[Q] security of rooting apps and custom roms - Security Discussion
Hello,
I think about rooting my device.
However I also think about how secure the custom roms builds or rooting apps are.
E.g.
In the modaco forum there is a tool called Superboot r2 to root the motorola moto g device.
How can I know/trust that this tool doesn't contain any spyware/malware or other malicous code?
How do you guys look at the security of custom roms and other apps which root your device?
Customizing and rooting one's phone can be done very securely. Even more now than a few years ago. I would be wary about apps that can root your phone with a buttoon press. Unless, of course, there is a really long thread about it on xda. The same with apps not from the Google store. You should run a virus scan on any apks you get in general. They can contain malicious code that can mess up your device and steal your information.
Once you root your device, it's a good idea to look into the XPrivacy app. You can use it to control the individual permissions of all of your installed app. There are a lot of other security measure you can take too. Do research on what would be relevant to your device.
kbntk said:
Hello,
I think about rooting my device.
However I also think about how secure the custom roms builds or rooting apps are.
E.g.
In the modaco forum there is a tool called Superboot r2 to root the motorola moto g device.
How can I know/trust that this tool doesn't contain any spyware/malware or other malicous code?
How do you guys look at the security of custom roms and other apps which root your device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting a device greatly decreased the overall security of the device. You are breaking the basic security design of Android, you are incorporating new code (mods etc) from developers who may not be properly trained, many who jsut copy past code from elsewhere without understanding what exactly is going on. Potentially (almost certainly with most custom roms) introducing new vulnerabilities.
Elzbach said:
Customizing and rooting one's phone can be done very securely. Even more now than a few years ago. I would be wary about apps that can root your phone with a buttoon press. Unless, of course, there is a really long thread about it on xda. The same with apps not from the Google store. You should run a virus scan on any apks you get in general. They can contain malicious code that can mess up your device and steal your information.
Once you root your device, it's a good idea to look into the XPrivacy app. You can use it to control the individual permissions of all of your installed app. There are a lot of other security measure you can take too. Do research on what would be relevant to your device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm going to have to flat out disagree. Once you have rooted your device, security has greatly been decreased. What would be a minor vulnerability in a normal app, can become a huge vulnerability in an application that has been granted permission to use root. Same goes for the Superuser control application.
Thank you for your replies guys.
jcase said:
Rooting a device greatly decreased the overall security of the device. You are breaking the basic security design of Android, you are incorporating new code (mods etc) from developers who may not be properly trained, many who jsut copy past code from elsewhere without understanding what exactly is going on. Potentially (almost certainly with most custom roms) introducing new vulnerabilities.
I'm going to have to flat out disagree. Once you have rooted your device, security has greatly been decreased. What would be a minor vulnerability in a normal app, can become a huge vulnerability in an application that has been granted permission to use root. Same goes for the Superuser control application.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree rooding the device decreases the overall secruity of the device.
On the other hand, rooting the device gives access to the apps that give you control over the system and data on it. For example as Elzbach wrote, with the app XPrivacy I can control what apps have access to my personal information.
Now - without root - when I instal a new keyboard or launcher with widgets, I'm warned that these apps can have access to my personal information and can use them malicously. For me that means, that even without root using normal apps I can get big security risk when using some apps from play store.
Do you build the custom android version by yourself from the source or use builds provided on this forum or modaco or use another way?
kbntk said:
Thank you for your replies guys.
I agree rooding the device decreases the overall secruity of the device.
On the other hand, rooting the device gives access to the apps that give you control over the system and data on it. For example as Elzbach wrote, with the app XPrivacy I can control what apps have access to my personal information.
Now - without root - when I instal a new keyboard or launcher with widgets, I'm warned that these apps can have access to my personal information and can use them malicously. For me that means, that even without root using normal apps I can get big security risk when using some apps from play store.
Do you build the custom android version by yourself from the source or use builds provided on this forum or modaco or use another way?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
XPrivacy, and apps like them introduce additional security concerns of their own. Android is not designed to work the way they force it too, introducing many new unknowns.
New keyboard, launchers introduce an infinitely smaller risk than any root app, and unlike with root apps you are warned and privileges are handled by an established well tested permission system. Comparing the two is completely silly.
Any developer, in a matter of minutes, put together a root app requesting 0 permissions, that can gain permissions or otherwise use APIs requiring permissions at runtime without declaring them, and disable or work around any "security" any XPrivacy type app claims to provide. Once rooted, apps like XPrivacy provide a complete false sense of security. Given you need root to use them... they provide no real security at all.
A completely valid scenario (one we have seen in the wild): An app with 0 permissions, but the ability to use su could download and dynamically execute new code to perform the malicious activities. IE Google bouncer, and any anti virus software would be @#[email protected] out of luck on that one. All because a user decided to completely break the basic security model, by installing su.
The only customized version of Android I use, is a customized emulator I use for analysis, and that only used when I suspect something could damage an actual test device.
