VPNSecure deal - About xda-developers.com

I'm guessing xda peeps take security seriously so I'd like to point out that the VPNSecure deal mentions it's safe and protects you. Well according to various reviews it fails DNS leaks so it's not considered safe.
https://restoreprivacy.com/vpn-warning-list/
VPNSecure – VPNSecure is based in Australia – a 5 eyes country that is not good for privacy. VPNSecure was also identified in an academic paper for leaking IPv6 and DNS requests, which leaves its users exposed to “surveillance and malicious agents.” The same paper also noted that VPNSecure has a number of egress points in residential ISPs. This suggests that users are unknowingly being used as endpoints in a P2P-like bandwidth network – i.e. user bandwidth is being stolen (although the paper could not confirm this). (See here for more info.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
5 eyes means that under a gag order they can force them to log and record everything you do over VPN.
Also lots of reports recently over "lifetime" subscriptions have proven to be not the case. Unless they state it's for YOUR lifetime then it can legal be the lifetime of the OFFER. SO tomorrow that can say it's over.

Related

Can devs work on preventing Celebrite UFED from violating privacy rights?

Just learned about the Celebrite UFED device currently available and in use by law enforcement (Link listed below). The UFED connects to mobile devices (indeed the Epic) and extracts every bit of data - to include previously deleted data potentially. This means all text messages, passwords, browser history, banking information, Google accounts, Facebook, etc. will all be rendered as part of the public record once judicial precedings commence. And even if charges are dismissed and the record is sealed, the integrity of the extracted information has been compromised and cannot be viewed as safe.
So I am asking if any dev's might be able to restore the fourth amendment constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure through the magic that ya'll do. For those who might be thinking they have nothing to hide and this would only benefit criminals, keep in mind that silently giving up civil liberties is a slippery slope. It starts off small, but (conspiracy kook sounding, I know) turns into opening up your nightstands for government types before bed. While I support the need for efforts by law enforcement in assuring the safety of our communities, I DO NOT support trickery and loopholes around the judicial process like the overtly invasive Celebrite UFED technology. I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this issue and if anyone with more knowledge in this are than I will step forward to secure our privacy and peace of mind.
cellebrite-com (forum won't allow me to post actual link)
I don't have a problem with this at all. If your stupid enough to do criminal stuff on your phone then you should go to jail. In actuality the US Supreme Court ruled recently that a cell phone is not constitutionally protected via 4th Ammendment. I think someone was arrested and they looked at his messages and found someone else who conspired to commit a felony. They charged him as well....
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
Eh if you are caught doing something stupid then yes it MIGHT be necessary. But if its abuse then we have a right to defend yourself.
I'm pretty sure that there are certain criteria for it to work. It was in a thread somewhere. When I find it ill edit my post.
I think they were:
Must have a sd card inserted
Usb debug must be on
*something else I can't remember*
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
mmcgrat6 said:
Just learned about the Celebrite UFED device currently available and in use by law enforcement (Link listed below). The UFED connects to mobile devices (indeed the Epic) and extracts every bit of data - to include previously deleted data potentially. This means all text messages, passwords, browser history, banking information, Google accounts, Facebook, etc. will all be rendered as part of the public record once judicial precedings commence. And even if charges are dismissed and the record is sealed, the integrity of the extracted information has been compromised and cannot be viewed as safe.
So I am asking if any dev's might be able to restore the fourth amendment constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure through the magic that ya'll do. For those who might be thinking they have nothing to hide and this would only benefit criminals, keep in mind that silently giving up civil liberties is a slippery slope. It starts off small, but (conspiracy kook sounding, I know) turns into opening up your nightstands for government types before bed. While I support the need for efforts by law enforcement in assuring the safety of our communities, I DO NOT support trickery and loopholes around the judicial process like the overtly invasive Celebrite UFED technology. I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this issue and if anyone with more knowledge in this are than I will step forward to secure our privacy and peace of mind.
cellebrite-com (forum won't allow me to post actual link)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly, "be part of the public record" is not true. Only evidence pertaining to the case at hand may be submitted in to some form of record. So while yes, there will be a person(s) scouring all of the information, anything irrelevant (ie, not usable as evidence) would not be saved.
With this in mind, how would this constitute illegal search and seizure? You said so yourself "once judicial precedings begin"; such as a search warrant. So there is no breaking of the constitution there...and furthermore, once a search warrant is obtained, anything of yours that falls within the scope of the warrant is subject to search. So, to me, this is no different than if a cop read through every page of your diary looking for evidence. Because the unneccessary stuff will not be saved.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
I am actually a law student, and this is illegal as long as you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (ie: YOU HAVE A PASSWORD) As long as you have a lock password it is illegal. Also, I have used cellebrites and they don't usually work anyway unless the phone is unlocked, so just keep your phone locked and if an officer asks you to unlock it, tell them to get a search warrant.
