Android How to protect data from unauthorized access on Android?

KleinesSinchen

GBAtemp's Backup Reminder + Fearless Testing Sina
OP
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
4,494
Trophies
2
XP
15,130
Country
Germany
First of all…
  • my description won’t fit in few words – as always. If you want to read it, then do it. If not, then don't, but please leave me alone with nonsense like tl;dr → :)
  • I do not want to discuss if my concerns and ideas make sense or if I’m a paranoid tinfoil hat wearing lunatic and conspiracy theorist. Instead I simply want to learn what is possible regardless if there is any practical value in this or not. Please spare me the name calling → :)
  • it was not possible to avoid certain, possibly controversial, thoughts touching politics →:(

Most of this text is ready for getting posted for roughly a week; I'm always hesitant. But since @Blauhasenpopo forced encouraged me… I finished this today. Happy now? :creep:


Main Question​

Does anybody know how data on an Android phone/tablet can be reliably protected from unauthorized access? This means a similar security level like offered by LUKS and VeraCrypt.
The latter featuring some kind of plausible deniability is a bonus.



I’m still at the very beginning of the process in understanding Android and it’s strange security design (locking the owner out of their own stuff). Much of it seems to be based on hard to justify assumptions, treated like axioms which must not be questioned:
The locked bootloader prevents flashing/running arbitrary code and the verified boot chain even prevents Evil Maid Attacks (on the software side→ data deletion and tamper evidence on unlock). Strong assumptions:
A) There are no security holes allowing ACE with bootloader rights​
B) Non-malicious vendors (no backdoors, no modified signed images, no rouge updates ↓↓↓)​
C) No government influence (no government backdoors)​
I doubt any of the three assumptions is true, let alone all of them.

While phone/tablets are encrypted by default using AES with random master key, which is inaccessible (Trust Zone? Is that the correct term?) and well-protected (another assumption!) there is a inherent weakness connected with usability:
Each time you want to use a phone you have to unlock it. It is simply not practical to enter a complex passphrase (at least 20 random alphanumeric characters) good enough to withstand an automated bruteforce attack every single time. There doesn’t seem to be a way to enforce a complex passphrase on boot and have a simple PIN for normal screen unlock (or I’m too dumb to find it). For unlocking a computer with a touchscreen I can’t even use my usual, mediocre local PC login passwords.

Preventing unauthorized access to personal/user data solely depends on the assumptions A), B), C) in the spoiler above this one to be true. If device integrity is actually given and there is no way to bruteforce the user PIN other than manually typing, then a simple but random 8 to 10 digit numeric PIN is secure enough. Normal unlocking methods intentionally change the encryption key. But… if one can let the computer do the guesswork for obtaining the user PIN by executing own, malicious code…
Trollface_non-free.png

…your data security goes down the drain.


All in all the security theater(!) provides a false sense of security; people are relying on devices simply defined as secure and convenient by design (opposed to the open PC platform, which is obviously vulnerable to Evil Maid Attacks. They try to counter with attached hardware security called TPM, but in the end PCs are more often than not unencrypted anyway).
While searching for a way to mitigate the problem that an Android device can probably easily read (and written!) by malicious “law enforcement”¹ and other attackers, I stumbled upon three apps (all by the same developer, x13a) that can be installed as device administrators:
Duress → Define a duress key/password. If entered, the device with factory reset (and hopefully change master key immediately)​
Wasted Factory Reset on given triggers (fake icons, device unused for days, USB cable with data connection gets plugged in without unlocking the phone before doing so – last one is pretty effective but easy to trigger accidentally yourself)​
Sentry → Disable safe mode (to prevent circumventing such apps), disable USB data connection. Could possibly prevent forensic tools from even trying to apply exploits on the running system. Factory reset on too many failed PIN attempts (some phones offer this by default).​
I’ve tested the three apps and they worked for me as intended.