I do not mess with customized versions of Android on real hardware, I only build when testing patches I plan to push to the AOSP gerrit for review.
jcase said:
Rooting a device greatly decreased the overall security of the device. You are breaking the basic security design of Android, you are incorporating new code (mods etc) from developers who may not be properly trained, many who jsut copy past code from elsewhere without understanding what exactly is going on. Potentially (almost certainly with most custom roms) introducing new vulnerabilities.
I'm going to have to flat out disagree. Once you have rooted your device, security has greatly been decreased. What would be a minor vulnerability in a normal app, can become a huge vulnerability in an application that has been granted permission to use root. Same goes for the Superuser control application.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jcase said:
XPrivacy, and apps like them introduce additional security concerns of their own. Android is not designed to work the way they force it too, introducing many new unknowns.
New keyboard, launchers introduce an infinitely smaller risk than any root app, and unlike with root apps you are warned and privileges are handled by an established well tested permission system. Comparing the two is completely silly.
Any developer, in a matter of minutes, put together a root app requesting 0 permissions, that can gain permissions or otherwise use APIs requiring permissions at runtime without declaring them, and disable or work around any "security" any XPrivacy type app claims to provide. Once rooted, apps like XPrivacy provide a complete false sense of security. Given you need root to use them... they provide no real security at all.
A completely valid scenario (one we have seen in the wild): An app with 0 permissions, but the ability to use su could download and dynamically execute new code to perform the malicious activities. IE Google bouncer, and any anti virus software would be @#[email protected] out of luck on that one. All because a user decided to completely break the basic security model, by installing su.
The only customized version of Android I use, is a customized emulator I use for analysis, and that only used when I suspect something could damage an actual test device.
I do not mess with customized versions of Android on real hardware, I only build when testing patches I plan to push to the AOSP gerrit for review.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I stand corrected.
Apologize if I'm resurrecting an oldie but this is a topic I've been contemplating for a while now. I used to root, looking back to my old OG Droid days. But I find newer devices sufficient as to not root anymore (mostly). I'm currently debating rooting a Samsung Tab S 8.4 to remove Touchwiz and hopefully speed some things up and maybe further control the CPU.
If the user is rooted and they only install apps from the marketplace that are known to be safe (I assume)- i.e.- not downloaded from some misc internet site and from "non-trusted sources," would this still be able to happen?
- "Any developer, in a matter of minutes, put together a root app requesting 0 permissions, that can gain permissions or otherwise use APIs requiring permissions at runtime without declaring them, and disable or work around any "security" any XPrivacy type app claims to provide. Once rooted, apps like XPrivacy provide a complete false sense of security. Given you need root to use them... they provide no real security at all."
I guess I'm just not sure how google approved apps, or if they even do. And what's the process of showing app permissions in the Play Store these days, since permissions are front and center when you download an app. Do dev's just flag permissions on their own will or is it built into the Android code? I would ASSUME the android code when posting to Play Store decides permissions for the dev. I would be horrified if Android relied on good will for people to post permissions solely from the dev's input.
I could be completely wrong
But as I understand dev a pick the permissions they need for the app to work correctly. They declare the permissions they need to the Android system. And then they can only use those permissions and no others. However they don't need to use all of the permissions but they can if they want to.
Btw apps from google play are in no way safe.it has no bearing if you do or don't have apps from unknown sources on your device. fact is google in no way checks the source code of apps on the play store.now maybe the run a virus checks but honestly that means nothing as moron could code in malicious code that would not trigger a scanner (and Trojans are far more prevalent for Android than viruses). If the source code is not available then no one knows what an app could be doing.
90% of my apps come from fdroid, who builds everything from source.
In the discussion above I should also note (but could be wrong about this completely) that system apps (the ones that come with your phone) all have root(administrator) permissions by virtue of being system components.
So rooting may decrease your security but personally I think factory roms are far too unsecure to start with and will never have a device that is not rooted. The benefits far out weight the risks for the careful user. Until such time as the source code is released.
Unless you trust google, face book, Samsung, Twitter, and a host of other baked in developers who get to put apps on your phone at the factory.
Or Apple who has their own way of making money off your every move, or microsoft with win 10 that also sells your habits.
jcase said:
Rooting a device greatly decreased the overall security of the device. You are breaking the basic security design of Android, you are incorporating new code (mods etc) from developers who may not be properly trained, many who jsut copy past code from elsewhere without understanding what exactly is going on. Potentially (almost certainly with most custom roms) introducing new vulnerabilities.
I'm going to have to flat out disagree. Once you have rooted your device, security has greatly been decreased. What would be a minor vulnerability in a normal app, can become a huge vulnerability in an application that has been granted permission to use root. Same goes for the Superuser control application.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This alone is enough for me to stay away from root and its capability to make things worse in my end. Thank you for the professional input on this.
Without root you can't add any security to Android. Which has very little security to start with. Permissions are vague and can't be denied on a per app basis short of not installing the app.
System apps have no way of being removed without root unless you do it before flashing, and without root you can't do a complete backup of your system.
Even if you don't root a device yourself Trojans can gain root with many of the same exploits, root themselves and cause whatever havoc they desire.
