3 ms·

Perhaps you may be interested in Librem 5 or Pinephone, both of which have hardware kill switches for modem and available schematics. The latter even has most o

Perhaps you may be interested in Librem 5 or Pinephone, both of which have hardware kill switches for modem and available schematics. The latter even has most of the modem software freed.

gf000 8mo ago
Security theater, it has absolutely no use. If you can't trust your hardware that it won't actively listen to the microphone without your knowledge and permission then what are you even doing with that device?!
- fsflover 8mo ago
  I do trust my device. However in specific circumstances where privacy may be critical, an additional protection might save me even from a state-sponsored attack.
  - handedness 8mo ago
    If your threat model is state-sponsored then I hope for your sake you're just LARPing, because if not you're in for a bad time with some of the solutions you advocate.
    - fsflover 8mo ago
      This is just a shallow dismissal. I'm sure state actors can break into my phone. I'm also sure that they can't track or record me when kill switches are off (unless there is another device nearby). Tell me why I'm wrong and please stop repeating how surprised you are that people are so very stupid.
      - handedness 8mo ago
        For kill switches on a device with otherwise comparatively abysmal security to be the better security choice over a device with thorough and comprehensive security paired with OS-level radio and sensor switches, you would have to demonstrate that the infinitely more vulnerable device's physical kill switches are somehow significantly more effective at addressing your threat model than software switches in a trustworthy OS. If they are approximately equally effective then you have given up a lot for no benefit, and are net much worse off. Again, I get the human factors appeal of physical kill switches, and if all else were equal they may be worth having, but people are place far too much faith in the value of physical kill switches.
        fsflover 8mo ago
        > For kill switches on a device with otherwise comparatively abysmal security to be the better security choice Same strawman as earlier: I already replied that I never said that Librem 5 was more secure. At least you accepted that the kill switches do work, so there is progress. > If they are approximately equally effective then you have given up a lot for no benefit, and are net much worse off. (I won't claim they are, but) there is another benefit in freedom, apart from the security. Some people care about freedom. When I see that, I suggest Librem 5 in my replies, and not as a more secure solution. Maybe you should read my replies more carefully before answering.
strcat 8mo ago
Those devices have atrocious security at a hardware, firmware and software level. Their microphone kill switch also doesn't prevent audio recording. They aren't open hardware despite many attempts to mislead people with the marketing. > The latter even has most of the modem software freed. Pinephones have entirely closed source baseband firmware. They use a highly unusual cellular radio which includes both an incredibly outdated Qualcomm baseband processor with atrocious updates and security combined with an extremely outdated proprietary fork of Android running on an extra CPU core which isn't present in any mainstream smartphone. It's only replacing the unusual extra OS which has been done. That whole component doesn't exist on other smartphones and the only reason it's possible to replace it is because the whole radio has absolutely atrocious security. The radio is connected via a far higher attack surface USB connection providing far less isolation for the OS and the USB connection can be used to flash the proprietary Android OS via the fastboot protocol. The baseband firmware itself doesn't have any replacement available.
- daneel_w 8mo ago
  > Pinephones have entirely closed source baseband firmware. > The baseband firmware itself doesn't have any replacement available. Same with the Google Pixels and their Samsung Exynos modem. Neither you nor GrapheneOS users have any idea at all what's going on in their cellular transceivers. What will it be for the upcoming Motorola phone?
  - ysnp 8mo ago
    Hi daneel, what would you like GrapheneOS to do while you develop your own formally verified, open hardware, open source firmware/OS baseband processor they can use? Sit on their hands doing nothing or making the best of the least worst options currently available?
    - daneel_w 8mo ago
      The Pixels already are the best of the least worst options currently available. Anything new must categorically bring improvements, and the closed source firmware of the Pixels is a pressing point.

Perhaps you may be interested in Librem 5 or Pinephone, both of which have hardware kill switches for modem and available schematics. The latter even has most of the modem software freed.

gf000 8mo ago

Security theater, it has absolutely no use. If you can't trust your hardware that it won't actively listen to the microphone without your knowledge and permission then what are you even doing with that device?!

fsflover 8mo ago
I do trust my device. However in specific circumstances where privacy may be critical, an additional protection might save me even from a state-sponsored attack.
- handedness 8mo ago
  If your threat model is state-sponsored then I hope for your sake you're just LARPing, because if not you're in for a bad time with some of the solutions you advocate.
  - fsflover 8mo ago
    This is just a shallow dismissal. I'm sure state actors can break into my phone. I'm also sure that they can't track or record me when kill switches are off (unless there is another device nearby). Tell me why I'm wrong and please stop repeating how surprised you are that people are so very stupid.
    - handedness 8mo ago
      For kill switches on a device with otherwise comparatively abysmal security to be the better security choice over a device with thorough and comprehensive security paired with OS-level radio and sensor switches, you would have to demonstrate that the infinitely more vulnerable device's physical kill switches are somehow significantly more effective at addressing your threat model than software switches in a trustworthy OS. If they are approximately equally effective then you have given up a lot for no benefit, and are net much worse off. Again, I get the human factors appeal of physical kill switches, and if all else were equal they may be worth having, but people are place far too much faith in the value of physical kill switches.
      - fsflover 8mo ago
        > For kill switches on a device with otherwise comparatively abysmal security to be the better security choice Same strawman as earlier: I already replied that I never said that Librem 5 was more secure. At least you accepted that the kill switches do work, so there is progress. > If they are approximately equally effective then you have given up a lot for no benefit, and are net much worse off. (I won't claim they are, but) there is another benefit in freedom, apart from the security. Some people care about freedom. When I see that, I suggest Librem 5 in my replies, and not as a more secure solution. Maybe you should read my replies more carefully before answering.

strcat 8mo ago

Those devices have atrocious security at a hardware, firmware and software level. Their microphone kill switch also doesn't prevent audio recording. They aren't open hardware despite many attempts to mislead people with the marketing. > The latter even has most of the modem software freed. Pinephones have entirely closed source baseband firmware. They use a highly unusual cellular radio which includes both an incredibly outdated Qualcomm baseband processor with atrocious updates and security combined with an extremely outdated proprietary fork of Android running on an extra CPU core which isn't present in any mainstream smartphone. It's only replacing the unusual extra OS which has been done. That whole component doesn't exist on other smartphones and the only reason it's possible to replace it is because the whole radio has absolutely atrocious security. The radio is connected via a far higher attack surface USB connection providing far less isolation for the OS and the USB connection can be used to flash the proprietary Android OS via the fastboot protocol. The baseband firmware itself doesn't have any replacement available.

daneel_w 8mo ago
> Pinephones have entirely closed source baseband firmware. > The baseband firmware itself doesn't have any replacement available. Same with the Google Pixels and their Samsung Exynos modem. Neither you nor GrapheneOS users have any idea at all what's going on in their cellular transceivers. What will it be for the upcoming Motorola phone?
- ysnp 8mo ago
  Hi daneel, what would you like GrapheneOS to do while you develop your own formally verified, open hardware, open source firmware/OS baseband processor they can use? Sit on their hands doing nothing or making the best of the least worst options currently available?
  - daneel_w 8mo ago
    The Pixels already are the best of the least worst options currently available. Anything new must categorically bring improvements, and the closed source firmware of the Pixels is a pressing point.