Hi,
Stock ROMs aren't really trustworthy by default (e.g., phandroid.com/2014/11/06/carrier-iq-settlement).
Some manufacturers' devices aren't really trustworthy, even with stock ROMs removed (e.g., theepochtimes.com/n3/830922-chinas-xiaomi-smartphones-may-be-spying-on-you).
Cyanogenmod went donwhill:
We may collect information such as occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, location, and the time zone where your product or device is used so that we can better understand customer behavior and improve our products, services, and advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(from cyngn.com/legal/privacy-policy) They started on this path long ago, but I won’t go there now.
I would like to buy a new Android phone. I won’t have national secrets on it, but I still don't want any Google-style spying. Assuming I don't add GApps, is PAC ROM a good choice for me? Does it respect the privacy of its users? Does it contain any components that would ever connect anywhere to trunsmit any information like GApps do. Obivously, I'm not talking about user initiated events.
One more thing, does it have a permission manager? Ideally, something that allows the user to choose for each permission for each apps whether real, fake or blank data is shared, but a bit cleaner than XPrivacy.
Thanks!
Well, PAC have permission-per-app management, I dont know what you need, give it a try and back at us your feelings.
Sent from my Xperia Z2 using XDA Free mobile app
afaik
the C in PAC stands for CYANOGENMOD
you quoted from cyng -> the profit department
Related
I saw (I can't remember where and even tried googling for a while and couldn't find it again) a website that lists packages for phone manufacturers. One was like, stock (like what's on the g1 w/"with google" branding) another one was custom ui etc (I am assuming the package used for motoblur and rosie). < or something that that effect.
Now my point: I am not sure the cost of these licenses, but I was thinking maybe one entity (xda for example). Could purchase a license (with donation money) and allow devs like cyanogen, maxisma, drizzy, jac etc operate under that license.
Not this is just an idea, I don't know too much about licenses and how they work etc. its just an idea to discuss.
CBowley said:
I saw (I can't remember where and even tried googling for a while and couldn't find it again) a website that lists packages for phone manufacturers. One was like, stock (like what's on the g1 w/"with google" branding) another one was custom ui etc (I am assuming the package used for motoblur and rosie). < or something that that effect.
Now my point: I am not sure the cost of these licenses, but I was thinking maybe one entity (xda for example). Could purchase a license (with donation money) and allow devs like cyanogen, maxisma, drizzy, jac etc operate under that license.
Not this is just an idea, I don't know too much about licenses and how they work etc. its just an idea to discuss.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats a stopgap until Google decides to change the agreement for their closed source software. the real solution is a fully open source flavor of android with proprietary repositories (a la Ubuntu)
alapapa said:
thats a stopgap until Google decides to change the agreement for their closed source software. the real solution is a fully open source flavor of android with proprietary repositories (a la Ubuntu)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a stop gap, this would actually be effective, as it would legally allow them to include those apps in the ROMs.
But, how much those licenses cost is a whole nother world.
Yeah, I posted this very suggestion in one of the first threads created about this topic. I even have some ideas about funding and possible non-profit status for the organization that acquires the license for distribution... but it was lost in the *****ing and moaning.
Yes I believe that would be a viable option as far as licensing goes there are a set terms to them that after has been agreed to like a contract can't change we would be fine. But as the case with Blizzard entertainment they can change and most likely will all the time. I aggree best option would to be make a full open source option that would allow us to operate without the google apps but that is very tricky as well, for service especially like YouTube that has terms of use and unless sactioned by them they don't want you using that service. It was for that reason why youtube downloader was pulled from the market and also violated ToS for downloading. No other youtube app has really poped up. Another solution like has pointed out in dev forum is to back them up from a google image already on the device. They specially said we can't distribute them. Currently I am trying to find the terms for it if any one can find for me that would be great. Another idea that I have was to make an application that would allow user to install what ever custom rom without google apps then find the approriate image from google for the device rom is installed on. Download that image ROM file and extract out google apps and install on the device. Since was ment for that and I or xda won't be distrubting the apps that might fall as acceptible in their terms. If anyone can find the terms I would greatly appreciate it.