An app only gets root if you allow it even after rooting your device. It will pop up and ask you if you want to allow or deny or always allow or deny. a Trojan that can create root will do can do it regardless if you root your device yourself, I have no idea if such a Trojan tried to get root if supersu, or superuser will pop up and ask.
A firewall requires root and that alone is worth rooting for me.
But then I have very few apps that I allow online.
Can root cause serious damage to your device? Yes
Can you administrator your device without root? No
Every Linux has root capabilities,
if you own it you should be able to administer it to the best of your abilities and to do that you need root.
Custom Roms are updated far more often that oem roms and as such generally have the newest fixes and updates for security.come that to factory roms that may update once or twice in their expected lifetime, regardless of how many security holes are found in the rom.older devices(read older as a synonym for 2 years old) may never get another update and the only way to protect yourself with out a custom Rom is to buy a new device.
For example Android 5.01 has a major memory leak.and even with that and other bugs and security issues Samsung had not updated the north American galaxy s5 (just over a year old,) above 5.01 yet and may not until marshmallow comes out (Which will mean almost a year after the security and memory leak were found). And until then you walk around using a device with major security issues and a major memory leak.
XPrivacy is not about Security. "Security" is never linked to Xprivacy on Github. "XPrivacy can prevent applications from leaking privacy-sensitive data". Saying the opposite is a lie.
Whether you have root access or not you can almost do nothing against serious attacks BUT having root access allows you to control some things like Internet connection, restricted access,...
Finally do not confuse Custom ROMs and Root. You can run a custom rom without root and vice versa. As explained above custom ROMs are more updated so you can enjoy more patches and new security features like SElinux.
Kayak83 said:
Apologize if I'm resurrecting an oldie but this is a topic I've been contemplating for a while now. I used to root, looking back to my old OG Droid days. But I find newer devices sufficient as to not root anymore (mostly). I'm currently debating rooting a Samsung Tab S 8.4 to remove Touchwiz and hopefully speed some things up and maybe further control the CPU.
If the user is rooted and they only install apps from the marketplace that are known to be safe (I assume)- i.e.- not downloaded from some misc internet site and from "non-trusted sources," would this still be able to happen?
- "Any developer, in a matter of minutes, put together a root app requesting 0 permissions, that can gain permissions or otherwise use APIs requiring permissions at runtime without declaring them, and disable or work around any "security" any XPrivacy type app claims to provide. Once rooted, apps like XPrivacy provide a complete false sense of security. Given you need root to use them... they provide no real security at all."
I guess I'm just not sure how google approved apps, or if they even do. And what's the process of showing app permissions in the Play Store these days, since permissions are front and center when you download an app. Do dev's just flag permissions on their own will or is it built into the Android code? I would ASSUME the android code when posting to Play Store decides permissions for the dev. I would be horrified if Android relied on good will for people to post permissions solely from the dev's input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go to F-Droid or fossdroid instead of Google Play to avoid crappy apps and unwanted connections. Apps on F-Droid are safer. Google has an automatic system to scan apks when they are uploaded but it doesn't detect everything... Be sure that if you didn't update the version number of your apk you will be blocked though lol
Permissions are stored in the AndroidManifest.xml. If the developer doesn't want to state the permissions he needs then nothing will be shown into the Manifest. That's why it's important to use 3rd party apps to control what apps really do.
Would never use my phone without a firewall installed. I want to have control over what apps can access the net and which cannot.
So rooting is a must for me.
Have no gapps installed and privacy is important to me.
Semseddin said:
This alone is enough for me to stay away from root and its capability to make things worse in my end. Thank you for the professional input on this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And you'll be 100% wrong. You are getting a bad advice from someone who sounds like he works for Google. He is wrong and he knows it...
Your system apps have root whether you like it or not. So, they can do whatever Google wants them to do. And they can do it silently. So, the question is are you going to have control over your device or google? Without root you can't; with root you can if you know what you are doing. Your main security threat comes from Gapps and the infamous google services framework, which spies on you and regularly transmits home (google servers) your every activity. That has to go and for that you need root. Custom rom vs stock. Custom roms don't have Gapps and gsf, so that puts them on pedestal, as compared to stock. Stock rom is android plus manufacturer's bloat which also spies on you and wastes battery. Custom roms don't have gapps and they are open source (like Linux). Have you ever heard about viruses on Linux? Maybe 2 or 3, but thousands in other OSs. As another user noted, linux (on which android is based) has root. So is any major OS. Root is just a key to control your device. It can be set up to restrict everything, even system apps, so the point that having root reduces security is invalid except for one situation, when you don't know what you are doing. Do you want incompetent and malicious evil Google to own your phone? If you do, stay away from root.
optimumpro said:
And you'll be 100% wrong. You are getting a bad advice from someone who sounds like he works for Google. He is wrong and he probably knows it...
