How Motorola's Smart Feed App Secretly Rerouted Amazon Purchases for Commissions

In late May 2026, Motorola found itself at the center of a controversy no smartphone maker wants: a pre-installed system app was silently intercepting Amazon launches and injecting affiliate codes so the company could collect commissions on purchases users believed were normal. The discovery, Motorola’s claim that it was "unintended," and the swift resolution have not quieted a larger conversation about bloatware, user trust, and whether phone manufacturers should be allowed to pre-install apps with network-monitoring capabilities.

What the Smart Feed app was doing

The behavior was tied to an update for Motorola's Smart Feed app, which comes pre-installed on many of its phones. When a user tapped the Amazon app icon from the app drawer, Smart Feed would intercept the action. Instead of opening Amazon directly, the phone would briefly flash the Chrome browser, route the request through a third-party tracker domain called devicenative.com and an affiliate link, and only then land the user inside the Amazon app .

This meant that if a user then made a purchase, Motorola—or a partner—could collect an affiliate commission. The process happened so quickly that most users would never notice anything unusual, though a brief browser flash was visible to anyone paying close attention . The behavior was confirmed on multiple devices, including Motorola’s $1,900 Razr Fold and the Razr 60 Ultra .

How the hijacking was discovered

The scheme was first flagged by a Reddit user on the r/Android subreddit, who noticed that their Motorola Razr 60 Ultra was making requests to devicenative.com and that opening the Amazon app briefly showed a "sketchy looking" URL before redirecting . The report was then picked up and verified with video evidence by 9to5Google, which published the initial investigation on May 25, 2026 .

Further investigation revealed that the affiliate code injected was loosely tied to a real fashion influencer who had no involvement—someone else was apparently using their code without permission . The behavior only occurred when the Amazon app was launched from the app drawer, not from the home screen, and it did not appear on older versions of Motorola’s software .

Motorola's response: "Unintended" and already stopped

Motorola confirmed the behavior after 9to5Google's report and said it had "stopped this behavior immediately" . In a subsequent statement on May 27, the company characterized the entire episode as "unintended" and said an update had resolved the issue .

The "unintended" framing was met with widespread skepticism. To intercept app launches and redirect them through an affiliate URL, Smart Feed had to be programmed to monitor network traffic and recognize when a shopping app was opened—functionality that critics argued could not simply appear by accident .

The long-running bloatware criticism

This incident didn't emerge in isolation. It has become the latest—and arguably most flagrant—flashpoint in a years-long critique of Motorola's software practices.

Bloatware has been a persistent complaint

Motorola has faced criticism for excessive pre-installed apps and so-called "app folders" that auto-download content. Users have complained about Shopping, Entertainment, and GamesHub apps that function as hubs for suggested downloads rather than simple folders . While some competitors have reduced bloatware in response to user backlash, critics say Motorola has moved in the opposite direction, with reports of automatic bloatware installation continuing into 2025 and 2026 .

A pattern of monetizing users

The Smart Feed incident fits a broader pattern that users have described for years: system apps that "constantly pop up with questions and install random shit," widely interpreted as an effort to monetize the user base beyond the initial hardware sale . The MotoApps application has been a repeat offender in these complaints .

Trust and privacy at stake

The hijacking has been viewed as an escalation. A pre-installed, non-removable system app was secretly monitoring app launches and injecting affiliate codes without user knowledge or consent—behavior that drew comparisons to the Honey browser extension scandal . It has also reignited debate about whether Android manufacturers should be allowed to pre-install apps with network-monitoring capabilities at all. As one commenter put it, the episode shows that the "clean Android" promise remains fragile when manufacturers have financial incentives to treat users as a revenue stream .