Related
Last night browsing the market, after having my phone reset for constant rebooting, I downloaded an app called "adult videos." I woke this morning to find the app wiped from my phone and from the market. Now, the problem lies not in the fact that this app is missing from my life, but in the question is google sneaking around in the middle of the night tampering with people's phones? I read that article about google remotely removing apps from phones strictly on a necessity based need. It kind of makes me wonder how selective they will be when determining what is necessary.
Google has the ability to do this and have flexed their muscles with that feature too recently,cant post links but google: "google remove android application". It uses google talk to send these removal requests. In normal conditions google will only delete apps that were malicious. (spyware/damaging/ddos/fraud/etc)
Most smartphone/ebook platforms have remote kill switches now. The more worrying part is that they also have the ability to install apps onto remote phones.
Google does this with android too? This is one of the reasons I dont like apple. This sounds like rediculous invasion of privacy. How does this work exactly?
Read the link.. disturbing both the install assett and the remove asset options. Plus the fact that Android maintains a constant data connection. Is there anyway to kill this constant connection? do you get charged for it? and can you disable the install and remove assett options?
It's Google, they live and survive off your information!
They went round WiFi snooping when they did Streetview, so God knows what they do with your mobile phone...
hungry81 said:
Google does this with android too? This is one of the reasons I dont like apple. This sounds like rediculous invasion of privacy. How does this work exactly?
Read the link.. disturbing both the install assett and the remove asset options. Plus the fact that Android maintains a constant data connection. Is there anyway to kill this constant connection? do you get charged for it? and can you disable the install and remove assett options?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This connection is maintained by using google talk. So as long as you are online on google talk you have a hotline to the kill switch. After these security concerns I bet some chefs are working on ROM with the kill switch disabled. But nearly all smartphones have kill switches nowadays, companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft don't want to be seen as unable to get rid of a malicious app which would impact on their reputation.
Edit: Thinking about it, if you have extreme worries about this, install some kind of firewall (like iptables (requires rooting)) and block mtalk.google.com.
The best part about these google phones is the ability to make them your own. I am currently waiting for cyanogen's mod 6 which I am pretty sure won't constantly chat with google, but I think that the fact should be recognized of who the major players are in the cell phone game. Remember that 'incident' google had with china, and how the NSA and google became friends after that. Hmm... The largest data analyzer teaming up with the largest data collector, google also reports higher sales every quarter now as well, that is alot of direct connections with alot of people. I'm not sayin' anything...I'm just sayin'.
El_Zilcho said:
Edit: Thinking about it, if you have extreme worries about this, install some kind of firewall (like iptables (requires rooting)) and block mtalk.google.com.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm..... no.
r3s-rt said:
Ummm..... no.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm why not? Its a Linux system below the dalvik vm. There are people who got iptables running on their system and when done correctly iptables. Be aware when I talk about this, I am talking tin foil hat style here.
What if someone modifies AOSP code to just remove the INSTALL_ASSET and REMOVE_ASSET portions of the code?
Google, don't go Apple way!
http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/android-also-gives-google-remote-app-installation-power-062510
Old news, but they've made me "a little bit" angry Is there any way to remove all that crapware?
hmmmmm well figuring they just got in trouble for stealing multiple GB of data from private routers I'd say its a sure bet. Also I recently took a federal job and low and behold they already had my gmail account on file even though I have never given it out and only use it for family and friends, but the feds sure had it.
I hope this time it's the correct forum.
So long story short.
I've written an app that allows to hijack FaceBook profiles over the WiFi. So when you're connected to WiFi you can "hack" into other users profiles. It doesn't work for profiles using SSL (yes you have that option in FB). So it can be treated as a "bad app". BUT! it is not dangerous for the one using it. I am aware that this is "questionable" application, but is there any other way to tell people - "HEY! use secure connections, it is not safe to use public WIFI!". I'd bet that a lot of you don't use SSL now and after using/reading this app you will turn SSL on.
That could be the #1 reason for deleting my app.
The second one is that I've put a 'demo' app in the market with a limit to sniffing only 3 profiles. But you could buy it through paypal. And today I've found out that this also could lead to app deletion. However i've bought launcherpro through paypal so I don't see why my app was removed in less than 24 hours.
What is your opinion and what can I do to sell my app somehow (i need my 25$ back that I've paid to register in google wrr...). Is there an option I could do put it in market without google deleting it like putting a disclaimer or something? The app itself is safe for the user downloading it.
Edit: If I put a link to this app here will this thread be deleted? If so, is there an option to promote it here?