Your system apps have root whether you like it or not. So, they can do whatever Google wants them to do with your device. And they can do it silently. So, the question is are you going to have control over your device or google? Without root you can't; with root you can if you know what you are doing. Your main security threat comes from Gapps and the infamous google services framework, which spies on you and regularly tramsmits home (google servers) your every activity. That has to go and for that you need root. Custom rom vs stock. Custom roms don't have Gapps and gsf, so that puts them on pedestal, as compared to stock. Stock rom is android plus manufacturer's bloat which also spies on you and wastes battery. Custom roms don't have gapps and they are open source (like Linux). Have you ever heard about viruses on Linux? Maybe 2 or 3, but thousands in other OSs. As another user noted, linux (on which android is based) has root. So is any major OS. Root is just a key to control your device. It can be set up to restrict everything, even system apps, so the point that having root reduces security is invalid except for one situation, when you don't know what you are doing. Do you want incompetent and malicious evil Google to own your phone? If you do, stay away from root.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your detailed answer but if i am not mistaken, are you suggesting that a custom rom made by a 3rd party hobbiest developer is more secure than oem's firmware ? If so, i will continue to be mistaken.
Semseddin said:
Thank you for your detailed answer but if i am not mistaken, are you suggesting that a custom rom made by a 3rd party hobbiest developer is more secure than oem's firmware ? If so, i will continue to be mistaken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the time the answer is yes. Also, you could be a developer yourself meaning you can compile your rom from sources with your own modifications. OEMs have user's security on the back burner. Their goal is to monetize the user and in case of mobile devices, there is no way to monetize the user without compromising security. The beauty of a published source code is that anyone could examine it and they do (even if it is not you yourself). Look at businesses: the majority of them use neither windows nor apple. They use Linux, because linux does not monetize the user and it is open sources and by the way, it is maintained by "hobbiest" developers. And naturally, because of this Linux has a vastly superior security and virtually no viruses.
Google is malicious and incompetent, but luckily, Android is based on linux and most of the code there is from linux.
This is of course a separate from root issue, which remains simply an issue of control: whether you want to be in control of your device or not. You can't name any OS that does not provide root to the user out of the box... Just because some (or most) smart phone dumb users don't know what they are doing does not mean that everyone should be denied root on their devices... And by the way, most Google engineers also don't know what they are doing and had it not been for Linux and the community at large, google wouldn't be able to produce anything that moves...
Related
Android application security
I'm trying to find out how the security of Android applications is enforced. This is the thing that grants permissions according to the application manifest and enforces those granted permissions. Is this security framework provided by the Linux Kernel or is it some service process running in the background? I do currently feel the security is very weak as users get used to just installing applications regardless of what the security says. For example, I saw one application (don't recall the name of it) which had some basic functionality but needed to request security permissions in an area that I can't think why it would need it. The number of downloads were in the 1000s so it seems as though people don't really pay attention to the security. I was going to download it but then thought against it after spotting this slight weirdness. Thoughts, suggestions?
You can start here: http://code.google.com/android/devel/security.html Techno79 said: I do currently feel the security is very weak as users get used to just installing applications regardless of what the security says. For example, I saw one application (don't recall the name of it) which had some basic functionality but needed to request security permissions in an area that I can't think why it would need it. The number of downloads were in the 1000s so it seems as though people don't really pay attention to the security. I was going to download it but then thought against it after spotting this slight weirdness. Thoughts, suggestions? Click to expand... Click to collapse Yes, 99% of users don't bother reading or understanding the security implications of the permissions they grant to an application, but that doesn't mean that the security is weak
security concerns migrating from iOs to Android
As title suggests, coming from a so called "clean" iOS environment to Android, my main concern how susceptible is my data to being stolen. I have no (current) plans to root my next phone and will be used mainly from business, but from what I have read in the past even google play store apps have been to known to have malicious content. Am I worrying too much ? I do carry sensitive work data on my iPhone.
applefag said: As title suggests, coming from a so called "clean" iOS environment to Android, my main concern how susceptible is my data to being stolen. I have no (current) plans to root my next phone and will be used mainly from business, but from what I have read in the past even google play store apps have been to known to have malicious content. Am I worrying too much ? I do carry sensitive work data on my iPhone. Click to expand... Click to collapse As long as the apps you install are from known sources (i.e. Play Store) you don't need to worry. Also every time you download an app check the permissions. If you think that the app shouldn't have those permissions then don't download it. Finally for safety reasons never install any apps from unknown sources (i.e. outside of Play Store) unless you trust the developer. If you still find yourself worrying read this.
applefag said: Am I worrying too much ? Click to expand... Click to collapse Yep I think you won't install any app outside Google Play so install apps that you know and you won't need to worry. FYI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security-Enhanced_Linux kalpetros said: Also every time you download an app check the permissions. If you think that the app shouldn't have those permissions then don't download it. Click to expand... Click to collapse Well only if you are sure. Sometimes apps need permissions that aren't justified for some people.
for the open nature of the android ecosystem, it is somewhat normal that you will have to be careful though there are several different techniques, i use this the most. Root your phone, install xposed framework and install xprivacy. here is a review of what it does http://www.xda-developers.com/android/manage-individual-app-permissions-with-xprivacy/ . I know the installation pprocess may seem daunting, but it is easier than you think this module wil allow you to block apps of certain permission. IE. you can block location service for all the apps on your phone so that no app can get your location. There are bunch of other permissions that you can block like access to contact, gallery etc My question to others is : Is antivirus application on android worth it? I mean can it protect me from real time attaks and malwares??
