Related
I have no idea where this needs to be posted. There are a number of different threads regarding this topic, and I know at least one of them are locked. So mods, feel free to move, delete or merge this as you see fit.
Google, via the Android Developers Blog, issued a statement a short while back. Here it is ...
A Note on Google Apps for Android
Posted by Dan Morrill on 25 September 2009 at 2:31 PM
Lately we've been busy bees in Mountain View, as you can see from the recent release of Android 1.6 to the open-source tree, not to mention some devices we're working on with partners that we think you'll really like. Of course, the community isn't sitting around either, and we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts. Recently there's been some discussion about an exchange we had with the developer of one of those builds, and I've noticed some confusion around what is and isn't part of Android's open source code. I want to take a few moments to clear up some of those misconceptions, and explain how Google's apps for Android fit in.
Everyone knows that mobile is a big deal, but for a long time it was hard to be a mobile app developer. Competing interests and the slow pace of platform innovation made it hard to create innovative apps. For our part, Google offers a lot of services — such as Google Search, Google Maps, and so on — and we found delivering those services to users' phones to be a very frustrating experience. But we also found that we weren't alone, so we formed the Open Handset Alliance, a group of like-minded partners, and created Android to be the platform that we all wished we had. To encourage broad adoption, we arranged for Android to be open-source. Google also created and operates Android Market as a service for developers to distribute their apps to Android users. In other words, we created Android because the industry needed an injection of openness. Today, we're thrilled to see all the enthusiasm that developers, users, and others in the mobile industry have shown toward Android.
With a high-quality open platform in hand, we then returned to our goal of making our services available on users' phones. That's why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google's way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren't open source, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best of intentions.
I hope that clears up some of the confusion around Google's apps for Android. We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom Android builds from developers who see a need. I look forward to seeing what comes next!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source:
http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2009/09/note-on-google-apps-for-android.html
Yep, it's over.
We're still asking for community access to these applications that are almost essential to the current Android experience. I really doubt it's hurting their bottom line substantially enough to justify the killing of their distribution.
In other words, Mr. Morrill's post was pretty much a sugarcoated attempt to gain some of the PR they lost.
We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom Android builds from developers who see a need.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A "novel" use from a developer who "sees a need" is quite a way to describe a substantially improved version of your OS.
So what is the conclusion? A lot of the things could be replaced, but as mentioned before, the sync tools and so forth are tricky to get around. What is the next step from here?
cyanogen said:
Yep, it's over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How so? What would be wrong with releasing the ROM without the google apps, but have a script or something that runs on first boot that installs the missing apps?
cyanogen said:
Yep, it's over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So no more ROMs? Or no more ROMs with close-source apps?
AquaVita said:
How so? What would be wrong with releasing the ROM without the google apps, but have a script or something that runs on first boot that installs the missing apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's still illegal. A clever trick to walk around the legal fine print. But in essence, it's illegal...
AquaVita said:
How so? What would be wrong with releasing the ROM without the google apps, but have a script or something that runs on first boot that installs the missing apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Without the basic function to sign into the device using your Google credentials, the ROM is useless. You can't just grab them from another build (as far as I know) because of the way they are tied in at compiling to the framework. So you would have to pull the ROM, grab the proprietary pieces from somewhere else, and compile the source yourself.
Right?
To touch on this in another way, what would it take for Cyanogen to become a licensed distributor of Google's Apps for Android? If there are really 30,000 users, couldn't legal fees be gathered from them? And, couldn't the business license be set up as a Not-For-Profit? Like the Association of Cyanogen Followers? If it were, wouldn't the required fees to license the distribution rights of the software be tax-free and operating expenses for the association? Meaning, any costs for running the business could be taken out of membership dues and donations? With the rest being tax write-offs?
Just a thought, as I would love to see this made legit, 4.0.4 is great, but I don't want this to stop here.... selfish I know, but it's the truth.
AquaVita said:
How so? What would be wrong with releasing the ROM without the google apps, but have a script or something that runs on first boot that installs the missing apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guees thats no way. What if you have a wipe? No APNs or anything else? You cant dowmload "Market" als a single-app directly from google (as i know).
daveid said:
Without the basic function to sign into the device using your Google credentials, the ROM is useless. You can't just grab them from another build (as far as I know) because of the way they are tied in at compiling to the framework. So you would have to pull the ROM, grab the proprietary pieces from somewhere else, and compile the source yourself.
Right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then what the hell is google talking about "encouraging other ROM releases"? If that isn't possible without some pieces of Google software, then is it literally impossible to develop a custom ROM for android?
Thoughts, Cyanogen?
As soon as my contract is I am Too! I can predict a mass exit from android and google!
daveid said:
Without the basic function to sign into the device using your Google credentials, the ROM is useless. You can't just grab them from another build (as far as I know) because of the way they are tied in at compiling to the framework. So you would have to pull the ROM, grab the proprietary pieces from somewhere else, and compile the source yourself.
Right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this true? If its proprietary how did CY compile them in the first place? In order to compile don't you need access to the source?
