4 ms·

Don’t use Android... do use Gmail?

blakesterz 8y ago
I though the same thing, and they also say use Chrome. Maybe two different threat models? I'd say Gmail is very secure, maybe not very private though? It seems like it would be super hard for an average bad guy to break into a Gmail account. So if you're defending yourself against people who are trying to break into your email account through average methods, Gmail is the way to go.
- jowiar 8y ago
  I think the main argument here is that Gmail+Chrome lets you use a hardware second factor for login.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    Tangent: I thought with webauthn and the new Firefox, U2F keys should work with Google Services. Has anyone been able to log in using a Yubikey and Firefox to Google? Because I haven't.
    - geofft 8y ago
      Yes, I do this, on Debian stable, using the browser download from the Firefox website. You need a recent Firefox (I think the latest ESR is fine but not before that) and for stupid reasons you need to register the security key with Chrome, but once it's associated with your account you can log in via Firefox.
      - Tomte 8y ago
        The register/use distinction is really stupid, but probably what's going to help me. Thanks a lot!
    - Leace 8y ago
      > Has anyone been able to log in using a Yubikey and Firefox to Google? Because I haven't. Yes, this works ever since Google introduced new accounts page. Tested with Firefox on Windows and Linux.
    - pcwalton 8y ago
      It should be supported in Firefox now. In general you should be fine using Firefox (note: not Tor Browser) if security is important to you.
      - geofft 8y ago
        What are your reservations about Tor Browser? (Or is it just that Tor is a different threat model and ballgame?)
snowwrestler 8y ago
For this threat model (hacking by nation states and political activists) the focus is on the individual products, not the company. Gmail and Chrome are considered to be the most secure options; Android is not.
toofy 8y ago
This is likely because the threat model does not include a threat for data which is collected for advertising purposes, but rather prioritizes the threat of random hackers or mid-high-range resourced state level actors. While Google is certainly a threat for those of us who value privacy, this is a different issue than being persistently targeted by resourced hackers. Also, Google are one of the more secure email providers, they spend a fairly significant amount of resources towards researching and defending against resource rich state actors. This combined with how seemless they’ve made hardware based 2 factor work with their products makes them one of the better options for anyone who will be persistently targeted like a journalist. And anyone with a threat model similar to a journalist will be using u2f if they have any technical sense whatsoever.
- dwighttk 8y ago
  But isn’t Gmail going to give your unencrypted emails up when they get a warrant?
tptacek 8y ago
That's right. It's not about avoiding Google. Google does excellent security work. It's about using the most secure products in each category. An Android phone can be made asymptotically as secure as an iPhone, but only by an expert.
- plttn 8y ago
  Buy a Pixel, set a secure passcode. There you go.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    No, that's wishful. The Pixels are the most secure Android phones you can buy, but they are not natively as secure as an iPhone. But: if it helps put a dumb argument to rest, consider that in the populations being trained, "Android phone" means "phone from an insane variety of vendors, most of whom are not competent to sell or maintain a secure phone".
    - coretx 8y ago
      Pixels are the #1 pick for security, but not with it's default ROM installed. https://copperhead.co/ https://copperhead.co/ is a seriously hardened ROM without google play services and simply having security as a #1 priority.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        I don't even know where to start with this but let's just stipulate that when I said "experts can get an Android phone asymptotically as secure as an iPhone", I meant stuff like "people can pick very specific models and then install an entire custom operating system on the phone". I don't actually agree with what you're saying, but the argument will be unproductive, and I think we're close enough that my point stands.

I though the same thing, and they also say use Chrome. Maybe two different threat models? I'd say Gmail is very secure, maybe not very private though? It seems like it would be super hard for an average bad guy to break into a Gmail account. So if you're defending yourself against people who are trying to break into your email account through average methods, Gmail is the way to go.

jowiar 8y ago
I think the main argument here is that Gmail+Chrome lets you use a hardware second factor for login.
- Tomte 8y ago
  Tangent: I thought with webauthn and the new Firefox, U2F keys should work with Google Services. Has anyone been able to log in using a Yubikey and Firefox to Google? Because I haven't.
  - geofft 8y ago
    Yes, I do this, on Debian stable, using the browser download from the Firefox website. You need a recent Firefox (I think the latest ESR is fine but not before that) and for stupid reasons you need to register the security key with Chrome, but once it's associated with your account you can log in via Firefox.
    - Tomte 8y ago
      The register/use distinction is really stupid, but probably what's going to help me. Thanks a lot!
  - Leace 8y ago
    > Has anyone been able to log in using a Yubikey and Firefox to Google? Because I haven't. Yes, this works ever since Google introduced new accounts page. Tested with Firefox on Windows and Linux.
  - pcwalton 8y ago
    It should be supported in Firefox now. In general you should be fine using Firefox (note: not Tor Browser) if security is important to you.
    - geofft 8y ago
      What are your reservations about Tor Browser? (Or is it just that Tor is a different threat model and ballgame?)

snowwrestler 8y ago

For this threat model (hacking by nation states and political activists) the focus is on the individual products, not the company. Gmail and Chrome are considered to be the most secure options; Android is not.

toofy 8y ago

This is likely because the threat model does not include a threat for data which is collected for advertising purposes, but rather prioritizes the threat of random hackers or mid-high-range resourced state level actors. While Google is certainly a threat for those of us who value privacy, this is a different issue than being persistently targeted by resourced hackers. Also, Google are one of the more secure email providers, they spend a fairly significant amount of resources towards researching and defending against resource rich state actors. This combined with how seemless they’ve made hardware based 2 factor work with their products makes them one of the better options for anyone who will be persistently targeted like a journalist. And anyone with a threat model similar to a journalist will be using u2f if they have any technical sense whatsoever.

dwighttk 8y ago
But isn’t Gmail going to give your unencrypted emails up when they get a warrant?

tptacek 8y ago

That's right. It's not about avoiding Google. Google does excellent security work. It's about using the most secure products in each category. An Android phone can be made asymptotically as secure as an iPhone, but only by an expert.

plttn 8y ago
Buy a Pixel, set a secure passcode. There you go.
- tptacek 8y ago
  No, that's wishful. The Pixels are the most secure Android phones you can buy, but they are not natively as secure as an iPhone. But: if it helps put a dumb argument to rest, consider that in the populations being trained, "Android phone" means "phone from an insane variety of vendors, most of whom are not competent to sell or maintain a secure phone".
  - coretx 8y ago
    Pixels are the #1 pick for security, but not with it's default ROM installed. https://copperhead.co/ https://copperhead.co/ is a seriously hardened ROM without google play services and simply having security as a #1 priority.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      I don't even know where to start with this but let's just stipulate that when I said "experts can get an Android phone asymptotically as secure as an iPhone", I meant stuff like "people can pick very specific models and then install an entire custom operating system on the phone". I don't actually agree with what you're saying, but the argument will be unproductive, and I think we're close enough that my point stands.