:!: Please do not play around with these apps on your productive devices! You can easily trigger deletion and Sentry can NOT be removed once set as device owner (which is required for disabling safe mode and disabling data USB connection) other than by doing the factory reset! :!:

These apps are a fun addition and might improve the situation very slightly.
If your dear friend, the cop, confiscates your phone and asks you for the PIN, it may help. Some police officers might even simply try out the PIN given to them on the spot and thus set off the deletion nuke.
And if the computer forensics experts, too convinced of their own importance and abilities, simply plug in a cable carelessly, these apps would also help.

But ultimately these are just beginner's traps that don't really help much if the adversary has done their homework or smells a rat. Emergency deletion is not a replacement for solid encryption. Preventing USB connection and safe mode could be a serious security upgrade though. A bad side effect is that Sentry kills Seedvault backup when set as device owner.




________________________
¹It is completely impossible to find reliable information about so-called forensic tools. The topic has inherent secrecy and intentional incomplete information and even misinformation in order to intimidate people.
With freedom (of speech for example) melting like snow in the summer sun this kind of threat model (prosecuting innocent people) has to be taken in account.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Blauhasenpopo

Blauhasenpopo

GBATemp's Funeral Director
Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
1,138
Trophies
3
Age
49
Location
Bruchsal
XP
2,934
Country
Germany
  • Haha
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

KleinesSinchen

GBAtemp's Backup Reminder + Fearless Testing Sina
OP
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
4,494
Trophies
2
XP
15,130
Country
Germany
...:unsure:… I hoped for a more elaborate answer from you.
smilie_girl_355.gif

Since you expressed interest in this yesterday, I might as well ask in public if (and how) you protect your phone(s).

Maybe you have professional administration tools for work?
 

Blauhasenpopo

GBATemp's Funeral Director
Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
1,138
Trophies
3
Age
49
Location
Bruchsal
XP
2,934
Country
Germany
I do not have any security tools installed or set on my device, but would, if i easily could manage it.

Your suggestions are a good way to start.

From what I've read a while ago, some Android phones will decrypt your data (presumably using a key retrieved from secure hardware) after you've entered your password for the first time after boot. Given locked bootloaders and waiting periods for incorrect attempts (increasingly long ones ideally, unlike the fixed 30 seconds on AOSP), bruteforcing shouldn't be a concern.



Last I'm aware, the only open source thing we have would be AOSP's encryption feature.

In my opinion though, if you want proper security then I don't think Android (or iOS for that matter) is where it's at. Whether the feature works largely depends on your particular (open source) custom ROM/GSI. And like you've mentioned about weird security model, it's unfortunate that the "because we know better" concept of most manufacturers and the mobile platform in general makes for hardware that's crippled for anyone who thinks otherwise.

Perhaps a good alternative would be postmarketOS, which isn't actually Android but instead Linux. Support for full disk encryption (with password prompt on boot) is present on some devices. Also maybe worth mentioning is the Raspberry Pi series (especially the Pi 5 with dedicated crypto hardware), though you'd have to figure out the 'mobile' part (or find someone else's).

The mentioned postmarketOS isn't available for much phones, besides it isn't the the right answer to the OP's topic.....but it truly is an alternative to be choosen as an complete other OS with a complete safer structure.
 
Last edited by Blauhasenpopo,
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

KleinesSinchen

GBAtemp's Backup Reminder + Fearless Testing Sina
OP
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
4,494
Trophies
2
XP
15,130
Country
Germany
I do not have any security tools installed or set on my device, but would, if i easily could manage it.
Convenient ≠ Secure
You surely own some testing device where you can try out things.

I was just wondering if you were using some management solution at work and could share insights.
=======



Ignoring my own warning to not simply try Sentry on productive devices I installed it as device owner on my Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 (2020) SM-T505. Running stock ROM with locked bootloader (Knox warranty bit intact)
Since there is no sensible backup solution (only Samsung Smart Switch → 🤦‍♀️ ), which could get knocked out there was nothing to lose.

