5 ms·

Google’s ATAP said the micro SD format made sense because there’s already advanced security features on your phone, contained in the SIM card, which protects th

Google’s ATAP said the micro SD format made sense because there’s already advanced security features on your phone, contained in the SIM card, which protects the things important to carriers. Vault is designed to be an equivalent, but designed to project a user’s important content. How exactly does this help on a mobile platform that is architected to enable easy and legal exfiltration of user data? It seems like a difficult sell to imply I can't trust the smartphone's primary storage for key material, but to trust processes on the same system with the plain text. I know why this is useful in the abstract (I use a yubikey as an openpgp card to keep key material off my computer and phone) but the class of attacks it is designed for are not the attacks smart phone users face daily and en mass. (I'd trade in the yubikey in an instant for a platform with a stronger permission system, and apps that don't send home a copy of all data I allow them to operate on.)

x0x0 11y ago
why aren't you using an iphone then? Apple's business model is not the systematic sale of your information to advertisers. They're far from perfect, but look at eg app permission systems. Android's next gen os finally catches up to what ios has had for quite a while. It's pretty clear where priorities lie.
- minthd 11y ago
  As android user , if you cared about app permissions, all you needed to do was to install cyanogenmod.
  - x0x0 11y ago
    all you need to do is root your phone, install a new os, and deal with all the downstream issues? That's just not at all what I want for my phone. Right now, it basically more or less works, and I really like that. I simply don't want to turn it into yet another thing I have to administer, follow security updates for, and deal with when it breaks. And even if I can do it for myself, the majority of users can't and/or won't.
- forgottenpass 11y ago
  Because I can use more than one criteria when making a purchase decision? I've had iphones too. When I did, I was able to care about users other than myself, and how the status quo effects us all. The difference in first party surveillance is real, but they both court developers to their platforms with little regard for how much surveillance they will or will not do. The problems are the same there, and the minor differences are merely dressing around the edges. They're just hyped to be bigger than they are because people love a rivalry and websites love clicks.
  - x0x0 11y ago
    well yes, this is the real world and you have to make tradeoffs; privacy apparently isn't important enough to you the differences are more than window dressing; one company is an advertising company and the other isn't. One company's messaging platform is only encrypted in transit to the company; the other's is architected so they can't read your messages. Again, I'm not claiming apple is perfect on privacy, but they are better than google.
- x0x0 11y ago
  replying to self -- over here [1] people are discussing apple shutting down an app that uses url handlers to scrape the other installed apps on an ios device. The crucial difference: android just lets you query this. While Android has an API for fetching a user's installed applications, Apple did not include one, and even removed the ability to access a device's UDID--steps clearly made with the intention of preventing the profiling of users and the leaking of personal information. Tell me again how google and apple are the same on privacy :rolleyes: [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9625916 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9625916
Guvante 11y ago
> but to trust processes on the same system with the plain text I don't know if that is necessary from what the details are showing. It looks like there are two dummy files that act are used to stream data between the two OSes meaning the phone does not necessarily have unlimited access.
- SturgeonsLaw 11y ago
  But surely whatever data the phone is piping to and from those dummy files can be read while it's still plaintext?
  - Guvante 11y ago
    The distinction is that random access to the files need not be provided. If I give your phone access to /usr/private_key.txt then the OS has total control. If I instead give you a way to sign messages then the OS has much weaker ability to control (obviously some amount if the device is connected and capable of signing).
_up 11y ago
Wasn't one big key Argument immutable logging. So you have at least a good chance to know, if you where compromised and maybe even get to know how they did it.

x0x0 11y ago

why aren't you using an iphone then? Apple's business model is not the systematic sale of your information to advertisers. They're far from perfect, but look at eg app permission systems. Android's next gen os finally catches up to what ios has had for quite a while. It's pretty clear where priorities lie.

minthd 11y ago
As android user , if you cared about app permissions, all you needed to do was to install cyanogenmod.
- x0x0 11y ago
  all you need to do is root your phone, install a new os, and deal with all the downstream issues? That's just not at all what I want for my phone. Right now, it basically more or less works, and I really like that. I simply don't want to turn it into yet another thing I have to administer, follow security updates for, and deal with when it breaks. And even if I can do it for myself, the majority of users can't and/or won't.
forgottenpass 11y ago
Because I can use more than one criteria when making a purchase decision? I've had iphones too. When I did, I was able to care about users other than myself, and how the status quo effects us all. The difference in first party surveillance is real, but they both court developers to their platforms with little regard for how much surveillance they will or will not do. The problems are the same there, and the minor differences are merely dressing around the edges. They're just hyped to be bigger than they are because people love a rivalry and websites love clicks.
- x0x0 11y ago
  well yes, this is the real world and you have to make tradeoffs; privacy apparently isn't important enough to you the differences are more than window dressing; one company is an advertising company and the other isn't. One company's messaging platform is only encrypted in transit to the company; the other's is architected so they can't read your messages. Again, I'm not claiming apple is perfect on privacy, but they are better than google.
x0x0 11y ago
replying to self -- over here [1] people are discussing apple shutting down an app that uses url handlers to scrape the other installed apps on an ios device. The crucial difference: android just lets you query this. While Android has an API for fetching a user's installed applications, Apple did not include one, and even removed the ability to access a device's UDID--steps clearly made with the intention of preventing the profiling of users and the leaking of personal information. Tell me again how google and apple are the same on privacy :rolleyes: [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9625916 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9625916

Guvante 11y ago

> but to trust processes on the same system with the plain text I don't know if that is necessary from what the details are showing. It looks like there are two dummy files that act are used to stream data between the two OSes meaning the phone does not necessarily have unlimited access.

SturgeonsLaw 11y ago
But surely whatever data the phone is piping to and from those dummy files can be read while it's still plaintext?
- Guvante 11y ago
  The distinction is that random access to the files need not be provided. If I give your phone access to /usr/private_key.txt then the OS has total control. If I instead give you a way to sign messages then the OS has much weaker ability to control (obviously some amount if the device is connected and capable of signing).

_up 11y ago

Wasn't one big key Argument immutable logging. So you have at least a good chance to know, if you where compromised and maybe even get to know how they did it.