SaffatBokul said: My question to others is : Is antivirus application on android worth it? I mean can it protect me from real time attaks and malwares?? Click to expand... Click to collapse Not useful IMO. FYI I remember this article.
User sensibility is your best defense. Don't install apps not from the market. Only install apps with a lot of positive comments. I would advise again rooting your phone. It's true that there are ways to block apps from accessing your private data on a rooted phone, but the additional vulnerability from unlocking your bootloader and rooting is not worth it. Just stick to apps from major developers.
snapper.fishes said: User sensibility is your best defense. Don't install apps not from the market. Only install apps with a lot of positive comments. I would advise again rooting your phone. It's true that there are ways to block apps from accessing your private data on a rooted phone, but the additional vulnerability from unlocking your bootloader and rooting is not worth it. Just stick to apps from major developers. Click to expand... Click to collapse I agree, rooting your phone comprimises your security even if you do it to install security apps.
Primokorn said: Yep I think you won't install any app outside Google Play so install apps that you know and you won't need to worry. Click to expand... Click to collapse Unfortunately, new apps in Google Play are rarely verified by Google staff, so there is still always a possibility of trojan or other malware.
Replacing kingroot with SuperSU
This guide is intended for a common user and it is assumed that the person has no knowledge of code at all or even what Android is Please keep this in mind while reading this thread It is not in my nature to spoon-feed. Please understand that I can't answer the same question multiple times for you, use the search button and if you still can't find it then ask here We're gonna need Mod Edit - Removed Thanks for understanding
They will probably update their app now to block the cloned app but when that happens I'll tell you another method Why am I doing this? I believe the root app should just be an interface between the user and the root app should not act on its own. The user should have choice of what root app he wants and trusts Kingroot is untrustworthy. It has network access permission, which can be used to download malware. It's fake cleaner slows down your phone. The app runs in the background and drains your battery. It spams your notifications. On top of that it doesn't allow you to get rid of it. It gives a false sense of security. Kingroot is nothing but malware
On top of that it installs purify, another fake app that claims to boost your phone It doesn't work. Android creates cache because Android needs it. If you clean this cache Android will generate the same cache again. What purify cleans is essential os files that the system has to regenerate In doing this you waste battery and CPU cycles And the newly created "junk" as claimed by purify is actually system critical cache that the system will be forced to rebuild if it's deleted Never use their code, they will harm your device and you won't even know
As a kernel developer, I know how security on android works. Kingroot cannot introduce extra security Let me phrase this in a noob-friendly way Android is a dalvik and java hybrid virtual machine running on top of a Linux kernel Let's call Android the userspace Stuff like selinux can only protect the userspace. Selinux isolates every app so no app can tell what the other app is doing. This is where anti-virus fails. Selinux isn't going to allow your antivirus to see what other apps are doing Antivirus does not decompile apks, all release apps made by developers experienced in their field use something called proguard which makes decompiling very hard Let's imagine an ideal case where the userspace is protected. Even then your kernel is technically "outside" the java VM (not exactly but I'm explaining to the average Joe). The antivirus doesn't even know what the kernel is doing. Even with root selinux won't allow you to read the whole kernel log
Oh, you want to hear more? Kingroot is not selinux-aware Many apps won't be able to work if selinux is in place. SuperSU, magisk and phh are fully selinux-aware and all apps work reliably on them In short kingroot can't even root correctly
Closing for now.
Security Bolster
Hi team, I am looking for advice on increasing the device's security after root. Is there a way to do this effectively? I've rooted my device (Galaxy S8 exynos processor). Presently the device has had many of the system apps removed, including the Play Store, and most of the Google apps (only drive and Maps remain). Running Android 9 on it. Open to suggestions! Thanks all.
Once a device's Android got rooted you and anybody else get complete access to everything in the OS, and those permissions allow you and anybody else to change it all, injecting malware included. IMO it's a widespread misconception that de-googling increases an Android device's security: All apps and services provided by Google aren't a security risk. When you're doing things with superuser ( AKA root ) permissions, you have the power to do anything.
Hey friend, thanks for the reply. The purpose for de-googling was to increase productivity, not to increase the security of the device. Are you aware of some basic things that could be done? For example turning off NFC? This would limit device functionality, like using Pay features. But I could live with it... Are there other suggestions or perhaps even modules/apps to install or settings to apply? Thanks for the reply!