Per forum rules, link removed
bponury said:
I've written an app that allows to hijack FaceBook profiles over the WiFi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's your answer.
JamesC_ said:
There's your answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 on that
if it allows you to hijack fb you can steal other information from the users account so why would they allow it and put themselves into a legal bind for doing so
JamesC_ said:
There's your answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if it wasn't for this app you would be safe? No, facebook is ignoring users privacy and this app is nothing more then a good way to show people what could be the cost of not using secure connections. Of course this can be used in a bad way, a lot of apps can. Like sms bombing or phone number spoofing. But they are not removed from the marked do they?
Ethics
And even worse you want to get paid for it.
wdl1908 said:
Ethics
And even worse you want to get paid for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I know what ethic is however we're not living in a perfect world and just believing that everyone is good and ethical so I can just leave my door open when leaving the house is not going to protect me against the reality. I believe in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_disclosure and this case is even better because FaceBook is aware of the problem and just ignore it. A few people are aware that there's an option to use SSL on facebook. In my opinion FB should just get it done right and force users to use it. It's not a problem these days right? And what is wrong in getting paid for my work. I've spent some time developing it. Security by obscurity is not working, really. Take my app for example it would take max 1h to crack it. It's not security it's just being to lazy to secure it. And hoping that no one would care to crack it.
sms bombing is not hacking someones account! you are just spamming someone with messages.
even if it is down to fb to let people know about security, the market owners can be sued for allowing such an app on the market. there are better ways of showing a person how unsecure a connection is without punishing them in such a way.
the secure connection is useful for public connections but some people may not want or need to use it at home so they have the ability to switch it on or off. apparently there are issues with some games on fb that are linked in with the use of the secure connection.
traumatism said:
sms bombing is not hacking someones account! you are just spamming someone with messages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People are killed for spamming in russia (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/26/russian_spammer_killed/)
And what about spoofing caller id? AFAIK that things are valid in court cases in Poland.
traumatism said:
even if it is down to fb to let people know about security, the market owners can be sued for allowing such an app on the market. there are better ways of showing a person how unsecure a connection is without punishing them in such a way.
the secure connection is useful for public connections but some people may not want or need to use it at home so they have the ability to switch it on or off. apparently there are issues with some games on fb that are linked in with the use of the secure connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how to tell people - secure yourself any other way. I know i'm devils (myself) advocate right now, but really do you think that forgetting about insecurity is a good way? I don't force anyone to use it in a bad way. But after I showed how it works in my house all my room-mates turned SSL on instantly. And they were not mad about it, shocked a bit but now they are safer now. Sure you can just tell people - hey turn ssl on and 90% of them will ignore you. But when you show them - look! i can see your messages that easily if you don't do it. Then they would listen.
haha! So, if someone got a gun and went around shooting people in cars to proove that they should actually have bullet proof windows and burst-proof tyres, that it's all ok, and not in any way shape or form, illegal?
ha. ha.
infact op ip should be reported to facebook
By nature I wouldn't go near this app. If its collecting other peoples info I could be collecting my own. Thats how I see it logically ... people always get screwed when they are doing something they shouldn't be doing.
There is a place for all apps in this world be they good or bad. You could always host a site and put it on there. I wouldn't go near it cause once again I'd be afraid of whats laced on that site.
I was just providing another point of view to the convo.
MarkusPO said:
haha! So, if someone got a gun and went around shooting people in cars to proove that they should actually have bullet proof windows and burst-proof tyres, that it's all ok, and not in any way shape or form, illegal?
ha. ha.
infact op ip should be reported to facebook
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if you have a car that can be opened by someone who has a screwdriver wouldn't you want car manufacturer to secure your car. Buying a bulletproof car isn't exactly the same as pushing a button in a web browser isn't it? And you're comparing killing a man to posting "I'm a jackass on someones FB wall". But still, you can buy a gun right? Also pretending that there's no problem isn't fixing a problem.
And hey, this app isn't new you know, if it wasn't for this thread maybe you wouldn't know that people use this apps on PC's maybe one day you would find that all your mail is gone (yes, this app could be modified to work with other sites like this forum). And ask yourself wouldn't you be pissed if you've found out that anyone using your network could get into your bank account? Well I would. But most (all?) banks use SSL by default. Google does. Why FB doesn't?
hazard99 said:
By nature I wouldn't go near this app. If its collecting other peoples info I could be collecting my own. Thats how I see it logically ... people always get screwed when they are doing something they shouldn't be doing.