TheArtiszan said:
Yes I believe that would be a viable option as far as licensing goes there are a set terms to them that after has been agreed to like a contract can't change we would be fine. But as the case with Blizzard entertainment they can change and most likely will all the time. I aggree best option would to be make a full open source option that would allow us to operate without the google apps but that is very tricky as well, for service especially like YouTube that has terms of use and unless sactioned by them they don't want you using that service. It was for that reason why youtube downloader was pulled from the market and also violated ToS for downloading. No other youtube app has really poped up. Another solution like has pointed out in dev forum is to back them up from a google image already on the device. They specially said we can't distribute them. Currently I am trying to find the terms for it if any one can find for me that would be great. Another idea that I have was to make an application that would allow user to install what ever custom rom without google apps then find the approriate image from google for the device rom is installed on. Download that image ROM file and extract out google apps and install on the device. Since was ment for that and I or xda won't be distrubting the apps that might fall as acceptible in their terms. If anyone can find the terms I would greatly appreciate it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well if flash comes out next month we wont need the youtube app.
Lol have you tried hero w flash. Slow as hell
well that not the official version so it hard to say. yeah did but the hero builds seem slow to me.
Jacheroski2.1 was pretty quick once swapper and everything was setup correctly
TheArtiszan said:
Lol have you tried hero w flash. Slow as hell
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea but adobe plans to release flash 10 for android as early as october
I read that Cyanogen or someone is already working on a workaround..kinda. A backup program which will backup your currently legal device apps, and upon install of his bare-bones rom, restore the original device apps.
Things will be close to the same. Just a bump in the road. They should know, people will always find a way. Legal or not.
Now this I want to try!
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/security-enhanced-android-released-by-nsa/
Android may be secure enough for the average consumer, but it is hardly air tight. The National Security Agency (NSA) released the first version of their custom build of Google’s popular OS, called Security Enhanced Android. The system is designed to minimize the impact of security holes on Android. The SE Android project is enabling the use of SELinux in Android in order to limit the damage that can be done by flawed or malicious apps.
Specifically, Android SE aims to offer:
Per-file security labeling support for yaffs2,
Filesystem images (yaffs2 and ext4) labeled at build time,
Kernel permission checks controlling Binder IPC,
Labeling of service sockets and socket files created by init,
Labeling of device nodes created by ueventd,
Flexible, configurable labeling of apps and app data directories,
Userspace permission checks controlling use of the Zygote socket commands,
Minimal port of SELinux userspace,
SELinux support for the Android toolbox,
Small TE policy written from scratch for Android,
Confined domains for system services and apps,
Use of MLS categories to isolate apps.
Will take rims place in the army maybe.
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
iammodo said:
Will take rims place in the army maybe.
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe this will also push companies like the one I work for to allow us to access Exchange on our Android phones.
how would someone go about implmenting this into a rom? i havent got a clue on how to do anything of that stuff.
Has anyone tried to build this for the Atrix? If so, how did it work?
ecko19 said:
Has anyone tried to build this for the Atrix? If so, how did it work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is much more than a custom rom (which is a very incorrectly used term itself) build. It is the base operating system. If you just build this and put it on your phone, it will probably run, but it will not have any drivers for the Motorola ATRIX hardware. It's like if you just downloaded pure android gingerbread source from google and tried to build it and install to your phone.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA
Well I meant build it but overlay some of the Atrix specific libraries and such.
If it ever does go main stream Companies like RIM would need to go above and beyond to compete, becuase right now that cant compete with anything as far as productivity that android can or does already. I had a Black berry bold for work and i could not manage anything but my email really. were as on my atrix I full RDP and all kinds of server management not to mention the other boat loads of features.
US military is already rolling out Android phones for testing in the field and starting to replace BB phones with them.
Would xda community really want to get phones with this? Other than the challenge of it, I'd imagine it'd be a very tough one to root... let alone unlock a bootloader
I heard my old flight has replaced their blackberry's with another device already
#Magecca SGH-I717
Whenever I hear SELinux my sphincter involuntarily tightens... That thing is a royal pita.
I worked a job where we had to do it support for a bunch of Fedora iMacs; whenever something went wrong that wasn't user error, it was almost always SELinux policy getting screwed for some reason.
Also, would your really want your OS from NSA? Comes with convenient backdoor precompiled™
I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.
