[HN Gopher] Google Blog: Android's theft protection features kee...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Google Blog: Android's theft protection features keep your device
       and data safe
        
       Author : Josely
       Score  : 106 points
       Date   : 2024-05-15 17:12 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.google)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.google)
        
       | daghamm wrote:
       | Looks like they have added tons of features for this. This one
       | really caught my eyes.
       | 
       | "Theft Detection Lock is a powerful new feature that uses Google
       | AI to sense if someone snatches your phone from your hand and
       | tries to run, bike or drive away"
        
         | oittaa wrote:
         | A rare case of actually useful AI features. Thumbs up!
        
           | duxup wrote:
           | Is it AI or just ... recognizing a pattern?
           | 
           | How much data could it have to look at in the time that
           | someone "snatches" a phone?
        
             | cflewis wrote:
             | AFAICT all machine learning models right now are just
             | pattern matching.
        
             | SushiHippie wrote:
             | The article continues with:
             | 
             | > If a common motion associated with theft is detected,
             | your phone screen quickly locks - which helps keep thieves
             | from easily accessing your data.
             | 
             | So it's probably a machine learning model that was trained
             | on motion data of snatches, but it's likely not AI in the
             | sense of LLMs.
             | 
             | But I wonder how many false positives this could yield. For
             | example you are in a hurry and you snatch your phone from a
             | table. How precicesly can this model decide with just
             | motion data, if this was theft or not.
        
               | ckozlowski wrote:
               | I'm trying to decide if parents with small children will
               | either love or hate this feature.
        
               | duxup wrote:
               | Google is really going to crush those little toddlers
               | dreams of finally getting their hands on the phone :(
        
               | duxup wrote:
               | Would be interesting to know the difference between a
               | snatch and me rushing out the door...
        
               | lupire wrote:
               | Do you often interact with your phone via the screen
               | while rushing out the door?
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Yes?
        
               | Terr_ wrote:
               | Probably the acceleration vector. If the phone is rapidly
               | moved a meter away from you, either it's being snatched
               | or it's being thrown.
               | 
               | Edit: To clarify, I was thinking of horizontally, in the
               | direction that corresponds to the top of the screen, as
               | if you were bent over using the phone--probably holding
               | the bottom-of-screen--and then someone grabbed the top-
               | of-screen to pull it away.
        
               | curiousObject wrote:
               | _> If the phone is rapidly moved a meter away from you,
               | either it 's being snatched or it's being thrown._
               | 
               | Good heuristics. Also that must not be a mainly
               | _downward_ rapid movement, which probably only means you
               | just dropped your phone.
        
               | Terr_ wrote:
               | I think a lot of the false-positive cases where the
               | screen gets locked are acceptable in context.
               | 
               | I mean, most people dropping their phone will be too
               | glad/devastated that the device did/didn't escape harm to
               | bother being annoyed that they have to unlock the screen
               | again.
        
               | roblabla wrote:
               | I mean, worse case scenario, your phone just locks (I
               | assume to the lockscreen, where you have to re-enter your
               | pin). It doesn't seem like such a big problem?
        
               | sunshowers wrote:
               | It's a classifier, like ML has done for many years.
               | 
               | There's a saying that when something becomes mainstream
               | it is no longer considered AI. Fun to see that being
               | reversed.
        
               | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
               | Personally, I would take the false positives. Way too
               | much of my life is locked into securing this fragile
               | black rectangle. Unlocked phone has access to basically
               | everything. I personally do not do any finances on my
               | phone, but all of the MFA works through it.
               | 
               | If I snatch a phone from the table (probably already
               | locked?) or drop it, I will suck up the additional login.
               | 
               | I have long thought about the utility of a little
               | locking-beacon. If phone suddenly gets out of range,
               | should auto lock. If only Bluetooth were not so
               | unreliable.
        
               | whiplash451 wrote:
               | My Apple phone won't let me do some sensitive things if I
               | am in an unusual location. It's a default setting.
        
               | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
               | If my phone gets nabbed, a motivated thief would do
               | nefarious actions the minute they get out of site. So
               | presumably just a few blocks away from a usual location.
        