There is a place for all apps in this world be they good or bad. You could always host a site and put it on there. I wouldn't go near it cause once again I'd be afraid of whats laced on that site.
I was just providing another point of view to the convo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, in fact it needs root to modify iptables and send raw arp messages and I know people get scared when an app needs root. If someone is interested I could write here how it's done and anyone could write it. It's actually nothing magical.
I wrote this app as a project for my mobile programming class. In the first version it also sniffed for Gadu-Gadu messages (it's a polish messenger). But I sure hope that when and if this app let's loose than FB will react and enable ssl by default. Maybe other websites will use it too. It's just that easy to protect your users, I don't understand why they don't do it?
most people who do not want their details stolen, do not use public access internet. does FB take money transactions over their site?
google does and the banks do so they will have a secure section. fb may do this using paypal or google checkout or otherwise so may not need the ssl that the banks need. sure it still renders people vulnerable to attack and theft of other information but even so that information is very limited dependant on the user of the account.
traumatism said:
most people who do not want their details stolen, do not use public access internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, so other people want their details stolen? You are aware of the problem 'cause your "into computers" but out of 500 milion fb users how many of them ever heard of SSL? How many know that they are unsafe?
well with the amount of messages being spread on fb already about this i think more people will know, but to let people know only by stealing their details is pathetic. sure you may have made this app for a project but why give other people the power to do this. all you are doing is providing more uses for those who like to make other peoples lives a misery. the best thing that could be done with this is to let the website provider know how unsecure their system is. especially if you are aware of the issue and are bothered by it. i know i'd do the same. if that didnt work, sure i'd tell people about it but i wouldnt sell an app on to others so they can make use of it. not even for free.
traumatism said:
well with the amount of messages being spread on fb already about this i think more people will know, but to let people know only by stealing their details is pathetic. sure you may have made this app for a project but why give other people the power to do this. all you are doing is providing more uses for those who like to make other peoples lives a misery. the best thing that could be done with this is to let the website provider know how unsecure their system is. especially if you are aware of the issue and are bothered by it. i know i'd do the same. if that didnt work, sure i'd tell people about it but i wouldnt sell an app on to others so they can make use of it. not even for free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure I could write an e-mail to facebook, but this issue is known for years! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_hijacking I am sure FaceBook is aware of it. In fact they've enabled SSL only a month ago (maybe two months) but why it isn't enabled by default?
who knows. perhaps issues with other applications on the website, or applications made to access facebook. they may have left it so they can cater for other applications for and on the site. only they can answer that question.
anyway, he just showed the spirit of a developer and created something new
he never told anyone "hey go hack facebook profiles" or "sniff those profiles, its fun"
he just showed the possibilites of android development and did nothing wrong in my opinion
it's not his fault if facebook is unable to close a security leak known for a long time
yeah dont get me wrong blezz i understand that completely. but the argument was as to why they would remove it. legality reasons would be tne main issue. to cover their own backs as they can in fact face legal action for allowing the app to become available in their market.
I don't see anything wrong with the app.
It shows the flaws of facebook, and the fact that no one in facebook cares enough to do anything about it. But then I understand whygoogle would remove it... If facebook decided to sue for this google would be sued not YOU.
so it would be best if you released it HERE on xda rather than the market
Ran accross this article just now, relized you all had to read this. It appears HTC ****** up hard.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/1...e-numbers-gps-sms-emails-addresses-much-more/
Scary stuff.
I'm so damn tired of all companies taking the liberty to just monitor our lifes just how they like, no matter if its google, microsoft, facebook, apple or HTC. What anoyys even more is how we passivly is forced into accepting it, and just shrudd our shoulders about it. Reading this, I wish I was smart enough to strike back somehow.
The article says "Some Sensations" I'd like to know what that means
Good find.
Pikabat said:
The article says "Some Sensations" I'd like to know what that means
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try running the app...
errr ok this is scary though. i wanna ask what's htcLaputa.apk is?
Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using xda premium
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
EddyOS said:
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the example of how we/some of us just go used to this kind of things and started to accept things we never would have a few years back.
How exactly do you determine whats a trusted source? Obviously weve already had a bunch of malwares entering the market.
I use apps only from the company in question. 'Facebook for Android' from Facebook, 'Twitter' from Twitter, etc...only use about 20 apps all in anyway so I don't think I'm at risk
I'm not saying what's been found out isn't bad - it is - I just don't really care. People are far too paranoid these days
EddyOS said:
I use apps only from the company in question. 'Facebook for Android' from Facebook, 'Twitter' from Twitter, etc...only use about 20 apps all in anyway so I don't think I'm at risk
I'm not saying what's been found out isn't bad - it is - I just don't really care. People are far too paranoid these days
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not using so much apps either, on the other hand I want to be able to try some "fun" app from androidmarket without fearing theft og my personal information.