Best decision ever regarding Android. This tablet is the only¹ of my Android devices featuring USB HAL 1.3, which is required for the USB restrictions to be applied.
While the USB restriction is activated there doesn't seem to be any way to connect to it. It doesn't report to a PC. No messages in journalctl -f. No reaction to USB keyboards or memory sticks or whatever. Only remaining function is charging the battery.
This makes me wonder why this isn't the default. There is no sensible reason for a mobile device to start or accept data connections in locked state. And, no, "My touchscreen doesn't work after I dropped the phone. Now I have to unlock with a keyboard to rescue my precious photos!" is not a good reason → Just backup your data on time.
Together with restricting safe boot / safe mode this greatly decreases attack surface for somebody trying to exploit the system (given the assumptions in my initial post are true for this tablet, which I doubt looking at the missing updates)


There are a lot more policies which could be enforced by a management app. Problem is that these EMM (Enterprise Mobility Management) apps are exactly that: Management by administrators for company owned devices or employee's devices with work profile. They are expensive (monthly or yearly fee) and most of these features are for remote control and useless for private persons (and these apps aren't even available without signing up with your company). I found no free implementation going beyond Sentry.

:!: Long and complex page ahead. Might make weak devices load a long time: Here is DevicePolicyManager API :!:






______________________
¹ Note that I paid a lot less for the whole bunch of old and very old phones over the years than some people pay for a single smartphone
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blauhasenpopo

naxil

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
850
Trophies
1
XP
673
Country
Italy
a zero click attack for android cost aroun 2.000.000$ and if have market exist... on iphone for example exist (probably now patched) a silent message, that silent message reach an iphone and use a chain of bug/exploit for log the entire phone data without the user notice something....
 

Exidous

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
351
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
737
Country
United States
It sounds like your security focus is more on the lock/unlock meatspace vector, but might I redirect some of that suspicion upward.

Smartphones have been designed to serve the interests of their vendors. In the case of Android, that's Google, which wants to gather and sell as much data from the phone's user as possible.

Hence, most of the Android security discussion I've seen starts with and predominately is de-Googling. And I can't even begin to think of achieving security on a stock Android rom. So the first step is usually installing a custom ROM, and then being as paranoid as you prefer/is possible in that OS. So before you implement your sounds-like-encryption software for the Android ecosystem, make sure you're building on the right Android OS/custom ROM.

If you're new to Android, welcome to hell, because while the software license core to the Android operating system all but requires permitting the user to modify/change the OS, the vast majority of commercially available Android devices today have locked bootloaders, which means no custom ROM. Assuming you are prepared to clear that hurdle:

I put LineageOS on my relatively new phone, which has a long history and good reputation among custom Android roms. But while I was researching what I'd do on this phone, there was significant discussion of GrapheneOS which sounds like it might be an approximation of what you're interested in - on the security maximizing side of the security-convenience spectrum.

https://grapheneos.org/
 

Exidous

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
351
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
737
Country
United States
What do you mean by sounds-like-encryption software? We're looking at stuff like AOSP by Google, and VeraCrypt which has had a two security audits. (In addition to its predecessor, TrueCrypt. Granted, the Android apps for VeraCrypt aren't official, but if you're unsure, you can examine or mount the same volume on a PC. Perhaps tools like photorec can pick up on plain files.)
I was alluding to my lack of knowledge about what software will be needed, on top of the ROM, to achieve OP's desired result. I don't get much further than 'sounds like it will include encryption'.
 

KleinesSinchen

GBAtemp's Backup Reminder + Fearless Testing Sina
OP
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
4,494
Trophies
2
XP
15,130
Country
Germany
Oh dear...

Thanks for the detailed replies!
@Blauhasenpopo will be pleased to see I was wrong.

Always the same trouble. I write a long post like an essay, cut away parts to at least partially evade the "too long didn't read" problem and end up with too little information.
Of course I already use custom ROMs and have no Google services.

Safety Net (old) or Play Integrity validation isn't a concern. If an app requires attestation by Google, the app isn't trustworthy (and I would say illegal in the EU for banking if no alternative is offered… but who cares… they will do whatever they want).