Exactly my thoughts. Though I am not sure what can be done to stop it.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
rd_nest said:
I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD
JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My view is that we took the application and made it compatible with other devices, Samsung never explicitly gave the permission.
Maybe they thought it would be easier to upgrade the app if it's not integrated into the TW. But I fear such activity may force them to become less dev-friendly in future.
It's a different story if in future they make the code available for CM9 or other projects separately. I just hope not, but the way it's being spread over the internet, I fear they will react in some way. Also throws a bad light over XDA.
JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They obviously didn't want it to be freely available because they have blocked it now.
Anyway, I don't get this mentality that if something is not impossible to take, it's ok to take it.
I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.
mskip said:
I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much appreciated. I wanted this to be brought to the notice of MODs. Nobody wants XDA to be in bad light for such a petty affair.
As for the apps (specially S Voice) being exclusive to SGS3, I think so. That's what I infer from Samsung's statement in Verge:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/22/3037943/samsung-blocking-s-voice-app-leak
But please do verify with relevant authorities and take appropriate actions (if required).
Mac OS X doesn't require a product key, but that doesn't mean my friend can just use my installation DVD legally, it all depends on the T&C's
The fact Samsung have blocked it for other devices should give an indication of their decision towards people using this software on another device. They may not send the FBI to kick down your door and arrest you, but cracking it to spoof a SGSIII for example would probably get a DMCA take-down notice pretty quickly. They almost certainly won't want all and sundry freely enjoying one of the big features of their new flagship device.
I have e-mailed Samsung PR dept on their views about this issue. Not sure if they check their Inbox
Unless we hear otherwise from Samsung, we will follow the normal site policy. In this case (though it is an edge case) for the moment we're allowing it.
If this is the case, then all devs who port roms from other models are in breach also.
Is this thread trying to stop dev work, and has the OP loaded the program, if he has shame on him for going against his beliefs, now let us and the devs get on with it.:what:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Edit: phone model is Arc, now why did I change the prop build?
OP - Care to share how this is any different from all of the Sense ports to other devices? It's not.
I also like how you thanked Mark for checking into this - and that you were waiting to hear.... And then not even an hour later you go and contact Samsung PR? It sounds to me like you have an ax to grind.
I think everything that needs to be covered has been
I saw F-Droid which I think is a very good starting point but I think we need to improve much to compile a good service.
1) We need a infrastructure. A server to host all apps, and which answers searches. F-Droids way with repositories isn't good because the whole repository gets downloaded and this wouldn't work with 10.000 apps. Another reason is that the average user doesn't want to manage repositories he want to have ONE CENTRAL TRUSTED SOURCE. We don't need to fragment android even more.
2) App Restrictions. Not like Apple, ofc!
2.1) Minimum Requirement is Android 4.0 and all Apps have to use it as minimum sdk version. 2.x is old and noone prefers this old UI style over Holo. High Quality Apps need good UI's. All Apps should use at least Holo-UI even if it's design is modified(like facebook or solidexplorer).
2.2) Trancparency. Apps don't must be opensource but the functions of the Apps should be checked by someone. A App upload request should be public. And some let's say 3 or 4 well known trusted persons who maintain the store have to verify the apps and give green lights for the app to be accepted. The reasons why a app wasn't accepted must be clear and publicly visible and users should be able to complain against the decision.
2.3) OpenSource Apps should be preferred and always get better positions in search results. And the web interface of the store should present the git/svn/hg checkout url directly so devs can download and work with it. We could say that developers always have to upload source even if it won't be published so it's easier for us to check for malware functionality but I think devs wouldn't be happy about it and we are good enough in understanding smali so we wouldn't need it at all.
3) Better User Interface for AppStore App. We need a good polished UI. with screenshots, downlod counter, rating etc. This App needs to be a pattern for devs how good Apps should look(point 2.1).
4) If we accept paid apps we need to give more options than credit card only.
Tell me what you guys think about it
Backstory: I've always used iPhones, was tired of the bull****, and wished for Android especially the S8. Was shocked, and I'm rarely shocked, but the agressive violation of privacy, the crazy amount of bloatware, and the unoptimised UX and system services overall.
Now, I'm in charge of a wide ecosystem of people using smartphones in our company as well as other companies I consult for. While people always blab about personal privacy (which is a concern of course), what I don't understand is how people dealing with either sensitive, contractual or strategic informations could use Android devices given that it *excuse but there's no better terms* rapes your privacy in every, but also I'm pretty sure, illegal, ways.
