Worried about Security with your cellphone?

[AZgl1800]

just encrypt it twice, that ought to do it
and you won't have to worry about sitting on it and breaking the phone.

https://interestingengineering.com/sams ... s-military

[Portreve]

“This smart phone will self-destruct in 5 seconds. Good luck, Jim.”

[AZgl1800]

“This smart phone will self-destruct in 5 seconds. Good luck, Jim.”

[AZgl1800]

I always buy rugged phones but not that spec. My current handset is rugged and can withstand a car being driven over it, it's slim, but still manages to be heavy. It has a built in battery though which I hate.

Curious about which phone you bought....
I have always said, "I will never buy a phone if the battery cannot be replaced".....
and then my Samsung Note4 died and I had to find a replacement....
I won't buy new, so ended up with a Samsung Note8 which has an internal battery....
......... so far, so good up to now though.

I installed an app called "MacroDroid" which monitors the battery voltage and lets me know when it is down to 35% so I can put it back on charge.... and I wrote a 2nd macro which kicks in at 87% and says "Battery Charge..... Remove Charger"

it vocalizes both of those messages...
the thought is, if I never run it down to zero volts, and never push it to 100% charge, the battery's lifespan should be extended.... at least that is what I have read from the folks who make the battery.

[Portreve]

If people here are really concerned about privacy and security, they should be using Purism's Librem 5. No AOSP distro competes with it, and certainly no other maker's release does, either. It's a bit hard to take seriously people who are like, “Oh, I'm very concerned about my security but I'm still running Android.”

Just saying.

[Pippin]

Purism's Librem 5 is out of reach for many...

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...It's a bit hard to take seriously people who are like, “Oh, I'm very concerned about my security but I'm still running Android.”...

And that's a major reason why I don't have a "smart" phone.

[Portreve]

Purism's Librem 5 is out of reach for many...

Well, while I can appreciate the financial aspects of this, it's just like somebody saying "I want a PB&J but I don't want to buy peanut butter."

[Moem]

It's a lot more like someone saying "... but I can't afford peanut butter".

[Lady Fitzgerald]

It's a lot more like someone saying "... but I can't afford peanut butter".

Or, in my case, the benefits of peanut butter do not outweigh its disadvantages and cost.

[Portreve]

Moem and Lady Fitzgerald:

I'm not referring to the financial aspect of this because I wasn't talking about folks who can't afford an $800 phone. I'm referring to people in general who like to act as though they're being very security conscious simply by trying to restrict through some means their factory install of Android, or their use of an AOSP release plus nonstandard mechanism for installation of highly specific apps.

I'm not arguing against the affordability argument you're trying to present. There is a significant difference between my analogy and your rephrasing of it.

[Moem]

Well, I can't afford to spend the equivalent of $800 on a phone. Or maybe I can but then I'd have to cut too many other things out. I see myself as fairly privacy-conscious... more so than you, for example. No Facebook (not even a 'deleted' account), no WhatsApp. Yet I own a (pretty much Google-free) Android. Does that mean that you can't take me seriously? So be it.

Basically, I'm not sure what your point is.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Moem and Lady Fitzgerald:

I'm not referring to the financial aspect of this because I wasn't talking about folks who can't afford an $800 phone. I'm referring to people in general who like to act as though they're being very security conscious simply by trying to restrict through some means their factory install of Android, or their use of an AOSP release plus nonstandard mechanism for installation of highly specific apps.

I'm not arguing against the affordability argument you're trying to present. There is a significant difference between my analogy and your rephrasing of it.

Some things are being taken out of context here (apples to kumquats with a few pears thrown in). I earlier agreed with what you had to say about people who claimed to be concerned about security yet continued to use Android phones by saying that was a major reason I don't have a smartphone (btw, iOS is no security prize, either).

My next comment was a response to what Moem had to say about not being to afford a certain kind of smartphone. I was obliquely saying that being able to afford it isn't always the reason for being unwilling to pay for the phone by pointing out that the advantages of it may not outweigh the cost and/or disadvantages.

Btw, not being able to afford something that would correct a problem (or not being able to justify the expense) is a valid argument for not buying that something and sticking with a less desirable solution. You may not have been referring to the financial aspect but it is something others do have to consider.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...I see myself as fairly privacy-conscious... more so than you, for example. No Facebook (not even a 'deleted' account), no WhatsApp. Yet I own a (pretty much Google-free) Android...

You are aware that Android is sponsored by Google? Even if you strip the obvious Google apps from Android, I would be surprised if Google didn't still have some way to monetize your use of it or otherwise compromise your security in some way.

I'm keeping my eye on Linux based phones, such as the Pine phone, but I don't feel they are ready for "prime time" yet (leastwise, not for me). Then there is the cost of the phones themselves and the data plans needed to use them. I'm retired and have no real need for a smart phone. It would be nice to have one but the benefits would not justify the long term costs for me, even if security wasn't an issue. My little $12 talk only flip phone and a $5/month pay as you go plan meets my needs just fine. This applies to me only; others may (and probably do) need smart phones enough to justify the costs and security risks.

[rene]

You are aware that Android is sponsored by Google?

Noticed those sort of comments before on this forum. Android is not "sponsored by Google", Android is a full-on Google-product, plain and simple.