So just come up with replacements for those apps that are closed source and not available on the market...
Devs WILL find a way... I guarantee you
But yeah, Google SUCKS on this...They could have just given him limited licensing...
Without a doubt the most foolish decision I've seen Google make in terms of Android so far. This puts a major damper on a community that was helping make Android better in very real ways.
The only explanation I can come up with is that the closed apps use 3rd party licensed code that Google can't redistribute. Otherwise this is just completely boneheaded.
Google said:
With a high-quality open platform in hand, we then returned to our goal of making our services available on users' phones. That's why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google's way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren't open source, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best of intentions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They claim these apps (YouTube, Gmail, etc) are Googles way to benefiting from Android, but they are not distributed with all android phones? I understand that companies license these applications from Google, but how does it hurt them if they are installed on a device that would already have them?
Then they say "We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market", yet this entire thing came about because the Android Market is being distributed? How can any device get these if the market is one thing that can not be distributed?
I paid for the ADP1, which came with Gmail, YouTube and the other applications. The ADP1 feature was that I could flash any ROM I wanted to on the device, but now they are telling me that I can't put one on there if it contains their applications that my device had in the first place.
Hello Google, welcome to the the Dark side, so much for "Don't be evil"
I will help with anything I can on a project to replace the Google Products.
AquaVita said:
How so? What would be wrong with releasing the ROM without the google apps, but have a script or something that runs on first boot that installs the missing apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ya i was thinking the same .i mean if not ,how do we get gmail ,youtube,ect?do we have to download from market ? some are not in market like youtube.i use gmail all the time .
Do the current Roms have to pulled?
That shiny device with an Apple on it is looking mighty delicious
CyanogenMod officially done now:
http://twitter.com/cyanogen
"Sorry everyone, CyanogenMod in it's current state is done. I am violating Google's license by redistributing their applications."
dwang said:
Is this true? If its proprietary how did CY compile them in the first place? In order to compile don't you need access to the source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had assumed that they were "reverse-engineered" using something like baksmali, to gain access to the source.... I could be wrong.
I came across this article while surfing the internet. I wanted to share this with you guys, and see what your feelings were on this.
"Mobile Device Security and Android File Disclosure
Back in November, Thomas Cannon brought to light an issue within the Android operating system. Specifically, he found that it was possible to obtain the contents of files on an Android device by simply persuading its owner to visit a web site under attacker control. The issue only garners a 3.5 CVSS score, but yet it’s still fairly serious.
Thomas reported this issue responsibly to Google and they took it seriously. However, since then they have come back with a ridiculous remediation plan. Granted, its probably not entirely Google’s fault, but the overall situation looks very bleak for Android.
The problem is that Google stated that a fix will be available as part of an update to the upcoming Android 2.3. While that, in itself, may not be totally ridiculous, the reality of the situation is that Google is only one party involved in Android. There are two other groups, namely OEMs and Carriers, that must also do their part in getting the fix to users. Although Android devices are becoming increasingly functional, the security posture remains abysmal.
The security posture for desktop applications has improved vastly with all of the sand-boxing, automatic updates, and various other exploit mitigation technologies. Meanwhile, Android includes almost none of existing security protections. In fact, mobile users are being left out in the cold, unable to get a patch for a trivially exploitable cross-zone issue. For that matter, they can’t even control whether their device’s browser automatically downloads files or not.
This situation is not news, rather it is a sad fact. It is totally unfair for end users to be left out to fend for themselves. After all, they are paying a small fortune for these devices and the service to be able to use them. Hopefully the vendors involved will wake up before a network worm outbreak occurs.
Originally, Thomas disclosed the details of his bug on his blog. Later, he removed some details to help protect users. I believe that responsible disclosure is a two-way street that requires responsibility on both sides. Since Google, OEMs, and carriers all continue to act irresponsibly, it is necessary bring more attention to this issue and the situation as a whole.
I spent a little time and managed to recreate the issue with nothing more than HTML and JavaScript. As of today, I have released a Metasploit module to take advantage of the flaw. It is available in the latest copy of our Framework product, or you can view the source via the link to our Redmine project tracker above.
Before I go deeper into the consequence of this bug, I want to point out that Thomas outlined several workarounds for this vulnerability in his blog.
Now, take a deep breath give some thanks to the fact that, under Android, most every process runs under a separate, confined, unix-style user account. This design feature partially mitigates this issue, lowering confidentiality impact to “Partial” and bringing the CVSS score from 5 to 3.5. That said, an attacker can still gain access to some pretty interesting stuff.
For starters, an attacker can steal any world-readable file. In my tests it was possible to get potentially sensitive information from the within the “proc” file system. This type of information could include kernel versions, addresses, or configuration that can be used enhance further attacks.
Also, you can snarf any files that are used by the browser itself. This includes bookmarks, history, and likely more. This kind of information could potentially be embarrassing or possibly even give an attacker access to any saved passwords or session cookies you might have stored.