GrapheneOS which sounds like it might be an approximation of what you're interested in
GrapheneOS is the reason for starting this thread. This ROM is what made me consider to finally use Android for more than a toy. After refusing to even look at smartphones for very long (main reason being Google), I decided to start learning some years ago: You can't criticize what you don't know. Using a not de-googled phone was never an option. Just reading their ridiculous Terms of Service and "Privacy" Policies (Haha) is enough to stay away from Google (and WhatsApp and Apple and Microsoft and Twitter and…)

Over the years I've picked up various Android devices between 0€ and about 100€ maximum for doing the experiments → mostly with LineageOS.

For the full security features of GrapheneOS a Pixel from series 8 seems to be needed. They are outrageously expensive. Best concept of GrapheneOS is making Android Verified Boot (AVB) actually useful by trusting own keys instead of manufacturer keys. I guess you could go as far as compile and sign it yourself. For even trying this hardened variant I had to buy a Pixel phone. Arrived three days ago and I flashed it yesterday. The only one in price range was a Pixel 4a with a tiny haircrack in the plastic frame at the edge; came from a reseller. Probably no warranty issues since Pixel phones can easily reverted to stock.
A.jpg B.jpg C.jpg
Unlocking bootloaders does downgrade security since it guarantees (at least to my understanding) automated bruteforce attacks on the user PIN are possible. It is obviously the same on open platforms like PC, but there is a keyboard for entering a solid passphrase and the possibility of acceptable quality login passwords in addition to the heavy boot passphrase.
I've no idea why only Pixel phones support changing the root of trust and relocking the bootloader into yellow state. Other phones will just go red state when locking with custom OS.

I want to emphasize that the complete technological verification, even if implemented flawlessly, does not really prevent Evil Maid Attacks. If she can't modify the device for sniffing passwords, our maid will just install a camera in the room for high tech shoulder surfing.
==============


Regarding VeraCrypt containers I'll have to do my homework and search up things. F-Droid had no results for VeraCrypt. Other "container" or "safe space" apps which can be found there suffer from being more or less a minimalist gallery and media player. It would be better (if Android even allows this) if an encrypted volume could be mounted to be available for the rest of the OS, just like on desktop.
This does of course nothing for protecting the normal private app data further than the OS does by itself. GrapheneOS might be a reasonable approach used with multiple profiles.
==============

All these topics never go without mentioning
security.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Exidous

JaapDaniels

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,204
Trophies
1
Age
40
Website
github.com
XP
2,483
Country
Netherlands
Protection in the way of crypt, can be done, but most android devices are not that secure to begin with in hardware design.
What you can do is:
  • You can split partition if you fully own the device in terms of you're system root.
  • You can then setup encryption to this space.
  • You can set a gateway proxyserver for security online (complete with key-management).
  • You can setup your own appstore and controll mirror the apps available.
  • You can setup a trap for it to erase the encrypted partition when battery is below certain level.
  • You can setup a trap for it to erase the encrypted partition when certain button is pushed (multiple times).
  • Your applications can be pushed to the encrypted partition.
  • You can setup a firewall.
  • You can setup endpoint security antivirus.
  • You can use VPN
Are these simple to implement? no.
This is cause:
  • Most ARM processors are not able to check themselves for being correct or backdoored.
  • Setup secure keymanagement is hard.
  • Keeping your appstore mirror up to date and controlled takes time.
  • Most devices have hardware drivers made once, never update, so known vernabilities are never really patched.
 
Last edited by JaapDaniels,
  • Like
Reactions: 4d1xlaan

JaapDaniels

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,204
Trophies
1
Age
40
Website
github.com
XP
2,483
Country
Netherlands
Well I do read your posts, it's just a lot to understand (and to reply to) all at once. Also, it'd help if I knew which parts (or to who) you're replying to.

To be fair, you were talking about Samsung devices and stock roms; and also seemed to like Exidous' reply, which was an introductory to security and privacy on Android.