Its not about paranoia to me, I couldnt care less about wheter or not some random dude can read my sms. But Im rather angry about the companies doing just as they like, mainly to direct commercials and ads conected to your personality. Did you know facebook, after their latest update, now saves a certain cookie after your logout and sends all urls you visit with your browser back to their server..?
Well, now Im going offtopic in my own thread.
Id like to see HTC comment on this atleast.
Again, if Facebook care if I open a YouTube video every now and then then that's up to them - I'm not interesting!!
Would be nice to see what HTC say but I'm not going to hold my breath!
Im starting to loose faith in htc
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda premium
I tried to run the app, seems like my Sensation is not affected (Dutch one, that is)
so, in order to gain any kind of advantage, those apps need to know this vulnerability exists, am i right? just deleted that apk file, along with some other ones.
As the Android Police blog appears to have melted, here's Aunty's take on it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15149588
Oh noes naughty people can access:
The list of user accounts, including email addresses (but apparently not usernames or passwords)
A log of recent GPS locations (so you can be stalked!!!!)
Phone numbers taken from recent call logs (so people you call can be stalked!!!)
SMS data, including recent numbers and encoded messages (meh if they want to read "Park 123 543" be my guest)
HTC's response:
"HTC takes our customers' security very seriously, and we are working to investigate this claim as quickly as possible," the company said in a statement.
"We will provide an update as soon as we're able to determine the accuracy of the claim and what steps, if any, need to be taken."
EddyOS said:
The offending app is HtcLogger.apk and I've only seen it in the newer ROMs - I automatically removed it before this story broke as it didn't sound useful. End of the day you just have to be careful when you install new apps (e.g. direct from trusted sources)
I really wouldn't worry too much about it, typical media hype
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a way to tell if the offending app (Htclogger.apk) is on your phone without rooting?
jggonzalez said:
Is there a way to tell if the offending app (Htclogger.apk) is on your phone without rooting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember it appears you are absolutely fine unless you install an app which is written to access the log files.
As Androidpolice says, the info could be used to clone your device, not only read some of your contacts. Now of course, you are fine as long as you do not install any malicious app, but I would even feel uncomfortable knowing that HTC can read ANY activity from my device at ANY point in time WITHOUT asking for my permission (or even after I denied that permission as shown in the video). The VNC thingie would also bug me cuz it is an app without any apparent use for the user and it does not serve a specific purpose - its just there until "someone" needs it. Now of course HTC wants to improve on user feedback and pulling it is much more convenient than asking for it, but if they want my opinion and see what I'm using they should at least ask me for it. That said, let's hope HTC addresses this problem in the very near future and does clarify why those apps are there and what purpose they serve. I will run the test app again after the next OTA for sure.
kwiggington said:
Im starting to loose faith in htc
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think HTC is the problem.
I believe the problem is Google.
Ever go to the Google Android market place and see what they want to run in the background before they let you in?
I don't go near the place.
majesensei said:
As Androidpolice says, the info could be used to clone your device, not only read some of your contacts. Now of course, you are fine as long as you do not install any malicious app, but I would even feel uncomfortable knowing that HTC can read ANY activity from my device at ANY point in time WITHOUT asking for my permission (or even after I denied that permission as shown in the video).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're misssing the point.
The phone has this feature so that should you enable "Tell HTC" it can then send the info to HTC, if you don't enable that it just sits on your phone as a system log.
xaccers said:
You're misssing the point.
The phone has this feature so that should you enable "Tell HTC" it can then send the info to HTC, if you don't enable that it just sits on your phone as a system log.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, and I agree that this is not a scary thing for itself. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, but think about a combination of things: The log is created and sits there. There is a VNC client embedded deeply in your system by your manufacturer for no reason, which gives access to your device from a remote location. I am from Germany and used to a debate about data preservation (which is illegal, in Germany), but there are other countries that have a much broader "grey-zone" for these kind of things. I wonder where those Sensations with the HtcLogger.apk are ([email protected]?). We are all running the same Android build (as long as we don't root our phones), some are affected, others aren't. I just find it weird, and I doubt that some rogue dev at HTC programmed these apk's just for the fun of it.
Voice messages are always automatically downloaded for the best communication experience...
Really..??