Wow aren't we ignorant. If it were that simple. How many people who were on death row have they let out because years later they find evidence that clears them. How many times hagve you heard of someone spending years in jail for rape to find DNA evidence clears them?
Unfortunately people in law enforcement are human beings flawed like the rest of us. If they can read the data who is to say they can't put incrimintating data on just because they don't like you?
I think it is easy to make blanket ignorant statements like this totally ignoring reality unless you are the one who is wronged.
Top Nurse said:
I don't have a problem with this at all. If your stupid enough to do criminal stuff on your phone then you should go to jail. In actuality the US Supreme Court ruled recently that a cell phone is not constitutionally protected via 4th Ammendment. I think someone was arrested and they looked at his messages and found someone else who conspired to commit a felony. They charged him as well....
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
My concern is not for criminals to be allowed to freely conduct their activities under protection from prosecution. And while cellphones have been ruled as not protected under the fourth amendment, handsets like the Epic interconnect to provide access into far more areas for personal data than a simple cellphone. in fact the courts have ruled that email, for example, IS protected by the fourth amendment. What this device represents is a "work around" into individual privacy.
More and more we as a nation have been relinquishing our privacy rights in support of protecting our safety and security. However, it's been almost a decade of this trend and the nation has been evolving ever since toward everybody knowing your business. We might not have anything to hide, but we must also have legal protections for cases which involve potentially corrupt individuals from abusing the systems which allow them use of this invasive device.
I agree, police officers are surprisingly uninformed of Supreme court law. They usually don't care until it affects them, like when the exclusionary rule told them "Hey, wanna **** these defendants over? Well now their free, good job asshole."
Plus there are crooked cops that could use your passwords they find on your phone (even if you aren't doing anything wrong on it) and sign in to your Facebook and IM to find out more info about you. Is this okay? If so then go to a communist state where you aren't allowed to have secrets from the government.
excellent point, squshy 7. But "part of the public record" was not meant to be taken as the only reason for concern. While protocol calls for the data to be disposed of if nothing happens, we don't live in a perfect world. Evidence is lost. Incorrect limbs get amputated. People forget to do things or believe something important has already been done. And corruption among those of authority can and does happen. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So why let it happen needlessly in the first place?
mmcgrat6 said:
excellent point, squshy 7. But "part of the public record" was not meant to be taken as the only reason for concern. While protocol calls for the data to be disposed of if nothing happens, we don't live in a perfect world. Evidence is lost. Incorrect limbs get amputated. People forget to do things or believe something important has already been done. And corruption among those of authority can and does happen. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So why let it happen needlessly in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly dude, I've come to terms with the fact that mistrusting everyone in charge for fear of corruption is unfounded. Its actually much simpler than that.
Most humans are idiots.
Hence our messed up world. Not evil. Just stupidity.
Once one realizes that, it becomes alot easier. Because then you'll see that there is truly nothing you can do about it.
Lol. Im a misanthrope to the max
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Deleted 10 char
Benjamin Franklin said:
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that sums up MY opinion on this matter, but really, just look at my previous post and just keep your phone locked.
Censura_Umbra said:
I agree, police officers are surprisingly uninformed of Supreme court law. They usually don't care until it affects them, like when the exclusionary rule told them "Hey, wanna **** these defendants over? Well now their free, good job asshole."
Plus there are crooked cops that could use your passwords they find on your phone (even if you aren't doing anything wrong on it) and sign in to your Facebook and IM to find out more info about you. Is this okay? If so then go to a communist state where you aren't allowed to have secrets from the government.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you putting illegal stuff on your Facebook? What's there that can't be retrieved via birth records, driver's licenses, and marriage certificates...all of which are already in the government's records?
A crooked cop can plant any kind of evidence they want to incriminate you. It doesn't have to be on your phone. Heck it's probably not even worth their effort.
Any decent lawyer can get that stuff tossed anyway. If anything, it's harder than ever to successfully prosecute someone, not easier.
And really, as resource strapped as police departments are, they're not looking at you at all unless you ARE doing something illegal. Don't use the word "wrong" because it's not necessarily the same as "illegal."
Censura_Umbra said:
And that sums up MY opinion on this matter, but really, just look at my previous post and just keep your phone locked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You confuse freedom with anarchy. You're free to do what you want. You're also free to accept any and all consequences.
