[HN Gopher] Study Warns Android Phones from Samsung, Xiaomi and ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Study Warns Android Phones from Samsung, Xiaomi and Others Are
       Spying on Users
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 95 points
       Date   : 2021-10-16 13:39 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (hothardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (hothardware.com)
        
       | throwawaysea wrote:
       | So are there any privacy friendly phones outside of Apple's
       | ecosystem? I have been hoping someone would make a premium
       | Android phone that is ungoogled and doesn't play these games.
       | Right now I have to choose between Apple's tightly controlled
       | walled garden and Android phones that are more open but not
       | privacy friendly.
        
         | sharikous wrote:
         | I think Librem and the Pinephone are the only options with some
         | privacy features. None of them runs Android, however.
        
         | ctack wrote:
         | There was that post a few days ago about Apples massive profit
         | margins in the mobile phone space, which just seems to
         | reinforce what this study is saying. Am watching the Pinephone
         | space with massive hope for the future, though there is not
         | much there for the present moment.
        
         | ranger_danger wrote:
         | There's no good out-of-the-box privacy-friendly phone, but you
         | can install a friendly OS on some devices.
         | 
         | Besides the article-mentioned /e/OS, there's also CalyxOS and
         | GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS is seen as the top choice for tightest
         | security, but also comes with the most downsides, being less
         | compatibility with all your favorite apps, slower performance,
         | lack of JIT compilation abilities (because it's unsafe), and,
         | ironically, is completely limited to _Google Pixel_ devices,
         | which happen to have a black box  "Titan" security chip that
         | Google promised to open up but never did.
         | 
         | Why they think this unknown chip somehow makes the device more
         | secure, I'll never know.
        
           | summm wrote:
           | GrapheneOS and CalyxOS might have slightly less tracking, but
           | are similarly anti-User as they do not grant any higher-level
           | access to the user (root for example), and similarly enforce
           | app authors' arbitrary restrictions against the user. All
           | under the guise of "security".
        
         | sofixa wrote:
         | The beauty of Android is that you can usually install a more
         | privacy focused OS if you want to. Besides that, there's the
         | Android One program, which comes with the Google stuff and some
         | related tracking inside it, but that's about it and it's
         | probably on a similar level to Apple's tracking. And the rest
         | depends on the apps you install, at least on Android there's
         | F-Droid for FOSS apps only.
        
           | t-writescode wrote:
           | I haven't owned an Android phone in a long while; but, back
           | when I did, the phones I liked, the ones with very long
           | battery lives, were not rootable and I couldn't replace the
           | OS.
           | 
           | Has that changed or can you replace the OS in all phones,
           | now?
        
       | winternett wrote:
       | Companies are taking their cues from Facebook and now they're all
       | in a race to build back-end data warehouses of information of
       | individuals, while congress stays oblivious to the practice, and
       | drops the ball on regulating and enforcing protection of privacy.
       | 
       | Because of how embedded mobile phones and cameras are into our
       | lives now, the field for collection of personal data can give a
       | company a huge database of information on anyone based on how
       | they interact with their phones.
       | 
       | Even your phone and Alexa devices are literal microphones that
       | can tap into your personal life at any given time. When this is
       | combined with social media, email, photos and videos, and of
       | course your browser history, anyone can be targeted at any time
       | by these private companies for any reason.
       | 
       | Blackmail will be a likely result. Corporate espionage will also
       | be a constant threat. The future is going to be wild, and we'll
       | likely need to lock our phones up and have private conversations
       | in rooms with no tech at all unless privacy invasion and
       | surveillance is reigned in properly by Gov leadership around the
       | world.
       | 
       | There is, in contrast, probably a fast growing pool of
       | independent hackers and whistleblowers out there to counter these
       | bad behaviors and practices by big corporate interests... The
       | future is both interesting and scary citing all of this.
        
         | choeger wrote:
         | Forget government. China actually shows what all governments
         | more or less publicly desire: Better and deeper control of
         | their feared enemy: The population.
         | 
         | In fact, I think we are about to enter an era where our
         | personal devices not only don't work exclusively for us but
         | instead work explicitly _against_ us. It will take a while for
         | governments to gather some experience, but I won 't be
         | surprised when data gathering becomes mandatory.
         | 
         | Wouldn't it be great for instance, if police could just tap
         | into Alexa's records to clarify a case of rape? Or throttle
         | down your intelligent thermostat because you are wasting so
         | much of our CO2 budget? Or stop your car because it already
         | entered that particular city twice this year?
        