Securing/controlling OnePlus 8 with OOS 11.0.88.IN21BA
I am a brand new owner of a OP 8. First thing I did was flash it to OOS 11, then installed Magisk. The phone is now up and running and rooted. I am coming from a galaxy S5 that I have owned and used for more than 7 years, and for most of that time it has been running Lineage OS. I am used to the control that Lineage gives me, and I would expect that I could exercise the same degree of control with a rooted OOS. But, this appears to not be true. On the S5, I had 3C System Tuner Pro which is now an obsolete app, so I have replaced it with the current variant; 3C All-In-One toolbox. This package should allow me to control which apps start at boot, but it seems I cannot turn any of the apps off; when I uncheck them, the app fails to actually remove them from the startup list. Also, I expect the 3C tool to allow me to uninstall pretty much any app, but there are a lot of google apps that I just can't remove. I also use greenify (the paid version) and mostly it seems to be working OK, except that I cannot seem to access system apps from it, which makes it very hard for me to shut down things that I don't want running. I also use afwall (the paid version) and it seems to work as expected. Which is good. My focus is security and privacy, and my mantra is: "on android, the app that is not running is the app that is not spying". Thus, I want everything that is not needed to satisfy my purposes to not be running, and I only want apps running when *I* say that they can run. Now, my S5 was running Lineage 17.1 which is android 9. I did not update it past that. And now I am running android 11, and I note that there is a lot of new hardware-based validation in android 11. So possibly I can't remove some things without disabling this validation (which I would prefer not to do). But even if I can't remove, I can disable (which, fortunately, I AM able to do). But I should be able to remove things from the startup list so they don't get started automatically at boot time. Right now, the way it works is they all start, then greenify shuts them down (and that isn't always completely reliable). I need more to make this phone genuinely secure and private. So. Does anyone here know how I could gain the capability to remove apps (including system apps) from the startup list and have it stick? Does anyone know what I need to do to get greenify to recognize system apps so I can shut them down when they are not needed, or failing that, can anyone steer me to a different app than greenify that will do that? Perhaps I would gain by adding the xposed framework? I have not used it in a very long time (since I move to lineage) and I recall it being a bit of a pain. I suppose I could move to Lineage from OOS, but I would prefer to not do that because of the camera software. This device seems to have a fine camera and not a lot of bloatware, so I would much prefer to stay with OOS for as long as the device is supported by the manufacturer. But I do insist on being able to completely control it, and disabling apps that I can't stop from running is a much bigger hammer than I would like to use; some of those apps I might actually want to use from time to time.
OK, after some work I have successfully taken full control of the OnePlus 8 and have been able to configure startups as I want them. I installed xposed through Magisk. I also installed the latest greenify (3.7.8) and afwall, and have those set up too. Since I did purchase greenify, I am able to greenify system apps as well. So, generally, I have full control over the device. But there remains a problem. I have disabled wifi and data connections in settings for all apps that I don't want to have accessing a network. I have also blocked those apps in afwall. And yet, my pihole DNS server that services my LAN shows me some of my apps are trying to call home, even when their capability to talk on the internet is denied. Specifically, greenify is denied network access and is firewalled off, yet there is an attempt to connect to oasisfeng.com. Also, I use an old version of ES File Explorer (from before it was sold and turned into something very like malware) and it is allowed LAN access but denied any access beyond the LAN...and I see it trying to call its old home domain (estrongs.com). Similarly, I use an old version of UB Reader (later versions again approach malware status), and it is completely denied network access. But, I see a connection to mobisystems.com. This clearly indicates that there is a proxy in use somewhere in the system, that is allowing these guys past my blocks. I am using adaway to block these specific domains, but it would be far better to just block that proxy. However, I don't know where the proxy is and what it is called. Can someone here tell me? If not, it will be trial and error, which is painful because functionality will break when I turn something off to see if this is it.
jiml8 said: OK, after some work I have successfully taken full control of the OnePlus 8 and have been able to configure startups as I want them. I installed xposed through Magisk. I also installed the latest greenify (3.7.8) and afwall, and have those set up too. Since I did purchase greenify, I am able to greenify system apps as well. So, generally, I have full control over the device. But there remains a problem. I have disabled wifi and data connections in settings for all apps that I don't want to have accessing a network. I have also blocked those apps in afwall. And yet, my pihole DNS server that services my LAN shows me some of my apps are trying to call home, even when their capability to talk on the internet is denied. Specifically, greenify is denied network access and is firewalled off, yet there is an attempt to connect to oasisfeng.com. Also, I use an old version of ES File Explorer (from before it was sold and turned into something very like malware) and it is allowed LAN access but denied any access beyond the LAN...and I see it trying to call its old home domain (estrongs.com). Similarly, I use an old version of UB Reader (later versions again approach malware status), and it is completely denied network access. But, I see a connection to mobisystems.com. This clearly indicates that there is a proxy in use somewhere in the system, that is allowing these guys past my blocks. I am using adaway to block these specific domains, but it would be far better to just block that proxy. However, I don't know where the proxy is and what it is called. Can someone here tell me? If not, it will be trial and error, which is painful because functionality will break when I turn something off to see if this is it. Click to expand... Click to collapse If you are concerned about security, you should stay away from Xposed. First of all, Xposed requires disabling Selinux, otherwise, it won't work. So during the installation, your Selinux status is turned to 'permissive'. That, coupled with the fact that almost every custom rom sets 'ro.secure to Zero', exposes your System partition to third party apps. So, basically, anything can exploit your phone. Second, Greenify, with all due respect to its great developer, is not needed anymore, since Android 10, because now we have builtin sleep mode that does the same thing as Greenify. Third, even if Xposed didn't require disabling Selinux, it is still an exploit that creates a back door to your system.