For exemple the Sound Detector app, even when disabled, is constantly listening to your environment without your priori knowledge or permissions. In fact it's mainly the permissions scheme that baffles me: on iOS or any PC or Mac, you can install any app without being constrained to accept giving out information or accessing functions that have nothing to do with the app, THEN you can choose what precise permissions, when and why. And of course there's the whole wider problem of usage and data tracking (which I apparently have to install...a firewall??) or even malware (I have to install a separate antivirus for...on a smartphone). Worst exemple being that of course: www.theverge.com/2018/1/2/16842294/android-apps-microphone-access-listening-tv-habits
Now I like Android for all their efforts, development and implementation, as well as Samsung efforts...but I'm on the verge of having to present a report to ban all Android phones (for a "leave at door" Policy or either iPhone, BBMs and any other "more" secure smartphones) like I just realise they did in the US government and other official institutions as well as some corporations...or...understand very well how it works, and devise a clearly guide on how to completely optimise and secure Android smartphones like I would for PCs/Macs.
So here's my mission if you accept to help me:
1. I want to deconstruct how Android works in a very simple scheme for noob.
2. From that I want to list all the system packages and services, to determine those that are critical, optional or bloatware, and actually describe exactly what they're for so people have a clear idea.
3. I want to list all the base applications, stores or packages apps, to determine those that are critical, optional or bloatware, then what they're for and most importantly the best alternative apps to these.
4. I want to list and make a simple schemes of how the device components (sensors, cam, mic...), the different data canals, and the the different permissions are circulating or violating privacy while screwing cpu time, battery and data.
5. Finally I want to learn, understand and create a simple noob introduction to the different tools like Xposed (and XprivacyLua which seems to be the best options), package disablers (I personally went for BK), Firewall, Adblockers and Antivirus (honestly didn't even think I would need those on Android).
So I guess first, I'll list all the apps, packages (and sub-services) that my Galaxy S8 came shipped with that overwhelmed me, so as to know for a basic Galaxy S8/+/Note what is a consensus of what to disable, why, how and by what to replace if there's alternative, while listing basic how-to's of the tools to that. Note that I only know about BK Disabler as of now.
Reserved
Upd: I haven't had time, but I'm starting to do a table with all the packages, what they're for and wether to disable them.
You do know that Silverpush do affect both iPhone and Android, right? And "leave at the door" policy or either iPhone or BBM? There's two errors in this sentence. Are you really what you claim to be? Or just someone with an agenda who just created an XDA account?
why would you need an antivirus for a phone if you stick to play store apps?
rashat999 said:
why would you need an antivirus for a phone if you stick to play store apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are plenty of play store garbage apps with spy ware and crap in them
vladimir_carlan said:
You do know that Silverpush do affect both iPhone and Android, right? And "leave at the door" policy or either iPhone or BBM? There's two errors in this sentence. Are you really what you claim to be? Or just someone with an agenda who just created an XDA account?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPhone (pretends to) be safe and secure and doesn't straight-up violate your privacy by forcing unneeded permission even before installing the app and running tons of spyware as per unbox while giving all your infos out to apps that demand it and more. It's also a question of procedure: iPhone are really easy to fix/secure with a jailbreak, I didn't even root this Android I got and realised how terribly aggressive their violation of privacy is.
But again, I just want to give people the choice as long as their device is secure, that's why I'm learning all the quirks of Android and how to secure them. All our IT guys confirmed that unless you know exactly how to secure Android devices like we did for our computer park, employees better go for an iPhone.
There's a difference between Apple that might have backdoors to the NSA, and Android that is a crazy open buffet for -permitted- informations stealing without even talking about spyware or silverpush. My Galaxy S8 came with apps and packages that were constantly listening through the mic without my prior knowledge, installation or authorisation, this is intolerable. But I switched for a reason, I'll see if using Android is easily manageable or if it's better to ban them from inside use.
OgreTactic said:
iPhone (pretends to) be safe and secure and doesn't straight-up violate your privacy by forcing unneeded permission even before installing the app and running tons of spyware as per unbox while giving all your infos out to apps that demand it and more. It's also a question of procedure: iPhone are really easy to fix/secure with a jailbreak, I didn't even root this Android I got and realised how terribly aggressive their violation of privacy is.