Perhaps the easiest win though, is that you can grab anything off of the SD card. You might ask, “Anything?! What about the user separation?” Well, because the SD card has been formatted with the “vfat” (aka “fat32”) file system, there is no concept of ownership. All files are owned by the same user id since the file system itself cannot encapsulate who created which file. As Thomas said, files in the SD card that have predictable names are ripe for the picking. This includes pictures and movies. These may in fact be some of the most private data on your device.
In conclusion, I hope that the Android security debacle will get resolved as soon as possible. If Google, OEMs, and carriers can’t work it out, perhaps another party will step in to maintain the operating system. I believe this could be very similar to the way various Linux distributions operate today. If the situation is not resolved, I fear the Android device pool could become a seething cesspool of malicious code..."
Here is the address
http://blog.metasploit.com/2011/01/mobile-device-security-and-android-file.html
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Shocking. Thanks for the info.
Nice find. You are right that oems and manufactures need to stay on top to mantain security. Hopefully meaningful post like this will make users aware of the possible dangers of the internet, data, and phone usage
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
Ouch. Wish Android updates were like iOS..
Android is open, one of the main assumptions is that there is no single company, which controls it. I could create my own phone with Android, sell it to people and give them no support at all - Google can't do anything about it.
There is only one solution to this problem: people have to choose their phones wisely. People look at phone specs, at CPU, RAM, camera, but they ignore future support and openess. Recently Motorola has stated they will lock bootloaders in their future phones. People will go for these phones anyway and then they will complain they can't do anything with some horrible bugs, they will complain about Android and Google, but they should complain about Motorola and themselves. While Nexus S owners will have same bugs fixed by both Google and community.
Choose your phones wisely.
SD with vfat...good catch. Horrible bug while many users trying to move their apps to SD. And maybe 80-90% of the apps in the market require modify SD card perm? Horrible. Verizon SGS is screwed since that phone have little internal and lots of external SD.
I'm so glad you guys came across this thread, and it didn't get lost in all the other threads. I hope some of the devs see it. Can a fix be implemented at the Rom or kernal level?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Hi.
I recently came across some chinese / asian websites which kang / modify and release a diversity of roms.
I'm not specifying sources / which roms are, this is a general announcement to be careful with what we download & flash into our devices, and why ?
I flashed in order to test some of these roms (not the sense 5 kang tho), since I work in network security, I had noticed on our firewall logs when my mobile connected through the wifi, a bunch of UDP requests / DNS queries to russian websites. This can be used to botnets, DoS, even malware / spam propagation (a diversity of not cool stuff, basically).
A colegue of mine which also has a 'droid had once an app which sent repeatedly ICMP requests in "not random" but specific hours / intervals, he asked me to test his rom which he downloaded and flashed from "another" website, and I confirmed the suspicious behavior. There was established connections to foreigner addresses through a diversity of protocols, data being sent / received and at times, a udp flood directed to specific addresses. This is bad, my friends.
We don't know what these roms have inside, what's their mechanism besides the standard transparent operations which most of us are familiar with, and they could be very well used to do illegal things which I guaranty we don't want to be part of.
Flashing a rom, connecting through 3G or Wifi, and then our mobile is now part of a botnet which participates without our knowledge on such illegal operations is just one of the things that could happen. Phishing is also very possible - in other hand, a lot of things are possible without our knowledge and consent. We don't want this do we ?
The last Rom which I have experienced this, the link was removed and is no longer online. So i'm not pointing URL's / Rom names because this is something that each one of us has to be careful about.
Fortunately we have ways to detect / avoid / remove and make sure our device is used only for us and does only what we "tell" it to do.
We can use this thread to report such roms (since they're not published on xda, we can only warn each other and be aware) and applications that have malicious content.
I'll also be updating this thread with methods, applications for android to detect malware / suspicious activities (I'm not going into depth like using a sniffer or protocol / packet analyzer (although we can) I'll try to keep as simple as possible.
Suggestions, reports are very welcome and should be reported here. We can use this thread to protect our droids and help each other making our devices secure.
This post has the intention of protecting ourselfs, but privacy tips / applications are also welcome. Be careful tho, would be ironic to suggest an app to protect user privacy and in the end the app itself sends private data to GodKnowsWhere.
To be continued / Updated Soon.
List of Applications to monitor / analyze traffic:
Netstat Professional - Allows you to see what connections your android has established. Allows whois info, Real time IP / Port and status information (pretty much like netstat -an), and what service is running / port information.
Wi.cap. Network Sniffer - Much like a network protocol analyzer / network sniffer. This neat app allows you to see what connections are estabilished / protocol / status / analyze packets. If there's a connection estabilished - it will be listed. [Root needed]
Shark for Root - Traffic sniffer for 3G & Wifi (supports FroYo tethered mode too). Records traffic which later you can open with WireShark. To preview you can use Shark Reader.
List of Applications fo scan for malware.
Coming Soon...
Procedures to discover / analyze / report malware / suspicious behaviours and such.
Coming Soon...