optimumpro said: If you are concerned about security, you should stay away from Xposed. First of all, Xposed requires disabling Selinux, otherwise, it won't work. So during the installation, your Selinux status is turned to 'permissive'. That, coupled with the fact that almost every custom rom sets 'ro.secure to Zero', exposes your System partition to third party apps. So, basically, anything can exploit your phone. Second, Greenify, with all due respect to its great developer, is not needed anymore, since Android 10, because now we have builtin sleep mode that does the same thing as Greenify. Third, even if Xposed didn't require disabling Selinux, it is still an exploit that creates a back door to your system. Click to expand... Click to collapse Device security is only one aspect of security, and I handle that mostly through device configuration and usage policy anyway. Overall security involves many other factors, which include maintaining full privacy and control over all data that gets out of the device and goes...elsewhere. To maintain this level of privacy requires reconfiguring any android device to prevent the release of that information. If this requires setting Selinux to permissive, then that tradeoff is quite acceptable. I might prefer it not be the case, but so long as all android devices sold into the marketplace represent the interests of google, the manufacturer, and any third-party that pays the manufacturer ahead of my interests then I will make that tradeoff. As for Greenify, I have not found the sleep mode that is available in Android 11 to be adequate because it does not allow me to control system apps. You can take it as a maxim that the only android app that does not spy is the android app that is not running - and this includes lots of system apps that I might not want to delete or disable but also don't want running unless I say so, and then only while I am satisfying MY purpose for them. As for the problem I was asking about, I added the specific URIs to the adaware blocklist and that suppressed them. Prior to that, I was seeing the DNS requests on my LAN DNS. I suspect the network utility I am using to monitor the phone's traffic is reporting requests ahead of the iptables FILTER table, and the packets were being suppressed prior to leaving the device, but I am not certain of that. The only way I could tell would be to monitor the device traffic as it went through the upstream VPN gateway on my LAN, and I did not do that. Adaware works adequately for this, and I am not seeing any other unexpected/unacceptable traffic from my phone. The one remaining thing I need to check for will involve monitoring from the VPN gateway, as I look for any DoH or DoTLS traffic. I hope I don't find any; that will be a ***** to block. I do block it on the IOT VLAN on my network, but it requires a separate device running a script I wrote. To block DoH/DoTLS on my phone, while allowing appropriate DNS will be...fun. Edit: And, actually, I just took a quick look. The sestatus command returns that my selinux status is "enforcing". The xposed framework I installed, actually, is lsposed, which is a systemless install using magisk. It implements the xposed framework but in a systemless way; I was just lazy when I wrote about it in my previous post.
jiml8 said: Device security is only one aspect of security, and I handle that mostly through device configuration and usage policy anyway. Overall security involves many other factors, which include maintaining full privacy and control over all data that gets out of the device and goes...elsewhere. To maintain this level of privacy requires reconfiguring any android device to prevent the release of that information. If this requires setting Selinux to permissive, then that tradeoff is quite acceptable. I might prefer it not be the case, but so long as all android devices sold into the marketplace represent the interests of google, the manufacturer, and any third-party that pays the manufacturer ahead of my interests then I will make that tradeoff. As for Greenify, I have not found the sleep mode that is available in Android 11 to be adequate because it does not allow me to control system apps. You can take it as a maxim that the only android app that does not spy is the android app that is not running - and this includes lots of system apps that I might not want to delete or disable but also don't want running unless I say so, and then only while I am satisfying MY purpose for them. As for the problem I was asking about, I added the specific URIs to the adaware blocklist and that suppressed them. Prior to that, I was seeing the DNS requests on my LAN DNS. I suspect the network utility I am using to monitor the phone's traffic is reporting requests ahead of the iptables FILTER table, and the packets were being suppressed prior to leaving the device, but I am not certain of that. The only way I could tell would be to monitor the device traffic as it went through the upstream VPN gateway on my LAN, and I did not do that. Adaware works adequately for this, and I am not seeing any other unexpected/unacceptable traffic from my phone. The one remaining thing I need to check for will involve monitoring from the VPN gateway, as I look for any DoH or DoTLS traffic. I hope I don't find any; that will be a ***** to block. I do block it on the IOT VLAN on my network, but it requires a separate device running a script I wrote. To block DoH/DoTLS on my phone, while allowing appropriate DNS will be...fun. Edit: And, actually, I just took a quick look. The sestatus command returns that my selinux status is "enforcing". The xposed framework I installed, actually, is lsposed, which is a systemless install using magisk. It implements the xposed framework but in a systemless way; I was just lazy when I wrote about it in my previous post. Click to expand... Click to collapse I have been building Android roms for multiple devices for 9 years. When I started, I also gave a significant positive weight to Xposed, etc... . But the more I learned Android code, the more I became convinced that all those 'privacy' layers are mostly useless and even harmful, because they create a false sense of security. Vanilla Android roms, actually, contain very little advertising/spying, and it makes a perfect sense: why would Google open-source their spying/advertising machine? The only thing that might be considered spying (in vanilla Android) is captive portal detection that checks the internet connection and a few other network tools/tests that periodically connect to the internet, but not necessarily with nefarious purposes. But even these could be disabled or changed to other servers. Android becomes an advertising tool only when you install Google Apps/Google Services Framework, register a Google account, etc. Once you have that, and 100% of stock roms do, no amount of tweaking can prevent spying, because these Google 'structures' sit lower than any systemless layer. In other words, they can go around Magisk/Xposed tricks. Moreover, on devices with stock roms, one doesn't even need encryption and the use of apps like Signal/Telegram/Silence etc.. Google Services Framework can see your outgoing messages before they are encrypted, and incoming messages after decryption. In other words, they can see what your eyes see on the screen. So, the only way to prevent Google interests from taking over your phone is never install Google 'things', which is the case with my rom and my phone.