Mmmm there is a stench of security breach..
ever asked yourself how they finance their continous updates? do you really think they just release a new version every 2 days just because they like you? think about it..
SecUpwN said:
think about it..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think about that?
tryin said:
Voice messages are always automatically downloaded for the best communication experience...
Really..??
Mmmm there is a stench of security breach..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? First of all, you can turn off the option of auto-downloading various file types in the app settings. Secondly, EVERYTHING you use Whatsapp for is passing through their servers (I'm assuming it's encrypted, because a while ago it was cleartext). If you're that paranoid about having your information read, don't use it. As a matter of fact, don't use a cell phone or the internet, because someone somewhere is skimming your data, whether it's a person or a computer doing it.
They also don't send out updates every 2 days. I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Their updates come months apart. They get their "funding" from user subscriptions...It's 99 cents for a year and $3 for 3 years. Multiply that by however many users they have (more than that of any other service) and you have a LOT of revenue. They've been doing this for years. Their app spans Android, iOS, Windows Phone, BB OS, Bada, Symbian, etc.
Whatsapp is already backdoored by 3 letter agencies and victim to dozens of security problems http://www.firsthacknews.com/2013/04/whatsapp-plagued-yet-again/
Don't use proprietary software use GuardianProject Gibberbot with a Tor .onion jabber/xmpp server to avoid SSL/TLS MITM attacks or open the app in Eclipse and pin certs to it for your jabber server.
Product F(RED) said:
What are you talking about? First of all, you can turn off the option of auto-downloading various file types in the app settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take a look at the screenshoot..
Secondly,
Product F(RED) said:
If you're that paranoid about having your information read, don't use it. As a matter of fact, don't use a cell phone or the internet, because someone somewhere is skimming your data, whether it's a person or a computer doing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you really saying that your advice is to stop using the internet or any other stuff if I care a bit about security or privacy (aka I'm paranoid, right!), seroiusly?
tryin said:
Take a look at the screenshoot..
Secondly,
you really saying that your advice is to stop using the internet or any other stuff if I care a bit about security or privacy (aka I'm paranoid, right!), seroiusly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically, yes. If something this negligible is bothering you, then you have bigger problems to worry about. Also the screenshot is saying that the audio is downloaded to your device automatically, not by someone else (even if it is). Anything that goes into or comes out of Whatsapp has been through their servers.
Solution? Don't use Whatsapp.
Product F(RED) said:
Anything that goes into or comes out of Whatsapp has been through their servers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And then? I don't understand the link...
I don't understand your link; you're saying that somehow the fact that voice messages are automatically downloaded to your phone are a breach of security... What about text messages then? Don't they work the same way?
I said that download automatically any type of file, (not text that in this context seems to be not executable) STINK of security breach...
Product F(RED) said:
What are you talking about? First of all, you can turn off the option of auto-downloading various file types in the app settings. Secondly, EVERYTHING you use Whatsapp for is passing through their servers (I'm assuming it's encrypted, because a while ago it was cleartext). If you're that paranoid about having your information read, don't use it. As a matter of fact, don't use a cell phone or the internet, because someone somewhere is skimming your data, whether it's a person or a computer doing it.
They also don't send out updates every 2 days. I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Their updates come months apart. They get their "funding" from user subscriptions...It's 99 cents for a year and $3 for 3 years. Multiply that by however many users they have (more than that of any other service) and you have a LOT of revenue. They've been doing this for years. Their app spans Android, iOS, Windows Phone, BB OS, Bada, Symbian, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha, no it's not secure neither good encrypted. Anyway, it's almost free and easy to use. Aslong as you dont share very private stuff you shouldnt care about privacy..
You should always care about privacy. This whole "if you're not doing anything illegal, you shouldn't care" mentality is how we got here to begin with.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Samsung Galaxy SIII, via Tapatalk.
meskes said:
You should always care about privacy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree!
With this apps,our privacy is very respected just scantly
Hi,
I've discovered the description of "Signal Private Messenger" app, but I don't know what thinking about it.
Its description seem's to indicate that you can communicate voice and text securely end to end with your smartphone, and that it's open source.
What is really securely ? I don't know and "I want to know"
Thanks in advance for your answers.
Hi, The short answer is Yes. Signal is by Open Whisper Systems & runs on iOS and Android. You can use it as a regular SMS/MMS app; as well as encrypted SMS/MMS/phone calls. To activate the encryption you need to exchange keys with the person you want to message.