Post reserved for procedures which will include:
- Common Sense
- How a malware works (the term malware is used to include viruses, trojans, custom scripts and apps.
- What to look for / suspicious behavior which you should pay attention to (also included in Common Sense).
- Basic tools to detect / analyze / remove malware.
More to come.
Sent from my HTC Z710e using xda premium
Generally, i suggest to use ROMs from XDA only, except for CM/MIUI official website. The risk is real! Thanks to @MidnightDevil for his help and his time
I suggest to read this thread to all the users!
XxXPachaXxX said:
Generally, i suggest to use ROMs from XDA only, except for CM/MIUI official website. The risk is real! Thanks to @MidnightDevil for his help and his time
I suggest to read this thread to all the users!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your support
If anyone has suggestions / knowledge about this sort of matter please share
There's a LOT of info that I tend to post on this thread in a way to educate / share knowledge with everyone.
Trusting the developers and sources is the first step for prevention. Be careful with dodgy websites and roms which you don't know about.
Scanning the rom zip file with a virus scanner is useless in this matter.
Unknown Rom
The threat is over when a secure rom is installed (after using a none xda rom) ??
MidnightDevil said:
Thank you for your support
If anyone has suggestions / knowledge about this sort of matter please share
There's a LOT of info that I tend to post on this thread in a way to educate / share knowledge with everyone.
Trusting the developers and sources is the first step for prevention. Be careful with dodgy websites and roms which you don't know about.
Scanning the rom zip file with a virus scanner is useless in this matter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
phearell said:
The threat is over when a secure rom is installed (after using a none xda rom) ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So far there isn't malware which persists after full wipe. Can't speak of the contents of the sdcard tho. But usually yes. But then you have the apk's which can contain malicious code and so forth...
Those apps are usually banned from the PlayStore, but there's a short window between published / report / removed from Store which users can download it.
Unless I didn't understood your post
MidnightDevil said:
So far there isn't malware which persists after full wipe. Can't speak of the contents of the sdcard tho. But usually yes. But then you have the apk's which can contain malicious code and so forth...
Those apps are usually banned from the PlayStore, but there's a short window between published / report / removed from Store which users can download it.
Unless I didn't understood your post
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK google also scan apps installed on the device. When installing a 3rd party app (not via Google Play), you get a prompt to allow google to scan it anyway for malicious content.
Also, there are a couple of anti-virus apps available from well known companies such Avast for android, and also from AVG.
I never really tried those, but they might help protecting your device. However I doubt if they scan system apps/services, for in most cases they are supposed to be safe (from the OEM itself).
It is well known that the biggest security hole is the user. So the best thing to do is to keep away from unknown ROMs/sources.
astar26 said:
AFAIK google also scan apps installed on the device. When installing a 3rd party app (not via Google Play), you get a prompt to allow google to scan it anyway for malicious content.
Also, there are a couple of anti-virus apps available from well known companies such Avast for android, and also from AVG.
I never really tried those, but they might help protecting your device. However I doubt if they scan system apps/services, for in most cases they are supposed to be safe (from the OEM itself).
It is well known that the biggest security hole is the user. So the best thing to do is to keep away from unknown ROMs/sources.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No doubt the biggest flaw usually comes from the end user.
But answering your statemente about anti viruses.
Usually anti viruses (specially in portable devices) act base upon a database of known signatures and suspicious behavior. They provide no protection against a custom developed script or code with a work-around for this behavior. Basically - avoids behaving like a malware.
A code is considered malicious when acts upon suspicious behavior (for example, on windows - when an app registers itself on registry autorun / startup folders / tries to load a file on temp directory / temporary internet files, hooks itself into a process / uses a windows process to deliver it's payload faking a signature, etc etc). Knowing this, any custom app / script that avoids suspicious behavior / does not have a present signature on a AV database and a few more details - all doors are "open" and is a highway to hell.
Google scan engine uses the same mechanism, in fact, I'm not even sure if it has any sort of protection against suspicious behavior as it only executes upon apk install.
Believe me, the biggest flaw is the user as the best protection is also a well educated user. It's a matter of knowing what can do and what should avoid. Fear or suspicion is an important thing these days, as they prevent us from making mistakes as installing an app from a dodgy site. We should know better.
MidnightDevil said:
No doubt the biggest flaw usually comes from the end user.
But answering your statemente about anti viruses.
Usually anti viruses (specially in portable devices) act base upon a database of known signatures and suspicious behavior. They provide no protection against a custom developed script or code with a work-around for this behavior. Basically - avoids behaving like a malware.
A code is considered malicious when acts upon suspicious behavior (for example, on windows - when an app registers itself on registry autorun / startup folders / tries to load a file on temp directory / temporary internet files, hooks itself into a process / uses a windows process to deliver it's payload faking a signature, etc etc). Knowing this, any custom app / script that avoids suspicious behavior / does not have a present signature on a AV database and a few more details - all doors are "open" and is a highway to hell.
Google scan engine uses the same mechanism, in fact, I'm not even sure if it has any sort of protection against suspicious behavior as it only executes upon apk install.