Censura_Umbra said:
I am actually a law student, and this is illegal as long as you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (ie: YOU HAVE A PASSWORD) As long as you have a lock password it is illegal. Also, I have used cellebrites and they don't usually work anyway unless the phone is unlocked, so just keep your phone locked and if an officer asks you to unlock it, tell them to get a search warrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. The cellebrites we use at Sprint at least, require the device to be unlocked(unless the Android has USB debugging on already, in which case I believe it can bypass the lock). If a blackberry has a password on it, it pops up on the machine requesting you enter the password on the machine.
So technically it can "bypass" your lock, but only if you enter the lock on the cellebrite machine.
LOL the cellbrites carriers have obviously were only meant to transfer contacts, pictures, etc. By error, Ive been to extract this information even when the phone was locked. Im sure they can program a machine to bypass all of that.
Uh and yes EVERY american must give up some freedom for security. This is nothing new. As long as you dont do some stupid ****, then you have nothing to worry about. Anyway, most of us on here have rooted phones. You know rooted phones exposes your passwords, etc right?
socos25 said:
Wow aren't we ignorant. If it were that simple. How many people who were on death row have they let out because years later they find evidence that clears them. How many times hagve you heard of someone spending years in jail for rape to find DNA evidence clears them?
Unfortunately people in law enforcement are human beings flawed like the rest of us. If they can read the data who is to say they can't put incrimintating data on just because they don't like you?
I think it is easy to make blanket ignorant statements like this totally ignoring reality unless you are the one who is wronged.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not ignorant by any shape of the imagination, as I have experience on both sides of the law. As someone said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the other ones that have been tried." Nothing is perfect and innocent people may be jailed or executed. Not saying that is good, but that it works most of the time...which is why I live in the USA.
If you have lived as long as I have then you would know that things go up and down (conservative & liberal) in this country. Now we are in a conservative swing and we do need some balance as we move away from the days of coddling criminals and granting more rights to them than the rest of us get.
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
I'd like to say this..
1) your locks are pointless if you have clockworkmod installed...as they can just backup your rom lol..as cwm has no password protect option...
2) You can always restore data...1 wipe i never enough..I had my sd cards erased a few times...I was able to recover 100% the contents..to do a proper wipe you gotta wipe 7 times using 0's method and alternating 1's and 0's..to note..this isnt going to make the data unrecoverable..just more expensive to recover...the point in wiping data is not that its unrecoverable but wipe it enough so that it isnt worth it financially for the other side to recover it.
b15love said:
Uh and yes EVERY american must give up some freedom for security. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
actually, this IS new, and those that believe the above quoted 'line' deserve neither freedom or security.
For example, is it ok for a police officer who does a traffic stop for improper lane change (for example) to snatch out the cellebrite device and ask you to hand over your cell phone ? NO.. without a search warrant or probable cause (at the very least) he has no right or authority to dig around in your phone.
If you were just involved in an accident, then i could see the possibility of scanning your phone to determine if you were texting while driving, thus contributing to the accident. Officers in Michigan could be using this device for routine traffic stops according to this article
Basically, we've ventured off topic anyway.. the question that remains (regardless of the 'conspiracy theory' sounding debate) is:
is it possible for the devs to prevent this device from scanning our phones ?

ITU vs ICANN (internet)

This is a bit off topic but still effects all of us.
So the ITU is attempting to form a coup in order to oust the American dominated ICANN for control over the international 'standards' of the internet. The ITU is comprised of countries such as China and Iran who want people to have registered IP's in order to gain internet access. Of course that means what anonymity you still have online will be completely lost. Other things they'd like to see happen are international mandated standards for packet delivery which could lead to easier censorship. Of course there are more things that certain countries in the ITU would like to see happen but that list is long. A lot of the major players in the ITU are also major offenders and oppressors of human rights and civil uprisings against the established government (eg. China).
This isn't to say ICANN is better, it's US led. Being American I can say for a fact that this government is far from a saint with oppression, human rights, freedom/privacy, and tyrannical tendencies (some may disagree on that one).
Of course the US is fighting this but honestly, this is exactly what the US government wants. The "fight" they're putting up is just a facade. I say this because after SOPA and all the other bills, what the ITU wants is eerily similar. This whole issue could be 6 of one 1/2 a dozen o the other though. Could the ICU be better for us than ICANN? After all, just because China or Russia wants the internet one way doesn't mean it will happen. Or does it?
