User2288 I agree, not sure how technically challenging this could be, but this would add an option to record calls not only in dialers but also in messenger apps like Telegram, Viber, Signal, etc. At least in my area these apps seem to be used for calls more often than the regular calls.

    In fact, I'd go one step further and say, doesn't the built-in screen recorder already record system "video" AND "sound"? If so then the code to capture system sound is already build in. I'd think its just a matter of extracting that code, adapting it and putting it under a permission. I wish I was an android developer, I'd have sure looked into this.

    BTW I too support the pay to support call recording. But I think what I've suggested is a much better solution. As @thetraveller1 said, this way you can also record any source/app, and you wouldn't be locked into a particular dialer/call app for the recording feature.

      User2288 I just tried - and the screen recorder doesn't seem to record voice of the conversational partner that is played through the earpiece speaker, only your own voice and sounds that are played with the loudspeaker.

          GrapheneOS

          How about we restore the old Android APIs ( https://stackoverflow.com/a/6688569 ) for call recording that worked great for years before Google purposely broke them.

          The users could then reuse the myriad of already existing old recorder apps. No changes to maintain in the caller app or in the settings. No GUI to adapt. No additional recording file logic to implement. No root privileges required. "Just" make some legacy APIs public again. Maybe modernize them by requiring a permission that the user can give for extra security. Have you considered this?

            Does recording whatsapp/telegram/signal work with the screen recorder? Anyone know?

            thetraveller1 I just tried - and the screen recorder doesn't seem to record voice of the conversational partner that is played through the earpiece speaker, only your own voice and sounds that are played with the loudspeaker.

            So if you put the conversation on loud-speaker and low volume, is the other person's voice recorded? If yes, does it sound like the other person's voice is recorded from the speaker reflecting back into the microphone or does it sound like the original good quality sound stream?

            If other person's voice is not audible when through the ear piece then obviously the sound channel is totally isolated. But I think it could be exposed using a permission as another audio channel, to be captured. It has to get baked into the OS.

                In my organization, GrapheneOS would be welcomed but the lack of voice recording is a no-go for now:

                • some users do need it for legal purpose.
                • many use it to ease the process of taking notes and/or to write meeting summaries or verbatims (sometimes using voice recognition afterwards).
                • de0u replied to this.

                  Carbon14 In my organization, GrapheneOS would be welcomed but the lack of voice recording is a no-go for now.

                  Depending on the size of your organization, it might have an IT person who could do custom builds of GrapheneOS including BCR (or something else). The build directions are clear enough that even I was able to do it, despite never having written any Android code at all. Arguably the build directions could be improved by adding an explicit list of the steps necessary to re-badge the resulting OS (i.e., so it doesn't advertise itself as "GrapheneOS", uses a different boot logo, etc.). A "private label" OS for your organization could probably be deployed in a week or two (including an update server).

                  At the other end of the timeline spectrum, contributing call recording to Google's AOSP project, if successful, would likely result in it showing up downstream in GrapheneOS. That could easily take more than a year -- again, if successful: Google might just not be interested in adding call recording to AOSP. I suspect they would not at all want to incorporate GPLv3 code such as BCR or any derived work (which would also be GPLv3).

                  Please note that I don't in any way speak for the GrapheneOS project (and certainly not for Google!).

                    aguttfx This would kill any potential implementation as it would violate states that have two-party consent laws to recording phone calls.

                        BalooRJ GrapheneOS is not going to be responsible for how call recording is used, we're not going to artificially restrict or add tones indicating call recording. We will have a warning upon first use and in the call recording settings that will explicitly tell you that you're responsible for your usage of it. It's going to be extremely cumbersome to maintain and keep a list of allowed countries and bringing in a lawyer to help us determine these kinds of things is a waste of project funding.

                            matchboxbananasynergy Wow! Fantastic guys! Thanks for this. A great gift.

                            I'll be sending a donation.

                            r3g_5z GrapheneOS is not going to be responsible for how call recording is used

                            Exactly right. How I use a knife is on me not the knife maker. End of story.

                                BalooRJ

                                This would kill any potential implementation as it would violate states that have two-party consent laws to recording phone calls.

                                No, it would not!
                                It's not the responsibility of the OS to preemtively not offer APIs because an app could do something illegal with it in some jurisdictions. Some states allow it, some don't? Maybe I don't even live in the US?!
                                Let the app and the user worry about that, instead of forcing something against the owner's will.
                                Big 👎It actually shocked me that the Graphite account liked your post.

                                I am happy that there is some integration in the dialer now. Evidently it didn't kill implementations after all!

                                It would still be great to bring the old APIs back.

                                    aguttfx

                                    I 👍 the comment because I agree it could cause devs to kill any implementation if they're worried about litigation. Google killed the API for this reason. And the US is a litigious country.
                                    You and I agree that it "should" be on the user. But state laws are finicky, anyone can sue anyone for anything. I'm sure they consulted lawyers before implementing this.