           | ypcx wrote:
           | A distinction should always be made between the government
           | and the elites who influence it to benefit their interests.
           | Being a member of the elite doesn't preclude one of being a
           | (high-ranking) member of the government, or becoming a member
           | of elite that way.
        
             | winternett wrote:
             | There is usually a lot more accountability for corruption
             | in being a government official than a private citizen in
             | collecting and controlling private information. There is a
             | lot more illicit profit in being corrupt as a private
             | citizen than in being a government official who collects
             | and holds private information.
             | 
             | This is why the government is the only one that should be
             | authorized to hold LIMITED private information. Somehow
             | it's mis-construed to private individuals and companies
             | collecting UNLIMITED personal data on everyone. Strange
             | times.
        
           | HideousKojima wrote:
           | >Forget government. China actually shows what all governments
           | more or less publicly desire: Better and deeper control of
           | their feared enemy: The population.
           | 
           | After the uprising of the 17th of June
           | 
           | The Secretary of the Writers' Union
           | 
           | Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee
           | 
           | Stating that the people Had forfeited the confidence of the
           | government
           | 
           | And could only win it back By increased work quotas.
           | 
           | Would it not in that case be simpler for the government
           | 
           | To dissolve the people And elect another?
        
           | sofixa wrote:
           | > China actually shows what all governments more or less
           | publicly desire
           | 
           | I doubt China is the best example for what "governments
           | desire". Many people of different kinds go into politics for
           | different reasons, and i personally doubt controlling people
           | is among the top ones. Enriching oneself, having power and
           | reputation, fixing things, etc. seem to be more popular.
        
             | summm wrote:
             | In what respect is "having power" different from
             | "controlling people"?
        
           | chuckee wrote:
           | > we are about to enter an era where our personal devices not
           | only don't work exclusively for us but instead work
           | explicitly _against_ us.
           | 
           | About to? LG smart TVs send filenames on connected storage
           | devices back to LG, Google's phones by default (and until
           | they were caught, even if you explicitly disabled it) send
           | your location to Google for logging, that is then accessed by
           | police with geofence warrants, printers add tracking dots to
           | deanonymize you, Intel and AMD refuse to sell CPUs without
           | their management engines (except to special customers),
           | printers want "authorized" ink, and all of DRM is explicitly
           | anti-user.
           | 
           | We are already firmly in that era, even if you ignore China.
        
         | foobarian wrote:
         | I've been watching a French show Bureau which has a lot of
         | hacking/spying technobabble, but as far as those things go I
         | think it has some interesting actually plausible things.
         | 
         | - Locate a phone using discovery data from nearby Bluetooth
         | devices under adversary's control
         | 
         | - Track/access a turned-off phone via a secondary battery-
         | powered GPS module (or similar, like in new iPhones)
         | 
         | - Localize nearby phones via IMSI catchers
         | 
         | The main implausible line of plot devices there are the ability
         | to access any target device at will, just a matter of
         | time/effort. This alludes to organizations having access to
         | zero-day exploits but that's still very unlikely to work
         | against a random phone.
        
         | nuerow wrote:
         | > Companies are taking their cues from Facebook and now they're
         | all in a race to build back-end data warehouses of information
         | of individuals (...)
         | 
         | The current state of affairs can be explained without dragging
         | Facebook or other bogeymen into the picture. The inception of
         | A/B testing, business metrics, and even crash analytics on
         | applications deployed to devices that are always on is prime
         | ground to emit tons of metrics regarding anything the
         | application/device does.
         | 
         | Even though I agree that this state of affairs goes against the
         | users' best interests, there's no need to refer to bogeymen to
         | explain why apps phone home.
        
         | zxcb1 wrote:
         | Corporate superintelligences are eating the world
        
       | Yaa101 wrote:
       | Besides the privacy problems, this also means that they use your
       | bundle to transmit data, it is a form of theft if one is not
       | compensated. I wonder if that can be a narrative to sue them for
       | it.
        
       | hypnotist wrote:
       | Related: Lithuania says throw away Chinese phones due to
       | censorship concerns https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28616683
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ComodoHacker wrote:
       | In other news, water is wet.
        
       | jsnell wrote:
       | Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28830328 (691 points,
       | 360 comments)
       | 
       | Also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28875932
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-16 23:02 UTC)