               | rezonant wrote:
               | Worth noting Android (or at least Pixel) does have a
               | feature like this, but it actually does the opposite:
               | while a Bluetooth device is connected it keeps the phone
               | _unlocked_. It would be way more useful in the reverse:
               | that if a Bluetooth device _disconnects_ , it should
               | _lock_.
               | 
               | These are two different things, since I do not want my
               | phone to have no lock screen just because my headphones
               | are sitting near it, but if it is unlocked and suddenly
               | my headphones disappear, that would be a useful
               | precaution, even if it doesn't eliminate the risk on its
               | own.
        
               | KTibow wrote:
               | I would expect this to not make a difference if your
               | phone was already locked. But I guess Google could only
               | lock the device if it was upright before being grabbed.
        
               | nonameiguess wrote:
               | How on earth do you even get training data for this?
               | Recorded phone sensor outputs that are known for certain
               | to be the result of validated, confirmed theft events
               | can't possibly be that common. Are they paying people in
               | Bangledesh a few bucks to be randomly assigned to group
               | that either get robbed or tripped in the hope they throw
               | the phone and labeling sensor data accordingly. When this
               | type of motion recognition was first developed, they had
               | labs and recorded people walking, doing jumping jacks,
               | sitting and then standing, whatever, and labeled the
               | patterns appropriately because they knew what was
               | happening because it was happening in a lab.
        
             | immibis wrote:
             | AI is another word for training-based computerized pattern
             | recognition.
        
             | commoner wrote:
             | There are free and open source apps for Android that
             | automatically lock the device when the accelerometer
             | detects rapid acceleration, which is a simple detection
             | method. For example, Private Lock is on F-Droid:
             | 
             | - Private Lock (source):
             | https://github.com/wesaphzt/privatelock
             | 
             | - Private Lock (F-Droid):
             | https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.wesaphzt.privatelock/
        
               | duxup wrote:
               | Very interesting.
               | 
               | Gotta admit first thing I would do is stage a theft
               | scenario to see how it works.
        
           | medo-bear wrote:
           | :) So one way I immagine it does this is by listening in on
           | your microphone to determine a distress signal. Up to you if
           | you think this is cool. In general people should ask
           | themselves do they really want a semi-intelligent program
           | someone else trained "living" in their phone. Yikes. I tried
           | to uninstall the neural network package on my Android but it
           | is impossible since it is an actual system package. Why on
           | earth it should be an Android system package is beyond me.
           | Moreover this issue persists even if you use a de-Googled
           | privacy and security focused distribution like GrapheneOS
        
             | vntok wrote:
             | Yes but that's only in your imagination, it's not how the
             | feature works. The feature works based on motion detection
             | trained on specific "theft patterns".
        
               | medo-bear wrote:
               | Because you trust how it is marketed. The android neural
               | network package is system deep, meaning it could easily
               | bypass all software permissions for hardware
        
         | quantumpacket wrote:
         | You don't need Big Brother Google accessing your sensor data,
         | nor do you need AI for this. I've been using this app for years
         | and it works great in locking the device if someone grabs my
         | device.
         | https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.wesaphzt.privatelock/
        
           | sva_ wrote:
           | You're saying it works great, which makes me wonder how often
           | your phone has been snatched away?
        
           | neilv wrote:
           | Sounds potentially useful, but question...
           | 
           | If you're trying to call 911, or you're trying to video an
           | assault... and someone tries to stop you, such as by jostling
           | you or your phone... what's the likelihood that this Private
           | Lock will get in the way of that?
        
           | michaelmior wrote:
           | It's not clear that any sensor data needs to be sent to
           | Google for thois to work. I suspect this is all on device.
        
         | WheatMillington wrote:
         | I don't understand the point of features like this. OK awesome
         | that thief can't use it, but I've still lost my phone. It
         | hasn't prevented any loss.
        
           | nmeofthestate wrote:
           | The phone is worth less to the thief, so theft becomes less
           | lucrative and there is less incentive for the thief to steal
           | your phone.
        
           | jakubadamw wrote:
           | The idea is that with features like this widespread, the
           | probability of a theft leading to the thief repurposing the
           | stolen device will be lower. Therefore, the incentives for
           | thieves - the ones acting rationally within the paradigm of
           | being a thief, at least - will be lower. Therefore, the
           | number of thefts, generally, may go down. A few big ifs here,
           | of course.
        
