“Some of the prices being offered by riders are extremely unreasonable, to the extent that they can understandably frustrate drivers, especially in this era of rising fuel prices and increasing vehicle maintenance costs.”
Independent automated assessment · 6 signal sources · 1,998 reviews scanned · analyzed 2026-10-04.
inDrive. Rides with fair fares
® SUOL INNOVATIONS LTDA great taxi alternative, inDrive (inDriver) is a rideshare app, where you ca…
4.8 ★16,172,850 ratings
100M+Downloads
4+Age rating
—App size
FreeIn-app purchases
About this app
A great taxi alternative, inDrive (inDriver) is a rideshare app, where you can find a ride or which you can join to drive, as it is also a driver app.
But that’s not all! You can also use this app to travel to other cities, send and receive packages, book a truck for your personal or business needs, and even hire a local pro to help you with whatever you need. You can also sign up as a courier or tasker. A fair price is the one you agree on — not hope for. inDrive exists to prove that people can always come to an agreement.
Silicon Valley’s new success story, inDrive, formerly inDriver, is a free ride share app available in more than 888 cities in 48 countries. We are growing fast by putting the power back in the hands of people, be they customers, drivers, couriers, or other service providers.…
Preview
Real screenshots from the store listing.
Independent evidence report
The evidence behind this assessment
This is where the page changes from an app-store listing into an evidence report: findings, important reviews, pricing and a dated history.
Which version this describes
When we ran this analysis, and what the store lists now.
This analysis describes version 5.184.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version VARY, updated 2026-10-02.
What we measured
Each line is a measurement published as a measurement, never a verdict.
Each line is a measurement, published as a measurement. Where we have not looked, the line says so rather than reading as a zero.
Developer replies to reviews
Replies to at least 1 review in 20
Price in the store description
States no price and billing period
Cancelling, in the store description
Does not say how to cancel
Themes reported by reviewers
1 theme reported
Counted from the reviews we have read for this app. "No theme reported" means no theme reached our reporting threshold — it is not a finding that nothing is wrong with this app, and we do not say it is.
Five-star share of ratings
80–89% five-star
Arithmetic on the stores' own published rating counts. It says nothing about why the ratings fall where they do.
In the package we scanned
From the package we downloaded and read — version 5.184.0, scanned 2026-09-17.
Permissions Android classifies as dangerous
6 or more requested
Counted against the eighteen permissions listed in collect-package.ts. A dangerous permission is one Android asks the user to grant; requesting one is not itself a finding.
Analytics or tracking SDKs in the scanned package
1–2 found
Advertising SDKs in the scanned package
1–2 found
Counted as distinct SDKs in the package we scanned. One mediation bundle can contribute several, so this is not a count of advertisers.
Graded bands · predicate set 1.4 · how these are measured
What the analysis found
App-specific findings, grouped by what each one rests on. How they are graded lives on its own page.
Context 1
Measured and published because a reader would want to know — deliberately not a charge. The measurement alone does not show a harm.
Asks for more sensitive permissions than similar apps
The package requests substantially more of the device's sensitive permissions than the typical app in its category. This is a measurement, not an accusation: a permission is granted because a feature needs it, and a wide request list is a reason to look rather than a finding on its own.
What we saw: Requests 10 sensitive permissions (ACCESS_BACKGROUND_LOCATION, ACCESS_COARSE_LOCATION, ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION, ACTIVITY_RECOGNITION, CAMERA, READ_CONTACTS, READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE, READ_PHONE_STATE, RECORD_AUDIO, SYSTEM_ALERT_WINDOW); the medi…
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
Developer says data deletion can be requested
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.
What we saw: 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
One source only — shown, not confirmed 6
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
In the app's own text: Trial terms not stated in the app's own text
The app's own screens offer a free trial without stating, beside it, what happens when the trial ends. Read this as context rather than as a charge: renewal terms are normally shown on the store's purchase sheet instead, which we cannot see, and we can only observe one kind of evidence for this — so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.
What we saw: Offers a free trial ("Free trial") with no renewal price, renewal date or auto-renew notice anywhere in the app's own text
In the app's own text: Countdown-timer purchase pressure
The app's own purchase copy attaches a deadline to buying — a countdown, 'offer ends in', 'limited time' — or ships a countdown view on a purchase-screen layout.
What we saw: Deadline pressure in the app's own copy: "Limited offer"
In the app's own text: Hard to cancel
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
What we saw: Cancellation copy routes the user away from a direct control: "Not working? Cancel the ride and contact Support"
In the app's own text: A plan is pre-picked as 'recommended'
The purchase screen arrives with one plan already framed as the recommended or most popular choice, so the default is the app's preference rather than the user's. We do not compare the plans' prices, and only the app's own text evidences this, so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.
What we saw: Purchase screen steers the choice: "Best offer"
Reported by users: States a price, or offers a one-time purchase
The app's own text offers a one-time or lifetime purchase, or reviewers report that the price is stated clearly.
What we saw: Reviewers report clear pricing: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (0.3% of 1998 reviews scanned)
Reported by users: Price keeps rising
The price of the paid tier has been raised on existing users.
What we saw: Price keeps rising: raised by 12 distinct reviewers (0.6% of 1998 reviews scanned)
Highlighted reviews
Representative public review excerpts shown as user reports, not Appworthy audit evidence.
Assessment & version history
App changes and Appworthy events in one timeline.
Store listing updated to version VARY.
What this app sells
Useful store-disclosed pricing, kept below the app listing.
Business modelFree
Prices and terms as disclosed by the store listing.