
In my case I got rid of the exception by replacing SetDataAndType
with just SetData
.
add a comment |
In my case I got rid of the exception by replacing SetDataAndType
with just SetData
.
In my case I got rid of the exception by replacing SetDataAndType
with just SetData
.
answered Aug 29 '18 at 0:45
thomielthomiel
1,3911023
1,3911023
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f38200282%2fandroid-os-fileuriexposedexception-file-storage-emulated-0-test-txt-exposed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
I feel like this was a mistake which makes life unnecessarily difficult for app developers. Having to bundle a "FileProvider" and "authority" with each app, seems like Enterprisey boilerplate. Having to add a flag to every file intent seems awkward and possibly unnecessary. Breaking the elegant concept of "paths" is unpleasant. And what's the benefit? Selectively granting storage access to apps (while most apps have full sdcard access, especially ones that work on files)?
– jimbo1qaz
Sep 17 '18 at 11:36
try this , small and perfect code stackoverflow.com/a/52695444/4997704
– Binesh Kumar
Oct 8 '18 at 4:38
Best practise of File Provider androidwave.com/capture-image-from-camera-gallery
– Surya Prakash Kushawah
Jan 4 at 13:29