             | 0xEF wrote:
             | I've always felt that system lock was about preventing
             | theft of the device data, not prevention of flipping the
             | device itself. Like tons of other people, I have sensitive
             | apps and data on my phone (banking, cloud services, etc),
             | but unlike tons of people, I take great care to ensure
             | logouts after I am done accessing said apps or data. Even
             | so, a thief snatches my phone, I don't care what happens to
             | the phone itself, so long as the data is safe.
        
           | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
           | Knowing the thief does not have access to my email, banking
           | apps, nudes, etc is worth a huge piece of mind.
        
         | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
         | That caught my eye too. For whatever reason I thought of how
         | Ross Ulbricht, Silk Road founder, was arrested when FBI agents
         | used a ruse to snatch his laptop from him before he could lock
         | the screen.
        
       | neverokay wrote:
       | This is how a feature like this worked on my iPhone.
       | 
       | 1.iPhone detects I'm in an unusual location (I'm not, vpn). It
       | just decided this all of a sudden, and I've used vpns in the past
       | without issue.
       | 
       | 2. Goes into lockdown mode
       | 
       | 3. You need Face ID to disable lockdown mode
       | 
       | 4. Face ID cannot be used in lockdown mode. Go back to step 3
       | 
       | Step wtf: We're now trapped out.
       | 
       | 5. I have to reset my phone. I forgot that I have eSIM, so
       | resetting deletes my phone number too.
       | 
       | Step holy shit: Apple let me delete my entire sim card in about a
       | one click warning lol.
       | 
       | -----
       | 
       | These people don't dog food their own shit at all. Had to disable
       | Face ID after an event like that.
        
         | r00fus wrote:
         | Do you have advanced data protection turned on?
        
           | neverokay wrote:
           | Maybe? Does it excuse this oversight by the iOS team?
        
         | vntok wrote:
         | > iPhone detects I'm in an unusual location (I'm not, vpn)
         | 
         | VPN literally moves your phone to an unusual location, for all
         | intents and purposes.
        
           | neverokay wrote:
           | So I'm supposed to go into lockdown every single time? Fine,
           | but don't lock me out with FaceID so I can override it at
           | least.
           | 
           | Apple needs to revisit that feature because that lockout
           | could have happened at a critical time.
        
             | stacktrust wrote:
             | What were the visible indicators that the phone had entered
             | lockdown mode? It usually requires user consent, followed
             | by reboot.
             | 
             | iOS Lockdown Mode does not usually constrain the method of
             | unlocking the phone.
        
               | neverokay wrote:
               | Maybe I'm crazy? If you have an iPhone, enable faceid and
               | put it into lockdown mode manually (I just remember it
               | happening automatically).
               | 
               | Tell me how you get out of lockdown mode.
        
               | stacktrust wrote:
               | My iOS devices are in lockdown mode 99% of the time. To
               | disable lockdown mode, go into Settings > Privacy >
               | Lockdown Mode, it offers the option to "Turn Off and
               | Restart", then asks for a passcode.
               | 
               | The behavior being described sounds a bit like malware.
               | If it happens again, the best option is to Force Restart
               | (VolUp, VolDown, hold side button until the device
               | reboots), which cannot be intercepted by any apps which
               | might be trying to simulate iOS system prompts.
        
           | roblabla wrote:
           | no, it doesn't? It changes your publicly visible IP. Your GPS
           | data still shows you in the original location. Your wifi
           | localisation and 5g antennas would still be in the original
           | location. It'd also be _trivially easy_ for the OS to know
           | that the user is behind a VPN, given the only way to do so is
           | through APIs dedicated to VPN use.
        
           | lupire wrote:
           | That's not true at all. Phones geolocate themselves using
           | satellites, cell towers, and WiFi access points.
        
           | sophacles wrote:
           | It moves your IP address to an unusual location. I highly
           | doubt that it changes your GPS coordinates, nearby wifi, cell
           | towers, etc that can be used in location detection.
        
         | xmprt wrote:
         | > You need Face ID to disable lockdown mode
         | 
         | It's impossible to use the apple ID password or lockscreen
         | password/PIN for this?
        