Oh, is that so? I've been trying to do the opposite with Android. So what was it before?


The apps I tried were simple file managers that could internally manage VeraCrypt volumes, nothing system level. It's just a fallback in case your system didn't support encryption. At least now we know you have a Pixel phone (and GrapheneOS); I think that should take care of it.


That's one of the main questions here; what tools in particular?
I used the terminal and tools embedded in linux from the terminal (termux), android has a lot of linux functions still left in most cases.
But you need to have development tools activated and being the root of android to get all functions.
and i'm not sure it can be done on all android systems, just did it once on a really old phone of mine.
https://android.stackexchange.com/q...-partition-and-decrease-data-partition#216130
https://www.majordroid.com/resize-system-partition-android-without-twrp/
 
Last edited by JaapDaniels,

4d1xlaan

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2024
Messages
182
Trophies
0
XP
147
Country
United States
I've no idea why only Pixel phones support changing the root of trust and relocking the bootloader into yellow state. Other phones will just go red state when locking with custom OS.
because every other manufacturer is garbage

for what it's worth, other manufacturers regularly fail to even properly implement android security bulletin patches, and will actively lie to you about security patch level (yes, even smasnug)
 

JaapDaniels

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,204
Trophies
1
Age
40
Website
github.com
XP
2,483
Country
Netherlands
Oh via terminal emulator, that's really nifty. Did you manage to create a working encrypted partition? (Also, would it be possible to use it for Android full disk encryption, or perhaps to mount as an external storage?)
i never tried that step myself, but i think it should be possible, specially since there are phones available preset this way.
blackphone has this, Bittium has this...
 

Exidous

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
351
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
737
Country
United States
The only one in price range was a Pixel 4a with a tiny haircrack in the plastic frame at the edge; came from a reseller. Probably no warranty issues since Pixel phones can easily reverted to stock.
Ah, I got a 4a as well. On this side of the pond they sell gimped Pixels as well - if it's from a carrier (cheaper) rather than Google (full MSRP, but unlockable), it has an un-unlockable bootloader. I lucked out/accidentally cracked whatever idiotic code they use to block unlocking the bootloader on my carrier version. ...my cheapness transcends my paranoia and I wanted to pay no more than ~$100 for the absurdly overpowered corporate spying devices we apparently need to use to place phone calls these days. Thanks? Walmart.
I've no idea why only Pixel phones support changing the root of trust and relocking the bootloader into yellow state. Other phones will just go red state when locking with custom OS.
Money is why. Google pays (a bare minimum of) homage to the software license they are supposed to be bound to and permit you to kind of sort of modify Android (on only their flagship hardware, full price bullshit).

Everyone except Google that's selling Android devices has negligible financial incentive to permit end-user modification. Frankly, Google doesn't exactly have a 'financial' incentive to do it, I suspect it's more inertia, and a way to pay lip service to the supposedly open source software base they're supposedly built on.

Everyone except Google that's selling Android devices either makes no modifications (investing a minimum in software development) or makes modifications for their own user data resale business, which would be at minimum impeded by a custom ROM. Today, those non-Google Android phones that have unlockable bootloaders are more frequently accidents. And when users aren't supposed to unlock in the first place, why would there be a need to support relocking?

In the old days there was a not-insignificant enthusiast customer segment, who would prefer the phones that eased (let alone permitted) custom ROM installation. That's not a big enough slice of the pie anymore, from the perspective of smartphone manufacturers.

While I'm ranting, the entire smartphone market has become, to my eyes, economically deranged. A basic phone should be less than $100 and have, at most, a four inch screen. Instead, the market seems to demand to pay hundreds of dollars for something that will unerringly spy on them and can't even fit in a pocket. It's absurd.