Believe me, the biggest flaw is the user as the best protection is also a well educated user. It's a matter of knowing what can do and what should avoid. Fear or suspicion is an important thing these days, as they prevent us from making mistakes as installing an app from a dodgy site. We should know better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just remembered of an app called "Who is tracking" (was featured on the portal a while ago), that also scans system files (bloatware) and tells you which app tracks you. tried using it a while ago, but didn'y really try to understand it, and it seems to have changed since. will try it myself.
Agreed with Patcha, unless you 100% trust the source (CM/MIUI are well known and if they did something untrustworthy a massive ****storm would ensue) then I would stick to ROM's posted on XDA (though frankly I avoid MIUI out of moral principle #SouceCodeMuch?). Anything untrustworthy that is posted on XDA is picked up very quickly and dealt with effectively.
More to come from me on this, I need to organize what I want to say so it doesn't sound like a mad persons ramblings
Edit: A thing to look out for in google play store is the permissions, READ THEM, read what they mean, read what permissions the app requests and if you don't know why an app needs that permission or if it looks dodgy (like the permission to send sms messages without the user knowing) then for God's sake don't use the app util you've found out what the app needs that permission for (quick google search or email to the developer). Don't just blindly agree to all the permissions without reading them.
These permissions are declared by the developer in the Android_manifest.xml file and pulled from there when publishing the app on play store. As far as I am aware, there is no way to fool this system - you can't edit the visible permissions through the developer panel of play store, only by editing the manifest - I have a developer account on play store so this I am 100% sure on.
Yup, very true. Something I forgot to mention earlier and is VERY important.
Always check the permissions and what for the permissions are used. Some good developers write what for they need the permissions. Some things are obvious, others not so quite.
Also reading the comments of an app helps as well. More experienced users tend to write a more complete review and sometimes they draw the attention to things that sometimes other users miss. About permissions or anything else.
Any user can write a review, so if you find something important, you can also write in the review. Just make sure you don't underrate an app because of a doubt
Usually developers also have their contact email in case of doubts, it can be used to to bring some things to light.
Ive been through the entire security forum. Must say till a little raw but it will mature hopefully. Still a lot of noobs talking and no serious dev talk. Im not a developer but I have done some research esp on encryption systems and keep myself updated with the loopholes in various apps. Until such time when they do join in I think it would be a good idea (esp if the higher-level know-its) would share their list of apps they use for their everyday functioning and especially how you currently protect yourself best against unwarranted attacks to the types other forums are talking about.
My list is:
K-9 mail : for email. I use APG with that though im still not convinced its worth it cause the keys would be a easy to 'reverse engineer' as you can easily detect the device you use to send the mail and thus an estimate of the computing power essentially showing them the narrow range of prime numbers in which the key could have been generated. But you would need to be a dedicated target for that. Plus its open-source and very popular.
Xprivacy: its good for apps with too many unnecessary permissions but it wont protect you against intruder attacks.
network connections: just switched over to this from wire shark. Still undergoing testing. But it tell you the current internet connections and seem promising. You can block the suspicious IPs using xposed framework called peerblock (look into the xposed mod index). Needless to say but I think blacklisting google would be perhaps make you life considerably old-fashioned esp if your plugging the google 'backdoor' access they provide to 'he-who-shall-not-be-named' organizations.
Browser: im using the native AOSP browser. Firefox would be a better alternative in my opinion to chrome or others. I wish we had chromium for android.
Quickpic: using it instead of the native gallery after i found that it was connecting to the internet.
Calander: using the native AOSP calander but deleted the calander sync cause i try to avoid relying on google too much. selectively Denied internet permission.
ES file manager: a very complete tool. root explorer with checksum built-in. denied internet permissions.
TextSecure : Using this for standard texting because it seems to offer more encryption that any other texting app at the moment. Plus its going to be the default messaging app in Cyanogen ROMs in the future. Offers One-Time-Pad system encryption which is encryption theoretically secure (what that means for the common man is that this encryption is the only one that has stood the test of time to be unbreakable of used properly. All other encryption systems rely on the fact that the decrypting systems used to 'crack' the encryption lag behind the algorithms. Lets hope the devs did implement it properly)
Remove Google from CM10+ ROMs : http://www.xda-developers.com/android/remove-the-google-from-cyanogenmod-with-freecygn/
"Not every user particularly cares for Google’s proprietary bits and its tendency to put them everywhere. As such, XDA Senior Member MaR-V-iN has created a script to clear out Google proprietary binaries from all CM10+ ROMs. Freecyngn disassembles the CyanogenMod settings app and replaces Google Analytics library with the free NoAnalytics. The whole process doesn’t break the Settings app, and turns your device into one that is Google-free"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks to @SecUpwN for the site: www.prism-break.org As you will see by visiting this site its not secure but just a list of more open-source projects.
I dont use a lot of google products like gmail or chrome or maps but i would like to minus the uneasiness that i have using it. And i dont use public wifi at all. The great things in life are hardly ever free!