           | neverokay wrote:
           | If you have FaceID enabled, it will require that to disable
           | lockdown mode (and I already explained the loop about how
           | lockdown mode disables biometric auth like Face ID). I can
           | get into the phone with my pin just fine, but the phone is
           | still locked down. When lockdown mode disables biometric
           | auth, I couldn't get into bank, brokerage or any app
           | requiring that auth.
           | 
           | Maybe I'm just crazy because it seems like a ridiculous
           | oversight.
        
             | stacktrust wrote:
             | _> I can get into the phone with my pin just fine, but the
             | phone is still locked down. When lockdown mode disables
             | biometric auth, I couldn't get into bank, brokerage or any
             | app requiring that auth._
             | 
             | Never heard of this behavior, but it's not associated with
             | the Apple feature called "Lockdown Mode", which does not
             | constrain use of secure enclaves for Touch ID or Face ID
             | authentication, https://support.apple.com/en-us/105120
        
         | buildbot wrote:
         | I wasn't aware lockdown mode can be enabled without you
         | explicitly doing so.
        
         | stacktrust wrote:
         | _> resetting deletes my phone number too_
         | 
         | There's an option during reset to keep the eSIM,
         | https://allthings.how/how-to-factory-reset-iphone-without-er...
        
         | rurp wrote:
         | Big tech companies locking you out of your own stuff is an
         | underrated threat vector.
         | 
         | I recently had a similar debacle with my Google account when I
         | was travelling out of state and lost my phone. I needed to
         | access my account quickly and fortunately knew my password and
         | had added my partner's phone number as a 2fa method for exactly
         | this kind of scenario.
         | 
         | Well when I went to log in Google took it upon themselves to
         | disable that 2fa method, because it thought there were more
         | secure options available. Except there weren't because I was
         | far from home and all of my other devices!
         | 
         | I was pretty shocked that Google would change my security
         | settings without any notice to me and confirmation on my part.
        
           | neverokay wrote:
           | I've opted for a backup phone on a $10 line to always have
           | SMS if necessary for 2fa. I don't take it outside.
           | 
           | Quite frankly I need to make a stronger commitment to
           | memorizing three passwords for life.
           | 
           | But to your point, yes I have critical apps where the main
           | threat vector is being accidentally locked out.
        
           | atomicfiredoll wrote:
           | I've lost 2 different gmail accounts, apparently due to
           | Google deciding to change or not respect my security
           | settings. It's hard to say for sure. Meanwhile I still have a
           | Hotmail email address. (This isn't me saying Microsoft
           | couldn't cause similar issues, but I've at least been able to
           | get things fixed through support in the past.)
           | 
           | I'm of the same mind that providers can be underrated risks,
           | because it doesn't always cross people's minds that the
           | provider could be that seemingly incompetent. It's certainly
           | a potential situation to consider when dealing with companies
           | that have poor support. And unfortunately, not all of them
           | have great support or self-service tools like account
           | recovery codes.
        
       | thescriptkiddie wrote:
       | Maybe someday they will bring back the ability to back up your
       | phone, so that you can restore your data to a new device without
       | having access to the old one.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | Doesn't Google/Android have the ability to backup the phone to
         | your Google Account?
         | https://support.google.com/android/answer/2819582?hl=en
        
           | refulgentis wrote:
           | Yes, it's tied to your Google Account
        
             | shuckles wrote:
             | iPhone can be backed up to a Mac or PC.
        
               | hedora wrote:
               | Even then, some apps "know better" and are not backed up.
               | Signal is one of the bigger offenders on this front
               | (despite there being options for E2E encrypted / on-site
               | backup in iOS).
        
               | hiatus wrote:
               | Signal has its own backup feature that will backup to a
               | file on your device on Android as well.
               | 
               | Settings -> Chats -> Chat backups
        
           | oittaa wrote:
           | It's not an exact copy of all the data. For example random
           | downloaded files don't get backed up and restored unless you
           | migrate from an old device[0]. It would be nice to be able to
           | do a full device local backup and restore.
           | 
           | [0]https://support.google.com/android/answer/6193424?hl=en
        
           | amlib wrote:
           | In my experience the backup is very limited and most app data
           | is lost, specially annoying are banking apps that require you
           | to go to a physical bank branch in order to re-pair your
           | restored phone and restore full access to your bank account.
        