I'm glad you're aware of the $5 wrench. It keeps us grounded while seeking grand security solutions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

Exidous

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
351
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
737
Country
United States
So you had a Pixel 4a before finding out about GrapheneOS? How lucky... albeit in 'end-of-life' support now. At least it has good custom ROM support.
No, last fall when I finally dragged myself to replace my last phone (OG Pixel), I started reading up on custom rom availability on the sorts of devices that were in my price tolerance. When I took the black friday deal for my current phone, I had already read up on the 4a. At puchase, I thought I had a high likelihood of being stuck with stock because it was a carrier model (disabled bootloader unlock), but if I got lucky when it carrier unlocked (thanks FTC merger agreement) after 60 days and also bootloader unlock I was expecting to use one of the xda custom roms.

I don't recall my exact reason for instead picking LineageOS when I indeed got lucky, but it may have had something to do with reading about GrapheneOS and feeling security-guilty about going with a random rom and installing Gapps.

So perhaps I salved my guilt a little by going with LineageOS and installing Gapps (over its whining).
 
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

4d1xlaan

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2024
Messages
182
Trophies
0
XP
147
Country
United States
for what it's worth, Pixel 4a has a bypass for secure element throttling which allows for bruteforcing of unlock pin, which will never be patched. this affects 2nd through 5th gen Pixels

graphene will eventually add 2fa pin for fingerprint unlock, which would allow you to use a long passphrase for first unlock and fingerprint + pin for regular use, but who knows if the end of life models will even get that update

(also lineage is a complete waste of a pixel, and a massive downgrade in security, but w/e you do you)

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/12...s-their-capabilities-and-how-grapheneos-fares
 
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

KleinesSinchen

GBAtemp's Backup Reminder + Fearless Testing Sina
OP
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
4,494
Trophies
2
XP
15,130
Country
Germany
more about understanding how you managed without the modern reliance on communication and other apps
That's an easy one. When I still has social contacts in real life I told people to contact me via E-mail. Take it or leave it.
As for forcing everyday life activity indirectly to smartphone usage: That's going to be a political rant, which will go into my blog. Started writing today. Don't know when it will be finished. Will take time.

This thread brought more than I dared to hope in my dreams.

From looking quickly through GrapheneOS in the last few days it does look convincing. I've yet to understand how it makes use of different keys (different user accounts) and how to make sure to unload encryption keys of specially protected profiles. For now I've only used one profile.

Biggest obvious problem is the attack surface offered by USB data connection. Despite Android defaulting to not expose data and only activating MTP after unlocking and manually selecting it, a phone still reports normally when plugging it into a PC. With journalctl -f this becomes obvious. The phone exposing itself voluntarily to the PC might also expose vulnerabilities.

Sentry solves that, but I still have the problem it disables Seedvault. No idea if this is
a) A bug in Sentry on supported devices or​
b) A bug in Seedvault or​
C) Intended behavior of Android when installing a device owner software.​

The commercial solutions in this regard offer way more options not needed and not wanted on a private device (remote access, surveillance, disabling app installation…). Sentry just diverts from the intended use of device owner app to allow enforcing very few things: Disable USB data and disable safe boot. Funny enough my tablet now says it is owned by my organization and I shall contact my administrator for further information. :rofl2: So for further information I have to contact myself?

If anybody got an unused stock device with Google services installed it would be nice if they would install Sentry as device owner, enter Google account afterwards (doesn't work the other way round – there must not be any accounts on the phone before setting a device owner app) and look it the Google (Drive) app backup gets disabled/removed.


XRY and Cellebrite and similar are one reason that got me into thinking about data security on mobile devices. A really sad approach that "the good guys" decided to abuse security holes "for protecting us from criminals and make prosecution possible." With rhetoric tricks anybody opposing these practices is associated with criminal activity themselves ("Do you have something to hide?" "Are you on the side of [very bad criminals]").
But don't you ever sell these tools to bad guys (Finfisher) that's totally not okay.