Needless to say but i use CM 10.1 since its well developed and open-source. Looking forward to omniROM by chainfire and other great devs. I do believe we need some serious stenographic programs for android because encryption alone is not the way to go. Maybe they will take this more seriously. This remains a work in progress. As always hit thanks if it helps.
CM is now for profit. It's CyanogenMOD Inc. Anyway, this is a pretty naive approach, IMHO. You want to keep something secret you can't tell technology about it. Check out "Schneier on Security."
where did you download "network connections" from?
@aejazhaq: See www.prism-break.org!
runwithme said:
where did you download "network connections" from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I downloaded it when the dev was giving the pro version free for a limited time to XDA members. How ever its available on the play store...https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.antispycell.connmonitor&hl=en
SecUpwN said:
@aejazhaq: See www.prism-break.org!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes i cam across that just a week ago. It seems to me as my knowledge progress' that the apps available are just to keep the selective data eg your mails private if you use APG with that. @pan.droid I think anything on your device is still as vulnerable as can be honestly and don't think, at least as of now that you can protect your data on you device with any satisfactory means, at least not yet. I'm interested in stenographic means more now than ever because I think encryption alone wont cut it esp keys generated on the phone; the prime numbers needed for a foreseeable future (3+ yrs) protection are elusive on the phone, perhaps the PC can do a better job, but again with its fallacies esp with emails being stored in the cloud permanently means that there's an expiration date on such material you choose to share. And given it lacks forward secrecy and anyone using PGP in emails is definitely shouting encrypted msgs being transmitted perhaps arousing more suspension and the subsequent package.
Thus I do agree the list is currently very naive but perhaps the best we can do at the moment. Thats why I'll leave people to share their opinions on this because this is perhaps an ongoing discussion.
I'm really interested in a contacts replacement. I hate the new style google version but I don't trust ANYTHING free from the app store. They all download your contacts!
You didn't mention AFWall+, the iptables firewall I consider instrumental in blocking most phone home attempts.
SecUpwN said:
@aejazhaq: See www.prism-break.org!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, pretty great site!
pan.droid said:
Actually, pretty great site!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome. If you're interested in security projects, have a look!
I'd totally jump on board with that, but all I have is a WI-FI tablet, ATM. Great activist project for anyone serious about security.
pan.droid said:
I'd totally jump on board with that, but all I have is a WI-FI tablet, ATM. Great activist project for anyone serious about security.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sadly, our project is missing real security enthusiasts and DEVELOPERS. Do you know anyone I should get in touch with?
I use "Keepass2Android Offline" to manage my passwords. This "offline" version removes Internet access permissions which I consider essential for security of my database.
Hello all! I'm sure most of you are familiar with Google Play Services, the base of Google's Android framework and the brains behind all the Google things you do on your phone. Less of you, however, might also know that Play Services is notorious for being a beast of an application that no one truly knows the function of.
Below here is a rough explanation of Play Services from what I know about it. You can skip this if you already know and move on to the bread and butter of this post.
Play Services is proprietary software, meaning that its source code is not available to the public. All of Google's apps are proprietary like this as well. While developers like Chainfire have legitimate reasons to close off their app source code so others don't steal it, and so does Google, it is extra worrying from a company that makes a profit off of collecting userdata. Many people, including me, do not trust Google with our data, so we try to avoid their products as much as possible.
I thought that it would be nice to create a megathread of sorts with various users' suggestions on how to subvert the constant surveillance of Play Services, while also attempting to maintain the useful functionality of it. Below are some of the primary methods that I have thought of, and that I and some others have tried:
LineageOS/CyanogenMod Privacy Guard - If you are using LineageOS or any derivative thereof, you can go to Privacy Guard and deny certain permissions from Play Services. I and another user have denied permissions from Play Services without side effects, but your mileage may vary. @javelinanddart said on Reddit that Privacy Guard does indeed block permissions from Play Services and other system apps, so rest assured that Privacy Guard actually does something rather than being a placebo.
XPrivacyLua - This is an Xposed module that feeds false data to apps rather than blocking it entirely. I haven't tried this method myself, but the XDA post I linked above reports that XPrivacyLua works, even in tandem with Privacy Guard.
microG - microG is an open-source alternative to Play Services. It emulates many key functions of Play Services - push notifications, location services, etc - without the data collection running alongside such functionality. To clarify, this is a full replacement for Play Services, so you would flash a microG package instead of a GApps package. There are lots of bugs, though, even admitted by the developer. If you want to learn more, I suggest you visit the XDA thread for it, or view the implementation progress for various pieces of functionality.
There is nothing else that I know of, so if anybody knows of another viable method or can provide their own experiences with the above ones, your contributions would be appreciated by me and the rest of the privacy community.
Thanks for thread.
My only reason to use custom ROM is because they are GApps-free. In nearly every other aspect stock ROMs are better. Phones without good custom ROM I simply setup without Google account and install f-droid and yalp stores.