             | lokar wrote:
             | I've never heard of that. Is it outside the US?
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | Banking apps willfully prevent backups on both platforms,
             | it's not something you'll get from the phone.
             | 
             | Someone put "prevent backups" on banks security audit
             | checklist and that's that.
        
               | amlib wrote:
               | My main issue, at least here where I live, is that you
               | can only have a single phone paired to your bank account.
               | If anything happens to your phone, that's it, you are
               | locked out of accessing your bank acc. You used to be
               | able to access your bank account from a telephone call
               | (sure, very arctic and insecure nowadays) or from the
               | bank website without requiring the phone app to
               | authenticate.
               | 
               | Had they provided a second form of access, independently
               | of a single phone, I would be more than fine with it.
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | These are good features, but I don't know if they help much
       | against the "$5 wrench" vulnerability: https://xkcd.com/538/
       | 
       | There have been multiple thefts in Chicago where "Police said the
       | gunmen forced one of the victims to reset his phone password
       | while threatening him with a pistol. They made another victim log
       | into their banking apps."
       | (https://cwbchicago.com/2024/05/chicago-bucktown-robbery-spre...)
        
         | bezier-curve wrote:
         | That sounds terrifying... what's wrong with people?
        
         | morning4coffe wrote:
         | WTF. This sounds like the next level
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | Hence why you should not have banking/brokerage apps on your
         | phone (or their passwords in your iOS keychain), except maybe a
         | checking account with a couple thousand dollars in it.
        
           | hwbunny wrote:
           | You can have, just tucked away in some folder.
        
             | rezonant wrote:
             | Uh, you know there's an app search on iOS right?
        
         | hwbunny wrote:
         | Against the 5$ vulnerability, if you are that important, go for
         | a gun permit and train on pigs so in a real life situation you
         | wouldn't freeze.
        
           | rurp wrote:
           | No, random people should not try to get into gun battles to
           | protect their phone. If you're that worried about the rare
           | chance of being forced to unlock your phone by criminals you
           | can limit which financial apps you have on the phone.
           | 
           | Despite some popular fantasies, buying a handgun and shooting
           | some targets (or live pigs?!?!) does not turn one into an
           | action hero. That kind of escalation is likely to get the
           | phone owner or another innocent person killed. It's a stupid
           | risk, especially given that there are much better ways to
           | protect your phone data.
        
       | jsheard wrote:
       | Hopefully the upgrades to factory reset protection actually work
       | this time. There's a seemingly never-ending supply of ways to
       | bypass Androids FRP by doing some weird incantation to break out
       | of the inital setup wizard.
        
         | shuckles wrote:
         | As an iOS user it's a bit shocking to hear that Android hasn't
         | had a functional activation lock. iPhone has had that for
         | almost 11 years. I suppose this is a case where Apple's
         | hardware and software integration is especially notable.
        
           | cantSpellSober wrote:
           | Android has activation lock. This announcement is about FRP.
        
             | hedora wrote:
             | What's the distinction?
             | 
             | On iOS, if the device is stolen, after a reset, you can't
             | set the phone up (and it's been like that for over a
             | decade).
             | 
             | Google says that's exactly what FRP does.
        
