Serious warnings 3 confirmed warnings. Checked: 689 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 2.027 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store lists the version as varying by device, updated 2026-10-16.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
- Captain! Captain! We are in danger!!!
- Captain! We need your help! Our galaxy is attacked by alien shooter!
- Captain! The alien invaders beat our squad, they destroyed all of galactica! Space team is waiting for your order! Please command ship to protect the galaxians and the surrounding asteroids.
- Jump on ship! NOW!
If you are a big fan of arcade shooting games with the new modern combat, and want to bring the freedom for the galaxy, Galaxy Attack - Space Shooter is perfect game for you. With classic arcade games genre, old game with a new context, this game puts you at the galaxy on fire with infinity shooting war. You will be faced lots of evil enemies and deal with many striker bosses in space war. Are you sure you will survive till the end?…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:464508668b3178c1eab39eedc9a8bea8ecd378e0f17df089bd5718249463e213Aggressive ad load: raised by 16 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 43 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Pay to progress: raised by 7 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 98 reviews we read)
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
The app's own text says: "Add a card of any bank for secure payment"
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The free trial demands a payment method up front and/or rolls into a paid subscription with no usable warning.
Package artefact
sha256:464508668b3178c1eab39eedc9a8bea8ecd378e0f17df089bd5718249463e213Sells a randomised reward ("Get more point when paying with a Pay card. Open it in the app") and states no drop rates or odds anywhere in the app's own text
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app sells randomised rewards — crates, chests, packs, pulls — and states no drop rates or odds anywhere in its own text, so what the money buys is unknowable before paying.
Package artefact
sha256:464508668b3178c1eab39eedc9a8bea8ecd378e0f17df089bd5718249463e213The app's own text says: "If you’ve decided not to pay, you can get back to the game"
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own screens offer a way past sign-up — guest access, skipping, or browsing before registering — rather than gating the product behind an account. The store's privacy disclosure is checked alongside it: that disclosure is self-reported, so it corroborates this credit rather than establishing it.
Package artefact
sha256:464508668b3178c1eab39eedc9a8bea8ecd378e0f17df089bd5718249463e213689 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Not bad other than throngs that like to spend their entire paychecks on the game. Way too many $$$$$ options. lots of new hack players make 1-1 harder. Too many boss glitches that kill you after you have already killed the boss and makes…
t o many ads
Just removed. The game is promising but it becames soon a waste of time. There are many improvements and many ships. Most ot the ships needs to be bought or get on events. Many events are just offers to buy with real cash. It is not.clear…
simply put this a p2w game. Edit:see u saying to join ur community group is a proof that ur game is expensive and you have to pay to play for example to upgrade ships and break the limit is extremely expensive to merge ships is extremely…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 2.027, scanned 20 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 2.027 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store lists the version as varying by device, updated 2026-10-16.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- Halloween Event - Fix some minor bugs.
No release notes were provided for this version.
No release notes were provided for this version.
galaxy-attack-apple-1225548580Assessed 2026-10-30 from 689 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
This assessment is produced automatically. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.