Another idea:
Imagine: Google is not as evil as we think: there are many privacy related settings in your Google account. You can login with a web browser and try through all these settings - and hope.
Device is a Samsung i9305 with RR-N-v5.8.5-final, Magisk v16.0, XPosed, XPrivacyLua, microG (via NanoDroid). No genuine Google services; Google Play Store is the one and only Google application installed.
I hope it suits into this thread (thanks very much for creating it!), and I'd like to share my settings. Please refer to the screenshots; I think it's self-explaining where they where taken from.
Actually no restrictions to microG, only to Play Store.
Remarks: µG has no restrictions in the firewall (AFWall+ Donation Beta); Play Store only granted internet access via WiFi and VPN. Just for completeness; running a RaspberryPi in the home network with Pi-Hole installed and acting as the DNS-server in the network. Unless using the home network i.e. using a foreign WiFi network or mobile data, ALWAYS establishing my own secure VPN to my RaspberryPi (with PiVPN installed) via OpenVPN and again the Pi acting as the DNS-server. If interested in further details please refer to this thread.
Thanks for this.
I was considering asking for a forum section here devoted to privacy, but it doesn't seem like a popular subject here. (After all, most of the people who have already picked the most snoopery OS in the world could be assumed to be not particularly worried about privacy. ? )
I come from a different motivation: the hope that by using a somewhat hackable OS, one can theoretically modify it in ways to achieve one's objectives, including privacy. But the last few years have made it rather clear that the Big G is working determinedly to foil such efforts.
Lately that seems to take the form of pushing more and more essential services into the Gplay frameworks, and deprecating perfectly working things like GCM in favor of intertwining it with Firebase, which may saddle us with that analytics data vacuum in order to get another essential service, push notifications.
Re: revoking permissions from Gplay frameworks, I feel like Google's determination to get their hands on data by hook or by crook (eg their ignoring of user preferences to disable various radios and enabling them in the background anyway, to track location and such) means they will quite possibly circumvent these preferences at some point as well.
As I mentioned in another thread I've experienced various problems in the past when I tried to aggressively restrict perms on the Gplay services using CM/LOS Privacy Guard, but perhaps some of that came from choosing interactive restriction prompts rather than blanket revoking. I do know that so many essential services are tied-into the Gplay frameworks these days that blocking tons of perms will inevitably cause breakage of some things depending how you use your device.
Jrhotrod said:
...
There is nothing else that I know of, so if anybody knows of another viable method or can provide their own experiences with the above ones, your contributions would be appreciated by me and the rest of the privacy community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Due to your request above, please allow me to draw your attention to two threads by me. In these threads I tried about one and a half year ago to initially capture but also to update how I believe to have enhanced the battery duration, privacy and security of my GT-i9305 and how I went for a GApps-free device with microG.
Over the time until today, some of the described implementations, applications and measures became absolete or were replaced by others (e.g. using NanoDroid - or Nanomod as it was called in the beginning, since it has come out). Some changes occured due to the step from Marshmellow to Nougat or the non-availabilty of the official Xposed framework for Nougat in the very beginning. However, over all the time I've tried to maintain both threads updated and amended but currently not to much occuring on that frontline, probably because I've received a privacy status on our devices that obviously satisfies me in my personal opinion.
Oswald Boelcke said:
Due to your request above, please allow me to draw your attention to two threads by me. In these threads I tried about one and a half year ago to initially capture but also to update how I believe to have enhanced the battery duration, privacy and security of my GT-i9305 and how I went for a GApps-free device with microG.
Over the time until today, some of the described implementations, applications and measures became absolete or were replaced by others (e.g. using NanoDroid - or Nanomod as it was called in the beginning, since it has come out). Some changes occured due to the step from Marshmellow to Nougat or the non-availabilty of the official Xposed framework for Nougat in the very beginning. However, over all the time I've tried to maintain both threads updated and amended but currently not to much occuring on that frontline, probably because I've received a privacy status on our devices that obviously satisfies me in my personal opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, this is really great! Very high-quality thread.
Will add to OP later today
I apologise for the double post (original in my thread here) but I guess it also suits in this thread.
Found the below quoted post by @jawz101 in the XPrivacyLua thread here. Pretty interesting, and therefore I like to share:
Looking around on Data Transparency Lab website http://datatransparencylab.org/ - they fund grants for research in privacy stuff.
...I found an app called AntMonitor, an academic research project that does a MITM SSL cert + local VPN to look at sensitive traffic - even that which is encrypted. https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...it2.anteatermo
Anyways, it shows some apps trying to send my gps coordinates even though it doesn't have Android permission. Like, my coordinates are actually attempting to be sent encrypted to a destination. XPrivacyLUA doesn't trigger so I can only assume they grab my coordinates in a way that circumvents the traditional Android permission model.
To test, just try the app and open a few apps. I think it's apps with the Facebook graph API that is maybe doing it.
If you like ANTMonitor another app that does an SSL cert+ VPN is Lumen Privacy Monitor- a project by Berkely, but it doesn't seem to detect raw coordinates like ANTMonitor does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
However, I suggest to also follow the discussion/conversation between jawz101 and M66B, which has developed after this post.