             | vlovich123 wrote:
             | No an Android user, so I'm not sure what distinction you're
             | making. On iOS there's not really a distinction between the
             | two [1].
             | 
             | > Activation Lock is an Apple feature designed to prevent
             | the unauthorized transfer or use of Apple devices. Built
             | into Apple's Find My system, it's Apple's implementation of
             | factory reset protection, which manufacturers are legally
             | required to include in order to sell smartphones in the US.
             | 
             | Given that it's been legally required since 2015 to sell
             | smartphones, this must be something else.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.kandji.io/definitions/what-is-activation-
             | lock
             | 
             | EDIT: Looking at the actual announcement.
             | 
             | > Factory reset upgrade prevents a reset by a thief. For
             | some criminals, the goal is to quickly reset your stolen
             | device and resell it. We're making it more difficult to do
             | that with an upgrade to Android's factory reset protection.
             | With this upgrade, if a thief forces a reset of the stolen
             | device, they're not able to set it up again without knowing
             | your device or Google account credentials. This renders a
             | stolen device unsellable, reducing incentives for phone
             | theft.
             | 
             | > More steps for changing sensitive device settings to
             | protect your data. Disabling Find My Device or extending
             | screen timeout now requires your PIN, password or biometric
             | authentication, adding an extra layer of security
             | preventing criminals who got a hold of your device from
             | keeping it unlocked or untrackable online.
             | 
             | > When enabled, our new enhanced authentication will
             | require biometrics for accessing and changing critical
             | Google account and device settings, like changing your PIN,
             | disabling theft protection or accessing Passkeys, from an
             | untrusted location.
             | 
             | AFAIK this has always been true for iOS, or true for as
             | long as I can remember at least.
             | 
             | The rest is pretty neat & unique to Android though (e.g. a
             | separate PIN-required space for certain apps like bank or
             | health data, automatic protection on snatch, fast-lock
             | using very low-overhead authentication mechanism).
        
             | shuckles wrote:
             | Perhaps you are using "activation lock" to mean the carrier
             | imposed requirement that some mobile phones are restricted
             | to their network? On iOS, it seems like activation lock
             | refers to exactly the feature that Android is touting
             | finally works with new updates to FRP.
        
               | daghamm wrote:
               | Are you thinking of sim lock?
               | 
               | Android and ios boot mechanism are pretty identical:
               | secure boot -> unlock modem -> unlock user area. There
               | are some differences in where in the CPU this happes and
               | how it is protected but Pixel phones are pretty close to
               | iPhone even if we look at such details.
        
       | codegladiator wrote:
       | > Factory reset upgrade prevents a reset by a thief. For some
       | criminals, the goal is to quickly reset your stolen device and
       | resell it. We're making it more difficult to do that with an
       | upgrade to Android's factory reset protection. With this upgrade,
       | if a thief forces a reset of the stolen device, they're not able
       | to set it up again without knowing your device or Google account
       | credentials. This renders a stolen device unsellable, reducing
       | incentives for phone theft.
       | 
       | Can I turn this off ?
        
         | rany_ wrote:
         | They've already done this for a while. It's called FRP (Factory
         | Reset Protection). I'm pretty sure that even my Android phone
         | from 2017 had this feature.
         | 
         | I don't know why they're touting it as a new feature.
        
           | cantSpellSober wrote:
           | Yeah they even mention it in their help pages
           | 
           | > _Expect to unlock your screen or enter Google Account
           | information [after reset]_
           | 
           | https://support.google.com/android/answer/9459346?hl=en#veri.
           | ..
        
             | AshamedCaptain wrote:
             | Frankly the only new feature I read on this announcement is
             | the "auto-lock on sudden movement" which seems like a minor
             | evolution of a feature they had 10 years ago that does the
             | opposite (prevent auto-lock when the device is stationary).
        
           | stusmall wrote:
           | It's definitely older than that. I remember implementing it
           | at an old job. That device ran 4.4 and was later upgraded to
           | 5. I know we had it in our 5 builds but I can't remember
           | about the KitKat builds.
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | > I don't know why they're touting it as a new feature.
           | 
           | This is powered by _AI_!  /s
        
       | 101008 wrote:
       | Some people reported it here that their phones were stolen, and
       | then were contacted by the thiefs to reveal the PIN. To prove
       | they were serious, thiefs attached addresses and names of the
       | victim relatives.
       | 
       | I know this wouldn't happen in USA or any serious country
       | (because these people were prosecuted), but in 3rd world
       | countries (where phone theft is super common) this will still be
       | a problem.
        
         | umanwizard wrote:
         | I left my phone (iPhone) in an Uber in Mexico and the driver
         | ignored my attempts to contact him to get it back. A few weeks
         | later someone attempted to spear-fish me: I was sent a
         | realistic-looking message pretending to be from Apple saying
         | that my phone had been found and I needed to log in to iCloud
         | to see its location. Of course, it linked to a fake iCloud
         | page.
        
         | daghamm wrote:
         | This is actually a pretty common problem with iPhone thefts in
         | US.
         | 
         | First the phone shows up the other side of the globe, then
         | someone either tries to trick you or threaten you to remove it
         | from your account.
        