optimumpro said: I have been building Android roms for multiple devices for 9 years. When I started, I also gave a significant positive weight to Xposed, etc... . But the more I learned Android code, the more I became convinced that all those 'privacy' layers are mostly useless and even harmful, because they create a false sense of security. Vanilla Android roms, actually, contain very little advertising/spying, and it makes a perfect sense: why would Google open-source their spying/advertising machine? The only thing that might be considered spying (in vanilla Android) is captive portal detection that checks the internet connection and a few other network tools/tests that periodically connect to the internet, but not necessarily with nefarious purposes. But even these could be disabled or changed to other servers. Android becomes an advertising tool only when you install Google Apps/Google Services Framework, register a Google account, etc. Once you have that, and 100% of stock roms do, no amount of tweaking can prevent spying, because these Google 'structures' sit lower than any systemless layer. In other words, they can go around Magisk/Xposed tricks. Moreover, on devices with stock roms, one doesn't even need encryption and the use of apps like Signal/Telegram/Silence etc.. Google Services Framework can see your outgoing messages before they are encrypted, and incoming messages after decryption. In other words, they can see what your eyes see on the screen. So, the only way to prevent Google interests from taking over your phone is never install Google 'things', which is the case with my rom and my phone. Click to expand... Click to collapse I don't really program Android, though I am a kernel developer in both Linux and Freebsd. I also am one of the principal architects of a network infrastructure appliance that is getting a lot of attention in the industry. So, while I do not know android in detail at a low level, I know linux thoroughly and I am fully equipped to completely monitor and control what access that android (or any other computer) has to any network. And that has been my dilemma; I can see what my device is doing and I am determined to stop it. I agree with you about vanilla Android, absent all the google stuff. It is just linux with a different desktop on it, and the connections it makes to google are just for network management functions; the network device I have built also contacts google (and a few others) for network maintenance only and not any information transfer. Unfortunately, the google apps infrastructure is required for some things that I use the phone for. Google maps is required by both Uber and Lyft; without Maps, I can't use those apps - and there are times when I am traveling where I really need to be able to use those apps. Also, unfortunately, the company I am contracted to (where I am part-owner) for which I have built this network appliance makes heavy use of google tools. I have not been able to convince my partners to move away from google, and they can outvote me. I have to allow Meet, and Chat to run on my device; I don't have a practical alternative. So I have spent a lot of time determining exactly which google components are the minimum required to allow those apps to run, and I have disabled or blocked or restricted permissions for all other google components - and both greenify and afwall play key roles in this activity. With my old Galaxy S5, I just would install the smallest google package that supported Maps onto my Lineage OS on that device, but on this OnePlus 8, I have elected to stick with OOS for as long as it receives updates. So, tying google's hands is a lot more work. My monitoring tells me I have it now as good as it will be. There are a few connections to google, as expected, but the frequency of those connections is not high and very little data is being transferred in either direction. I believe most of the traffic is administrative. The only thing I have not yet checked is whether there is any DoH or DoTLS traffic. My IOT VLAN watches for and blocks such traffic (my IOT VLAN exists to isolate and completely control my Android TV), and I have connected the phone to the IOT VLAN for a short while to see if any DoH/DoTLS was detected and none was - but I really need to connect it to that VLAN for an extended period. I do root around in the phone's databases (which reveals what Google is doing, and Google can't stop that...) and the result is that I know Google is not doing much. So, it isn't perfect. I would be much happier if the company would move away from google. But it is as good as its going to get, and I don't believe google is sneaking anything by me; I would have detected it. I do block a LOT of google URIs.
Also, as far as google open-sourcing their spying machine...that, quite explicitly, is the purpose of Android. It is open-sourced spyware for google. They open-sourced it partly because they had to (the gnu licensing ties their hands) and partly to gain acceptance; its open source nature is why it is now the dominant architecture. It greatly reduces development costs for device manufacturers while providing a standardized framework upon which they can build. Those of us who put in the effort to exploit that open-source nature to stop the spying are a small fraction of the total marketplace, and google can easily tolerate us. Android has increased google's reach and ability to collect data about individuals to an enormous extent. From the standpoint of knowing everything about everybody (which is google's explicit goal) it is an enormous win for them.