rattrattus
often times it comes with multiple trackers, as can be seen from a client like Aurora store
The information on permissions and trackers from Aurora Store and Exodus is unfortunately inaccurate and misrepresents how things work.
If I do not give that application network permissions, would whatever trackers it has not be a problem?
Apps including third party libraries deemed to be privacy invasive doesn't give the apps any additional access and they still cannot obtain the data of other apps or the user's data. They only have access to what's entered into the app by the user, granted to them by the user or explicitly sent to them by another app in the same profile. Aurora Store is including inaccurate data for this purpose. Apps being marked as including trackers often doesn't mean they are privacy invasive since some things have been classified that way which are not privacy invasive. Also, since they're simply using a list of a small number of third party libraries, apps being listed as not having any absolutely doesn't mean they are privacy respecting. The data is both poor and misrepresented by the UI.
Similar thing applies to permissions: they display all the possible permissions which can be granted to an app, not what it requires to function, and then present that as if it's a privacy score. For example, say that there's a camera app which has an off-by-default geotagging feature via the Location permission, such as GrapheneOS Camera. That does not make it any less privacy respecting. It makes no sense to mark the possibility of granting a permission as a negative without knowing if it's required to use it. Similarly, marking the ability to request to do something like requesting to pair with a Bluetooth device as being able to do that isn't correct. They simply list out low-level permissions in the manifest and make it seem as if it gets access to those things by installing it which is not how things have worked for a over a decade...