Related
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...
Hi,
I recently bought a Xiaomi Redmi Note 2. very happy with the phone hardware, however the phone shipped with preinstalled apps that serve ads. I have run AVG and identified the preinstalled apps (which cannot be removed) and disabled those apps through Settings > Apps. I have also reset all of the defaults to change the Launcher to the Google Now launcher and things such as the default Mail and browser apps.
What i was hoping to get advise on, is simply disabling the apps enough to ensure that they can no longer cause a threat to the person using the phone, the ads have stopped running since I have done all of the above. Does disabling the app put the apps into a quarantine state where they are completely harmless or should I aim to permanently remove them?
I have tried to avoid rooting the phone (partly because I have never rooted a phone before) and also because of warranty concerns. Would a temporary root be a good compromise here? I also attempted to flash the rom with the global developers rom, however that didnt work when I attempted it and I kept getting the Install update.zip failed! update.zip signature verification failed.
At the moment the phone is stable fast and does not show ads like it did before disabling the apps and changing the launcher etc.... Have I done enough to protect any silent processes sending my data off to china?
Thanks for your help
Hi devs,
Since I have rooted my device with magisk my axis Bank app says we don't support rooted phone and it doesn't open. Is there a work around for it.
gunmanrishi said:
Hi devs,
Since I have rooted my device with magisk my axis Bank app says we don't support rooted phone and it doesn't open. Is there a work around for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you root with Magisk? If so, use Magisk Hide feature and check the Axis Bank app. It should start working again.
gunmanrishi said:
Hi devs,
Since I have rooted my device with magisk my axis Bank app says we don't support rooted phone and it doesn't open. Is there a work around for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK In android each app is installed as different user(from Linux system point of view).
Each user(app) has and runs in its own space. And can not access any other user's data.
Root is the user(app) which can access any user's data.
So any app having root access can access any other app's data which can compromise the security mechanisms used by banking applications. So banking apps refuse to start on rooted phone.
I would advice not to use banking apps on rooted phone.
sandrocks said:
AFAIK In android each app is installed as different user(from Linux system point of view).
Each user(app) has and runs in its own space. And can not access any other user's data.
Root is the user(app) which can access any user's data.
So any app having root access can access any other app's data which can compromise the security mechanisms used by banking applications. So banking apps refuse to start on rooted phone.
I would advice not to use banking apps on rooted phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If banking app builds its security on this fact, then I wouldn't use it at all. Many banking apps run completely fine with enabled root, some are just more cautious (or paranoid). Just think about security on a Windows PC (admin account, unsecure browser, internet banking in flash ..) - you have no restriction from bank, why should you accept it on a phone?
_mysiak_ said:
If banking app builds its security on this fact, then I wouldn't use it at all. Many banking apps run completely fine with enabled root, some are just more cautious (or paranoid). Just think about security on a Windows PC (admin account, unsecure browser, internet banking in flash ..) - you have no restriction from bank, why should you accept it on a phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have any experience on windows 8 and 10, and do not know about any banking app for windows 7.
If we are running something as Admin and are able to access app's data(not common data folders like program files or login user data) we are screwed up. In that case most of the DRM protected contents also shall not work. I am not sure pre-installed DRM keys also work as usual after rooting your android phone.
Again every OS architecture is different and I am talking about android which uses Linux kernel.
Root access is not something about tuning your OS or phone, It comes with much more responsibility.
Root access to one wrong app can screw up many things. Off course you know all this jargon since you are senior member on this forum and I don't need to tell you this.
In Windows all apps can read other apps data, under the current user. They don't need admin access for that. Yet nothing is compromised I guess that Windows/Linux/Android banking apps use good cryptography and preventive measures, so even if someone gets access to the data, be it settings or network packets, you are safe. I am absolutely confident in using banking apps with root, however not so much with apps requesting accessibility permissions or Xposed modules. Those two can IMHO potentially do much more harm.
Long story short, use your brain, don't install everything you find on the Internet, don't allow all permissions without thinking and don't use shady public Wifi hotspots.
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.
When I try to open the pushTAN app of my bank, I get a security notice: blah blah ROOT something something.
My phone is the OnePlus Nord and I'm using the lastest magisk version with zygisk and the SafetyNet Fix from kdrag0n enabled. If I check the SafetyNet Attestation with various apps, I pass both "Basic integrity" and "CTS profile match", but for some reason my banking app still doesn't work.
Any help is appreciated.
Banks aren't soft. I don't think you'll find a way around it and if you do it won't last for long. The banks have a responsibility to keep things secure so see it as a good thing that they're protecting YOU from fraud. Root is insecure and blocked by banking apps for a very good reason.
Sorry but that's just the truth of it.
Take note that only 1 line of program code is needed to detect whether Android got persistently rooted or not. And such a line of code can get implemented in every app.
@m0.ke What I'm finding surprising -- correct me if I'm wrong -- is that if you weren't rooted, the app would work despite the other factors, like being unlocked. In an unrooted state here, at least, but on LineageOS so unlocked, which is something else that some apps don't like), I don't get a security notice when running it (of course I can't actually try logging in).
So, the irony may be that Magisk created a problem that it's designed to get around just by virtue of the root.
I'm beginning to wonder at this point just what percentage of problem apps actually object to a phone being unlocked (and/or being on a 3rd-party ROM like LineageOS) compared to that AND being rooted. So far, and I'm trying all that I can think of, including several banking apps and Google Pay (update: I did later see the issue with this one: it happens when trying to enable contactless), I haven't found one that has given me a problem. I don't quite know why, but it's making me much less inclined to bother with Magisk, something that I was positive that I would need after going to LineageOS.
m0.ke said:
When I try to open the pushTAN app of my bank, I get a security notice: blah blah ROOT something something.
My phone is the OnePlus Nord and I'm using the lastest magisk version with zygisk and the SafetyNet Fix from kdrag0n enabled. If I check the SafetyNet Attestation with various apps, I pass both "Basic integrity" and "CTS profile match", but for some reason my banking app still doesn't work.
Any help is appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you also hidden: Magisk root, Zygisk module and the Magisk app itself by renaming?
Nowadays banking apps also validate for this.