Hope this helps!
equi_design said:
Hi, The short answer is Yes. Signal is by Open Whisper Systems & runs on iOS and Android. You can use it as a regular SMS/MMS app; as well as encrypted SMS/MMS/phone calls. To activate the encryption you need to exchange keys with the person you want to message.
Hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Thanks for your answer.
Your answer is a good summary of the app's features.
But what are you thinking about the word "securely" ?
Is it a dream or a reality ?
The app's editor highlights testimonies from known people who use it. Is it sufficient to trust this app ?
Has someone in this forum examined the code of this app ?
Nothing is completely secure.
In my opinion, & from my use, Signal is more secure than a normal messengering app - but less secure than a talk in real life.
If you are interested in security, please check out this XDA subforum; http://forum.xda-developers.com/general/security
And read up here: www.eff.org
Hm, nice to see a discussion going on. Have just heard Snowden recommend the app so I thought I'd check it out. BUT, there is a but ... I intentionally blocked the app from any internet usage whatsoever with AFWall+ donate. I've set up my AFW to show a toast whenever it blocks an app trying to use the internet so that I know which apps try to use the net in the background without my permission or intention. To my surprise my AFW blocks Signal all the time when I use Signal. And I mean ALL the time. How does this make sense? Why would a privacy app try to connect to the internet constantly? I've not got WiFi calling and I've not even enabled it in Signal's settings. Am I missing something here or is there sth wrong with the app? It's making me feel that it is constantly trying to leak data and that's why it attempts to use the internet. Good thing I have a robust thing on board such as AFWall... best firewall out there.
jonathansmith said:
Hm, nice to see a discussion going on. Have just heard Snowden recommend the app so I thought I'd check it out. BUT, there is a but ... I intentionally blocked the app from any internet usage whatsoever with AFWall+ donate. I've set up my AFW to show a toast whenever it blocks an app trying to use the internet so that I know which apps try to use the net in the background without my permission or intention. To my surprise my AFW blocks Signal all the time when I use Signal. And I mean ALL the time. How does this make sense? Why would a privacy app try to connect to the internet constantly? I've not got WiFi calling and I've not even enabled it in Signal's settings. Am I missing something here or is there sth wrong with the app? It's making me feel that it is constantly trying to leak data and that's why it attempts to use the internet. Good thing I have a robust thing on board such as AFWall... best firewall out there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's encrypted, end to end. It's not leaking anything. The code is opensource, you can go and review the code and build it yourself.
If you're blocking it from accessing the internet, then it's going to try again, probably because it can see that there is a network connection live.
@jonathansmith
Thanks for your detailed feedback.
It will be nice if someone in this forum could analyze the code of this open source app.
As for me, I am unfortunately not competent.
Were you able to identify with AFW the site the app was trying to connect ?
dtective said:
It's encrypted, end to end. It's not leaking anything. The code is opensource, you can go and review the code and build it yourself. If you're blocking it from accessing the internet, then it's going to try again, probably because it can see that there is a network connection live.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, that's exactly what I don't get. Why would it attempt to establish a connection. Ofc I'm blocking it. I'm blocking tons of others apps as well, but unlike Signal (and a few other suspicious apps) the other apps do not try to establish a connection.
As I said, when you block an app from accessing the net with AFWall you can tell AFWall to give you a toast showing you when every signle time when AFWall blocks a certain app trying to access the net. So, with 99% of my AFWall-blocked apps I don't get this toast, meaning that those apps don't even attempt to access the net (but better stay safe and have em blocked.) With some tricky apps though, AFwall shows that toast msg indicating that it successfully blocks a certain app from accessing the net. That's what I don't get - why would Signal be set up in a way that it would attempt to access the net. Prolly WiFi calling or sth but I'd rather use it for now only as a default SMS client.
Yes, you are right. Signal can see that there is a network connection live and that's why it constantly tries to connect to it. Just wish Signal would get it once and for all that it is blocked for good and stop trying to access the net.
If anyone knows which Services, Broadcast Receivers, or Activities from Signal should be disabled (using MyAndroidTools for example) please do share which ones they are so I can disable them and thus prevent Signal from constantly trying to establish a connection. The toast msg from AFW does become annoying when it is every second second
---------- Post added at 11:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 AM ----------
iwanttoknow said:
Were you able to identify with AFW the site the app was trying to connect ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe gotta look into the log of AFW. The toast msg only shows the ip address which Signal ties to connect but AFwall prevents it form doing. But that's not the prob for me. Doesn't matter too much what it tries to access cos I know AFWall is good enough at preventing that. Just want to stop Signal from trying to access whatever it is trying to access! Will let you know if I figure it out!