But again, I just want to give people the choice as long as their device is secure, that's why I'm learning all the quirks of Android and how to secure them. All our IT guys confirmed that unless you know exactly how to secure Android devices like we did for our computer park, employees better go for an iPhone.
There's a difference between Apple that might have backdoors to the NSA, and Android that is a crazy open buffet for -permitted- informations stealing without even talking about spyware or silverpush. My Galaxy S8 came with apps and packages that were constantly listening through the mic without my prior knowledge, installation or authorisation, this is intolerable. But I switched for a reason, I'll see if using Android is easily manageable or if it's better to ban them from inside use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mate my question still stand: are you really what are you claiming to be or you just have an agenda? Some badass company appointed you to decide what is secure and what not. Really? You? In Op you are talking about thinking to allow only iOS and BBM (it's Bbos BTW) only. BBOSS? Really? BBOS was discontinued one year ago...no more updates no more security patches, no more nothing.
vladimir_carlan said:
Mate my question still stand: are you really what are you claiming to be or you just have an agenda? Some badass company appointed you to decide what is secure and what not. Really? You? In Op you are talking about thinking to allow only iOS and BBM (it's Bbos BTW) only. BBOSS? Really? BBOS was discontinued one year ago...no more updates no more security patches, no more nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not my job, but that's part of mine to decide or push in front of committees what tool we should use, purely from a utilitarian, managerial and system POV. None of us beside IT guys ever realised how Android were intolerably insecure, I've had my head in Apple buttock for years thinking "yeah, that's too limited and I heard Android is now as stable and well made".
But I don't want to go back to iPhone either, so here I am sitting with a Galaxy S8 I'm still not using because I don't where to start to secure it, whether I should try to fix everything on the factory rom or just root it.
OgreTactic said:
That's not my job, but that's part of mine to decide or push in front of committees what tool we should use, purely from a utilitarian, managerial and system POV. None of us beside IT guys ever realised how Android were intolerably insecure, I've had my head in Apple buttock for years thinking "yeah, that's too limited and I heard Android is now as stable and well made".
But I don't want to go back to iPhone either, so here I am sitting with a Galaxy S8 I'm still not using because I don't where to start to secure it, whether I should try to fix everything on the factory rom or just root it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay...what exactly makes you to feel insecure? I understand you're bothered that some apps are accessing your microphone. That's easy... Settings-Apps. Tap on those three dots and chose app permission. You'll see what apps have access to microphone and deny permission for them. Job done. What else makes you to feel insecure?
vladimir_carlan said:
Okay...what exactly makes you to feel insecure? I understand you're bothered that some apps are accessing your microphone. That's easy... Settings-Apps. Tap on those three dots and chose app permission. You'll see what apps have access to microphone and deny permission for them. Job done. What else makes you to feel insecure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I put my S8 away for now I went back to an iPhone. I'm using it off-grid to still try and figure out how it works.
Basically my problems are clear:
1. There's no transparency in background processes/services, the component they use and the data they send.
2. The way permissions are managed is intolerable: forcing you to accept non-necessary and arbitrary access to connected components or private information BEFORE installing the app is a form of extortion. The same goes when running the app: forcing permissions that are not critical to the app code actually running is a form of extortion. Baffles me how Google even allows that today.
3. The fact that there's even a need for a firewall and antivirus, and that the official stores is filled with illegal (copyright infringing app so blatant) and therefor myriads of potential malicious apps like Silverpush-enabled one, without any store control or curation on Google's part.
All this means there is no way I will use an Android rather than an iPhone and allow anyone dealing with private or "sensitive" commercial informations using one inside the company. I'm still trying to figure out if going straight to root is the solution, if I'll have to use cryptography for documents and coms, or if I'll have to spend days figuring out Xposed+Xprivacy, Packages Disablers, MicroG alternative libraries, Firewall and Antivirus and god knows what to make it decently secure like an iPhone (which doesn't aggressively violates your privacy and is really easy to secure with a jailbreak...unless there are hidden backdoors which is still far from the probably illegal open-buffet of private and sensitive informations Google provides to any potential malicious websites, scripts or apps).