Oswald Boelcke said:
Found the below quoted post by @jawz101 in the XPrivacyLua thread here. Pretty interesting, and therefore I like to share:
However, I suggest to also follow the discussion/conversation between jawz101 and M66B, which has developed after this post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is certainly an important discovery, thanks for the news.
Now for the sidenote that's 10x longer than the main comment. ?
One of the key issues I have with the various "privacy tools" is trying to figure out whether or not I trust all these entities that produce these diagnostic things to not be a solution worse than the problem when it comes to possessing and safeguarding my sensitive personal data.
It's getting to the point where I'm no longer enamored of giving *anyone* access to such stuff if I can help it, no matter *who* they are.
Even if they're not lying about their intentions and their commitment to security/privacy, there are still matters like carelessness/incompetence and targeted attacks to worry about.
@Exabyter: You're statement and expressed concerns are abolutely correct. Nothing to add except that I wouldn't limit it to "privacy tools" but especially include all applications that require root (and get it granted by the user) or all Magisk and Xposed modules. The latter should definitely concern.
My personal decision:
I'm not willing to trust anybody from the very beginning but I'm willing to trust single persons, groups or agencies. I've developed my own, private criteria, to which I stick but I've also admit the final decision isn't always based on rationality but also a lot on my feeling (in my stomage).
I don't held any confidential data on my device but privacy related ones, and I don't use my device for any kind of banking, shopping or payments.
I consider to use tools, modules and applications if their functionality rests within my defined specifications for the use of my device. Then I go for "the shopping tour" while I try to look into the details of the tools under closer examination, which includes where is it from, who's the developer etc.
I'll continue with the measures already described in one of my threads.
Oswald - I think we have largely similar stances on such things. In my case I will sometimes sway towards the pragmatic over the pedantic when the pedantic involves so many inconveniences that the tech becomes more of a burden than a help to me.
For example, I really don't like the idea of 3rd-parties keeping data pertaining to my daily geographic movements, but I also use several tools and services that by their nature rely on location data which could in some cases end up in the hands of parties I'd rather didn't have access to it. So I have to regularly weigh the apparent cost/benefit of such services and there are certainly some of them which have a high enough value to me that I willingly lower my default "protection level" in order to keep the other benefits of such tools/services.
Certainly microG is an important tool in that toolchest as it has a major disruptive impact on some of the most common ways Google and other parties snoop on users. But some of its imperfections also threaten to keep me from my ultimate goal of carrying a single phone which performs all the tasks I need to accomplish with it without undermining my privacy in a major way. (And ultimately, my freedom and agency as a citizen in a nominally and allegedly "free and democratic society", which is the actual "big picture" problem with privacy incursions in general IMHO)
I have spent several years now, with varying degrees of effort and success, trying to come up with a hardware/software solution to this problem, and I've never reached a point where I'm fully satisfied with the results. The fact that I am still carrying several mobile devices with me everyday is proof enough that I haven't achieved my objective in this regard and it gets tiring. As does all the time spent on venues such as XDA, researching, discussing and keeping-up with all the relevant issues, not to mention the large amount of time spent tinkering with HW/SW in order to keep all the special measures working. (And after we finally get things working more or less the way we want, we are faced with the particularly customized hardware wearing out, becoming unsupported, 3rd-party ROM and other compatible and necessary software being abandoned/deprecated, and so on and so forth.)
Truth to tell I'm a bit bitter about the amount of time/energy I have to spend to achieve something which should have been part of the mobile platforms in the first place. The current de-facto mobile platform duopoly certainly doesn't help matters.
---------- Post added at 03:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:57 PM ----------
Now that I've gotten that philosophical rant out of the way ? ...
So as far as technical specifics:
microG of course is a big help as it either neuters or removes many troublesome anti-privacy vectors. For example, at the present time it does not support Firebase Analytics at all, which means (as far as I can tell) any app that expects to get telemetry on users via Firebase Analytics will not get anything if the app user's device is Gapps-free and using microG instead. (It remains to be seen if adding Firebase Cloud Messaging capability to microG will negate this presumed benefit. Cynics like myself are inclined to think one of Google's key objectives in deprecating Google Cloud Messaging and rolling push notification frameworks into Firebase instead was specifically to undermine the ability of users to avoid/circumvent Firebase Analytics)
XprivacyLUA looks interesting and is on my list to test. I found its predecessor Xprivacy to be an extremely tedious and labor-intensive option so I never seriously pursued it after my initial testing.
There are various tools I find handy to help get a sense of how dangerous certain apps may be to privacy. Here are a few:
AppBrain Ad Detector
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appspot.swisscodemonkeys.detector
Addons Detector
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.denper.addonsdetector
Checkey (also on f-droid)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=info.guardianproject.checkey
Applications Info (also on f-droid)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.majeur.applicationsinfo
Permission Friendly Apps
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.androidsoft.app.permission