---------- Post added at 12:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:39 AM ----------
equi_design said:
Nothing is completely secure.
And read up here: www.eff.org
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I second that. Nothing is, indeed! And thanks for reminding me about eff ... here's a good one - https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere @iwanttoknow check it out!
And here's a bit of a follow-up. Managed to catch the toast. Not sure if it is always the same ip that AFW blocks, but will try to pay attention. A reverse search reveals that the geo location of the ip is some place in Washington, US.
https://imgur.com/a/5fhIf
As I understood it
(And I could be wrong I left signal years ago when it was text secure)
Signal does NOT use sms to send messages
That functionality of the app was dropped a while back
It uses internet only to transmit encrypted messages
And it uses its own message server to host your messages.
It seems like decent software
I abandoned it because it uses your personal phone number as your identifier..
And it will not work with out a phone number..
Which for me is just crazy as every government in the world and most phone companies are selling /tracking your "meta" data based on your smart phone and it's phone number.
Think of it as any other encrypted internet message system
But it uses your phone number as an identifier...
Everyone gets my pubic email address now for communication.
Cops, government, hospital, work, stores,etc
It's the 21st century. Why use a phone number for anything anymore?
nutpants said:
As I understood it
(And I could be wrong I left signal years ago when it was text secure)
Signal does NOT use sms to send messages
That functionality of the app was dropped a while back
It uses internet only to transmit encrypted messages
And it uses its own message server to host your messages.
It seems like decent software
I abandoned it because it uses your personal phone number as your identifier..
And it will not work with out a phone number..
Which for me is just crazy as every government in the world and most phone companies are selling /tracking your "meta" data based on your smart phone and it's phone number.
Think of it as any other encrypted internet message system
But it uses your phone number as an identifier...
Everyone gets my pubic email address now for communication.
Cops, government, hospital, work, stores,etc
It's the 21st century. Why use a phone number for anything anymore?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have to go back in time when the app was called Textsecure and it provided end to end encryption for SMS. The app was available on F-Droid until someone discovered that plain text sms were saved unencrypted on device. After that, the dev temporarily closed the source and also demanded that the app be removed from F-Droid, because in his view distribution on F-droid was "insecure." Well, that hole was fixed and the following versions worked pretty well. About the same, time, the dev started to be bothered by TSA every time he travelled by air. Then, within a few subsequent releases, google binaries and internet permission were included. Then, the app started to crash if internet service was restricted. In addition, you could only get the app from Googleplay, which means, you must have Gapps and Google Services Framework, which has total control over the phone and regularly "phones" home (obviously not your home). GSF can get your outgoing text before encryption and incoming text after.. Despite all of the above, one could still compile the app and use it without GSF. Then suddenly, the dev announced that he would no longer support encrypted SMS. About that time, he started receiving literally millions of $ from a US government's backed foundation. In addition, he was offered a lucrative contract to do encryption for What's UP, which later became Facebook. Quite a change after being harassed in airports So, encrypted sms were dropped and the app turned into an internet messenger. You must register with your phone number; your data goes through Google servers and Whisper System's servers. And by the way, neither the Signal servers nor Redphone servers are open source. You can't use the app unless you have Gapps and GSF and if you use the app, you are known to Whisper Systems, Google and all 3-letter agencies...
This is not the first time I am posting on Textsecure/Signal, just do a search on XDA and F-Droid forums and you will find more info with links. I would stay away from anything coming out of Whisper Systems. Use Silence, which is a fork of Textsecure with encrypted SMS. For over-the-internet services, use Conversations.
And by the way, never use an app where everything: encryption, encryption method, registration, servers are in the hands of one entity, which won't allow you to use other servers...
nutpants said:
As I understood it ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You might be right but for normal unencrypted messages Signal uses simple SMS. Have tried it and without any WiFi or data it simply sends a msg as an SMS. So far so good but u might have a point. I'm yet to test with someone who also has the app installed and see how encrypted msgs are transferred. I'd imagine it NOT to be over the internet, but then again you might have a point? Why? Because as I said I've blocked Signal with AFWall and I get a toast showing that Signal CONSTANTLY tries to connect to the internet when there is currently a live connection to the internet, be it Data or Wifi. So yeah, you might be right, but I need to test it out. In the meantime someone who has already done this would do us a favour by telling us how it works.