My private data is just that: Private. Do I have something to hide? Normally one would answer: "I don't think so.", but in the end you never know. After listening to an audio drama I searched the Wikipedia as the movie "Dirty Harry" was mentioned on that CD. After reading about the movie, I continued reading about the second leading role of that movie. With that I mean his oversized revolver. Without precautions like TOR/VPN and full disk encryption this would provide evidence I'm interested in firearms, maybe make somebody assume I want to get a powerful gun (or already did).
It is a trivial example how something simple and innocent can be suspicious when thinking like law enforcement, especially when law enforcement becomes questionable itself like it is the case right now. Such an information in search history can be a puzzle piece when you are suspected of a crime… while being innocent.

You never know what your computers might reveal. So yes, I got something to hide – without being a criminal.

Back to the technical topic. I've not the faintest idea how these forensic tools achieve becoming able to bruteforce anything. They must somehow have some kind of access just by plugging it in. This is why I want to disable USB data connection altogether like mentioned above.

graphene will eventually add 2fa pin for fingerprint unlock, which would allow you to use a long passphrase for first unlock and fingerprint + pin for regular use
Why is that not default since days one of fingerprint readers!? That would finally make these thing useful!
Fingerprint sensors are resistant against shoulder surfing and PINs are resistant against pushing your finger against the phone. In current implementations fingerprint is a convenience and not a security feature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4d1xlaan

Exidous

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
351
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
737
Country
United States
From looking quickly through GrapheneOS in the last few days it does look convincing. I've yet to understand how it makes use of different keys (different user accounts) and how to make sure to unload encryption keys of specially protected profiles. For now I've only used one profile.

I like Shelter https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.typeblog.shelter/, from your perspective as a baby blanket. It sounds like it similarly uses the built in Android (work) profiles function to sort-of sandbox apps. Maybe there's more discussion associated with that functionality as in that app? I don't know if GrapheneOS significantly altered the implementation of Android's profiles or if it's just utilizing them for functionality ala Shelter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

4d1xlaan

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2024
Messages
182
Trophies
0
XP
147
Country
United States
I like Shelter https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.typeblog.shelter/, from your perspective as a baby blanket. It sounds like it similarly uses the built in Android (work) profiles function to sort-of sandbox apps. Maybe there's more discussion associated with that functionality as in that app? I don't know if GrapheneOS significantly altered the implementation of Android's profiles or if it's just utilizing them for functionality ala Shelter.
the separation/sandboxing between a work profile and the user profile is not nearly as strong as using two separate profiles

for instance, work profile uses the same encryption as owner profile, while secondary profiles can be closed to put their data at rest

work profile can read some info from owner profile as well

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/605-apps-in-owner-profile-detect-play-services-in-work-profile/2

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/115-work-profile-vs-user-profile/4
 
Last edited by 4d1xlaan,
  • Like
Reactions: KleinesSinchen

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Did someone loose a leg? You're fired
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Ffs 55gb patch for hogwarts legacy
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    @K3Nv2, Teslas are prob running Windows XP to this day.
  • Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy:
    sometimes I wonder where I went wrong and why I'm so dissatisfied with my life
  • Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy:
    Then I find myself arguing with someone on reddit about how blatantly wrong their understanding of the USB Power Delivery specification is.
  • Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy:
    At 1 AM.
  • Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy:
    Where did I go wrong, again? 😕
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    @Sicklyboy, What do you mean?
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    @Sicklyboy, always blame women
  • Veho @ Veho:
    Blame woke.
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    Blame society.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Woke isn't part of society they woke up from it
    +1
  • Veho @ Veho:
    *spends years yelling "wake up sheeple"
    *acts shocked when they actually wake up
  • Veho @ Veho:
    Make up your mind.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    You mean the government doesn't care? :(
  • Veho @ Veho:
    I have no idea what you're talking about.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    The government
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Lol jedi fallen order crashed on SteamDeck through ea play guess the deck doesn't have the force
  • Veho @ Veho:
    Well it's called the "fallen" order, not the "stable" order.
  • Veho @ Veho:
    The "smooth running" order.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Guess they weren't lying about not being compatible
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Ea play is such hot garbage for making you register per console
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    Site's down again. :/
    SylverReZ @ SylverReZ: Site's down again. :/