[Moem]

...I see myself as fairly privacy-conscious... more so than you, for example. No Facebook (not even a 'deleted' account), no WhatsApp. Yet I own a (pretty much Google-free) Android...

You are aware that Android is sponsored by Google? Even if you strip the obvious Google apps from Android, I would be surprised if Google didn't still have some way to monetize your use of it or otherwise compromise your security in some way.

Google built Android. But I did not strip the obvious Google apps from Android; rather, my Android was installed through LineageOS, which allows it to never have had those apps in the first place.
Yet, we can't be completely certain, like you are saying, and that's why I'm saying it's pretty much Google-free, not completely and utterly Google-free.

Ubuntu Touch, on the other hand, does appear to be Google-free. Which is one of the big reasons why I'm currently trying that out. If you want to see how that's turning out: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=320295

[Portreve]

Well, I can't afford to spend the equivalent of $800 on a phone. Or maybe I can but then I'd have to cut too many other things out. I see myself as fairly privacy-conscious... more so than you, for example. No Facebook (not even a 'deleted' account), no WhatsApp. Yet I own a (pretty much Google-free) Android. Does that mean that you can't take me seriously? So be it.

It may not be your intent, but you come across as someone more motivated by a hatred of all-things-Google than privacy itself. I'll take a wild stab and assume that's not your intended self-representation, but nevertheless that's the impression I get.

I take great pains to ensure that anything which I might wish never to be known by third-parties is indeed kept secure beyond any reasonable ability by anyone to discover. Consequentially, anything for which my usage of Google may serve as a conduit are things which simply do not fall into that category. Yes, it's a trade-off in a sense that I allow Google to know of my physical whereabouts, about my physical movements, aspects of my personal health (I use a Samsung Galaxy Active2 smart watch), primarily work-related events in my life, etc., but I regard all that as being trivial. Thanks to constantly on-orbit surveillance satellites, I regard my movements and whereabouts as being already known by governmental actors, as well as AT&T, so I really do not give a whether Google also knows about it in parallel. All the rest of my records are either known or immediately knowable upon first desire by my own government (along with everyone else who lives in the U.S. and, thanks to Five Eyes / Nine Eyes / Fourteen Eyes, pretty much you and everyone else anywhere in the world as well).

Now, switching gears here (because I think this has now been beaten to death) another reason I don't try to rush out and buy the L5 is it takes two to tango where communication security is concerned. Since I can say with certainty that I do not know anybody in my own personal life (whether friends or co-workers) who can possibly be the least bit bothered to shore up and secure any aspect of their communications, it would be futile for me to switch to entirely secure communications means (for example, Signal) because I would then simply find myself alone. Attempting to, shall we say, "force the matter" would likely end my employment and all my friendships.

As they said in the movie Apollo 13, “Well, if the chutes don't open, what's the point?”

[AZgl1800]

If people here are really concerned about privacy and security, they should be using Purism's Librem 5. No AOSP distro competes with it, and certainly no other maker's release does, either. It's a bit hard to take seriously people who are like, “Oh, I'm very concerned about my security but I'm still running Android.”

Just saying.

that phone, right now, is pure junk............

battery life is 2 hours??
My Samsung Note8 will give me 2 days of light use, about 14 hours of moderate use while roaming around town looking for addresses, occasional Facebook reading, etc.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/li ... mer-ready/

[Portreve]

If people here are really concerned about privacy and security, they should be using Purism's Librem 5. No AOSP distro competes with it, and certainly no other maker's release does, either. It's a bit hard to take seriously people who are like, “Oh, I'm very concerned about my security but I'm still running Android.”

Just saying.

that phone, right now, is pure junk............

battery life is 2 hours??
My Samsung Note8 will give me 2 days of light use, about 14 hours of moderate use while roaming around town looking for addresses, occasional Facebook reading, etc.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/li ... mer-ready/

Oh... wow... I honestly didn't know it was in that kind of state. I assumed by now it functioned properly.

Clearly, at this time, Ubuntu Touch is the better choice for a straight GNU+Linux-based phone. At least it functions.

[Moem]

It may not be your intent, but you come across as someone more motivated by a hatred of all-things-Google than privacy itself. I'll take a wild stab and assume that's not your intended self-representation, but nevertheless that's the impression I get.

If I tilt my head and squint a little, I can see that, yeah. The thing is, some companies are the target of my specific distrust because they have their fingers in so many pies. And Google is the king of that. They get their data from a uniquely large variety of sources. Plus, they're under a foreign government, so not even the laws of my own country can protect me.

Yes, it's a trade-off in a sense that I allow Google to know of my physical whereabouts, about my physical movements, aspects of my personal health (I use a Samsung Galaxy Active2 smart watch), primarily work-related events in my life, etc., but I regard all that as being trivial.

I don't see health data as trivial at all. Think about insurance premiums... what if you got notified that your premiums will rise because you've been walking a lot less recently?

Thanks to constantly on-orbit surveillance satellites, I regard my movements and whereabouts as being already known by governmental actors, as well as AT&T, so I really do not give a whether Google also knows about it in parallel.

I trust my own government somewhat. I do not trust yours at all. I trust companies less than I trust governments. For me, there's a difference.

it takes two to tango where communication security is concerned.

Yes, that's the old problem, isn't it. And I don't know of a universal solution. At least in some areas, we can make a few tentative dance moves and see if anyone joins in.