       | exabrial wrote:
       | Oh yeah, like that time you guys locked me out of my phone after
       | I reset it, lent it to a friend, who reset it when they returned
       | it to me? And I called you dipshits to resolve the problem, and
       | you refused to unlock it, despite having a fucking receipt
       | showing I literally purchased the phone FROM GOOGLE?
       | 
       | Thanks asshats! Hard nope on any "AI" here.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | > _With this upgrade, if a thief forces a reset of the stolen
       | device, they're not able to set it up again without knowing your
       | device or Google account credentials. This renders a stolen
       | device unsellable, reducing incentives for phone theft._
       | 
       | Is this going to be a significant deterrent to mugging in
       | practice, or are muggers still going to approach for your wallet,
       | and take the phone in any case (to prevent calling, and to flip
       | it for parts)? Is there data?
       | 
       | For muggers that want the phone not to be tied to a Google
       | account, is a mugging going to turn in a more intense and lengthy
       | encounter, while they make you deactivate your account on it?
       | (And they're getting nervous about how long it's taking, and take
       | it out on you.)
       | 
       | Personally, my first choice is not to be mugged. But, if/when I
       | do get mugged again, my second choice is that it be a quick and
       | smooth transaction, in which everyone remains calm, and I don't
       | get physically hurt nor develop PTSD.
        
         | jpalawaga wrote:
         | Are most phones stolen through muggings?
         | 
         | In my experience, they're lifted from people's hands while
         | walking, taken out of back pockets, out of lockers, from the
         | window sill at bars/restaurants, etc.
         | 
         | this would certainly deter that sort of activity.
        
           | neilv wrote:
           | I guess that information will also be be useful, when
           | weighing "X% less likely that your phone is taken when your
           | wallet is taken from your gym locker" against "Y% more likely
           | that a mugging turns into a maiming".
        
           | Angostura wrote:
           | Sounds like an incentive to increase the number of muggings
        
             | sagarm wrote:
             | You could make this argument against locking your house or
             | car, or password protecting your bank accounts, ... really
             | any kind of security.
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | Nice, I didn't catch that one: Let's say that phone
             | snatch&grab is just an easy entry point for people driven
             | to bottom-end crime, and their current snatch&grab is
             | suddenly no longer paying off, but the most immediate
             | barrier to that can be gotten past, if only they step up to
             | getting the phones in muggings.
        
         | qmarchi wrote:
         | This isn't anything new and has already led to a significant
         | reduction in mobile phone thefts.
         | 
         | On Android, it's called FRP and has been part of the Android
         | CTS since ~2015.
        
           | chpatrick wrote:
           | Right, I thought we had that for ages.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | > is a mugging going to turn in a more intense and lengthy
         | encounter, while they make you deactivate your account on it?
         | 
         | This is already happening.
         | 
         | "Police said the gunmen forced one of the victims to reset his
         | phone password while threatening him with a pistol. They made
         | another victim log into their banking apps."
         | (https://cwbchicago.com/2024/05/chicago-bucktown-robbery-
         | spre...)
        
       | redbell wrote:
       | In unrelated topic, I've always been wondering how Google was
       | able to acquire this _.google_ TLD?!
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | It's mostly a matter of "they spent (and continue to spend) a
         | lot of money on it" but you can read about who has applied and
         | what the requirements are here
         | https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-...
        
       | utrack wrote:
       | It sounds great, but they could also block the settings' switches
       | in the pull-down drawer first...
       | 
       | As far as I understand, this whole Find My/Remote Lock stuff will
       | stop working when the thief pulls the bar down and activates the
       | Airplane mode. Then all the data is one vulnerability away from
       | being accessed.
       | 
       | This is the case on _Google_ Pixel 8 Pro and it 's been there for
       | ages; I assume it's the same for other vendors.
        
         | teamspirit wrote:
         | Right. I just recently switched to iOS and was pleased to turn
         | that on. It took a minute to remember why only sometimes I was
         | able to access the settings pulldown until I finally realized I
         | had to wait for face unlock to finish - I felt pretty silly
         | when I remembered.
         | 
         | I'm surprised this isn't a feature on android yet.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-15 23:00 UTC)