Using my personal phone number as identifier does not sound cool indeed. If you are right about this: 'It uses internet only to transmit encrypted messages. And it uses its own message server to host your message' then I guess I'm ok with using the net for transmitting encr. msg since they are encrypted with E2EE. As to where the msgs are hosted. I guess I'm better off having them stored at Signal's server than at Verizon's cos from Verizon they end up DIRECTLY to the government. I guess with nuff persuasion and money though they'd also end up there from Signal. It's the way of the world, isn't it? Also, as I mentioned in my last post, the IP which Signal constantly tries to connect to is in Washington. That's already fishy enough .... very fishy!
optimumpro said:
Use Silence, which is a fork of Textsecure with encrypted SMS. For over-the-internet services, use Conversations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about apps like 'Wire' and 'Wickr - Top Secret Messenger'? Are they any good? Will give Silence and Conversations a try! 10x for bringing them up.
unknown404 said:
How about apps like 'Wire' and 'Wickr - Top Secret Messenger'? Are they any good? Will give Silence and Conversations a try! 10x for bringing them up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wickr is not open source. So, for me it is out of the question. Wire sounds good, although they say they can terminate your account at any time. Also, they say the company is based in Switzerland, but the location for dispute resolution is San Francisco. They also say they can require you to download/upgrade the app, which means that if you want to stay on older version, they won't let you...
Again, I am against models where everything is concentrated in the same hands...
optimumpro said:
Wickr is not open source. So, for me it is out of the question. Wire sounds good, although they say they can terminate your account at any time. Also, they say the company is based in Switzerland, but the location for dispute resolution is San Francisco. They also say they can require you to download/upgrade the app, which means that if you want to stay on older version, they won't let you...
Again, I am against models where everything is concentrated in the same hands...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess I'm ok with Wickr's being closed source (but then again what do I know ... the discussion about open vs closed source goes both ways so more opinions are welcome). Just don't get why I made an account there and now trying to log back in I'm told the credential are wrong. Weird!
Hi,
In my first post, I was asking your opinions about "Signal Private Messenger" app.
Thanks all for your answers.
In your answers, I have discovered the names of Silence and Conversations apps.
Which level of confidence for them and why ?
iwanttoknow said:
Hi,
In my first post, I was asking your opinions about "Signal Private Messenger" app.
Thanks all for your answers.
In your answers, I have discovered the names of Silence and Conversations apps.
Which level of confidence for them and why ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll be happy to hear more opinions as well but as optimumpro said, Silence really seems solid and offers E2EE, which is what I need. Have tested it with other users and seems good so far. Can't say anything about Conversations cos I've not used it yet. I read good stuff about Wickr as well, but yeah ... closed source deters many.
unknown404 said:
I'll be happy to hear more opinions as well but as optimumpro said, Silence really seems solid and offers E2EE, which is what I need. Have tested it with other users and seems good so far. Can't say anything about Conversations cos I've not used it yet. I read good stuff about Wickr as well, but yeah ... closed source deters many.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both Conversations and Silence are open source, unlike Signal, which contains prebuilt binaries and jar files. Also, neither Conversations nor Silence forces you to register or use their servers, which Signal does.
optimumpro said:
Both Conversations and Silence are open source, unlike Signal, which contains prebuilt binaries and jar files. Also, neither Conversations nor Silence forces you to register or use their servers, which Signal does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That I do second and that I do like!
Hi,
After reading some articles, I discovered that it was "easy" to assure End-to-end encryption (E2EE) for our communications. I share my understanding here, knowing that it's well known by experts in the domain. So thank you for being kind to me.
In fact, there is a difficulty for communicating parties who wanted to communicate without anyone spying their voice or written messages. They have to use cryptographic protocols relying on a shared secret. But how to share a secret on unsecure communication channels ?
It's "easy", due to the Diffie-Hellman cryptographic protocol which permits to do that. There are a lot of explanations about it on the Net. But it could be defeated by the man-in-the-middle attack (MITM). To counter this attack, you have "simply" to sign the shared secret with asymetric keys (with your secret key to sign the shared secret, and with your public key permitting to the other part verify it). If you are interested, see more explanations on the Net about asymetric cryptographic protocols.
I sincerely hope that I didn't say too much nonsense.
Silence app is based on Diffie-Hellman protocol, like other apps in the domain.
In summary, after reading your answers to my initial post :
- Silence app permits to exchange SMS/MMS, using E2EE.
- Conversations app is an instant messaging (IM) client for Android, using E2EE.
Signal Private Menssenger is an E2EE IM and voice calling app.
I have noted what has been written about Signal Private Menssenger in this thread, so is there a "less intrusive" E2EE voice calling app, in the same way as Silence ?
Thanks for your participation.