It all just seems to convenient. The US admits to Stuxnet (thanks Obama) while Flame remains unclaimed. The ITU wants different standards to "combat" these issues but also lock down the internet. They use Flame as a major example why this needs to happen. The US "fights" the ITU and looks like the good guy but loses. In the end every government involved gets what they want: control over information and people.
Anybody else know about this whole situation? Any opinions or viewpoints? How about the lack of oversight that exists and will continue?
I don't see the internet ever leaving the hands of ICANN. Too much of the backbone is owned by the US Govt directly or US corporations. Not just here, but overseas as well.
Of course the international community wants a bigger say who wouldn't?
Let me leave you with an analogy. If you are my neighbor and I build a road but let you connect your property to my road I am a nice guy. If you start telling me how I should run my road I might listen or I might keep you off my road but it doesn't change who owns the road.
I do agree that the US has far too much vested in ICANN to even consider leaving. That being the case, if these other countries continue with the ITU it seems that would almost create two different internets (plural internet? what an odd idea). While I agree with America building the metaphorical road, the truth is that we don't own it. In fact nobody truly owns it. We could shut down all the servers in the US or block outside access but that won't necessarily halt the rest of the worlds internet. Though it might be a pretty big hit on the commerce end.
KCRic said:
We could shut down all the servers in the US or block outside access but that won't necessarily halt the rest of the worlds internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yah, it pretty much would. So much of the core backbone rests in US control, that if the US shut it off, MOST of the internet would stop functioning.
DCRocks said:
Yah, it pretty much would. So much of the core backbone rests in US control, that if the US shut it off, MOST of the internet would stop functioning.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't know that. I truly don't have a full grasp on how much of the internet the US controls on the hardware side.
Not to seem like I'm wearing a tinfoil hat or anything, just posing a question. The wants of the ITU seem to be exactly the same as what the US government wants when you take SOPA and all the other bills into account, do they not? So wouldn't it seem only logical for the US to pretend to fight the ITU, only to lose, have what they (the government) want, but still look squeaky clean?
KCRic said:
Didn't know that. I truly don't have a full grasp on how much of the internet the US controls on the hardware side.
Not to seem like I'm wearing a tinfoil hat or anything, just posing a question. The wants of the ITU seem to be exactly the same as what the US government wants when you take SOPA and all the other bills into account, do they not? So wouldn't it seem only logical for the US to pretend to fight the ITU, only to lose, have what they (the government) want, but still look squeaky clean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's say you own billions of dollars worth of networking gear and fiber. Would you let an international group tell you how you MUST use it?
I see a future where packets leaving the ICANN backbone being filtered on a MAC or IP basis. Think borders and passports in the digital world. Want to visit China, digitally? Papers please, comrade.
Edit: you don't want an ITU controlled internet. How well had the UN worked out for us? Recently the Soviet bloc has been vetoing things simply on party principle. Those countries hate the internet. Why would you want to give them control of it? As bad as things are here, it doesn't hold a candle to some of the ITU countries. You don't want to compromise your online freedoms to their standards.
TerryMathews said:
Let's say you own billions of dollars worth of networking gear and fiber. Would you let an international group tell you how you MUST use it?
I see a future where packets leaving the ICANN backbone being filtered on a MAC or IP basis. Think borders and passports in the digital world. Want to visit China, digitally? Papers please, comrade.
Edit: you don't want an ITU controlled internet. How well had the UN worked out for us? Recently the Soviet bloc has been vetoing things simply on party principle. Those countries hate the internet. Why would you want to give them control of it? As bad as things are here, it doesn't hold a candle to some of the ITU countries. You don't want to compromise your online freedoms to their standards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well no, I don't want to compromise my online freedoms. However, our government wouldn't have it any other way if they could. Considering the ITU's main focus from what I've read so far is to strip anonymity from the internet and also control who comes in and who goes out. Literally tracking your every click. If you have a website and they don't like you (or somebody has enough money and doesn't like you) they block you from the internet. That is exactly what the US government wants to do. I don't really think the government cares how well the internet performs for us, it's seen as a luxury for the most part, not a right for every citizen. I personally don't see them caring much about what the ITU says regarding the civilian network. If it works, good. They'd rather play internet god than worry about how our traffic is dealt with on public networks. Just my opinion on it anyway.
The idea of needing papers, or rather a digital certificate, to access another countries network is insane. The internet use to be a place you could go to let loose, that last great freedom. Now you have to watch your every click and every word you type.
KCRic said:
I do agree that the US has far too much vested in ICANN to even consider leaving. That being the case, if these other countries continue with the ITU it seems that would almost create two different internets (plural internet? what an odd idea). While I agree with America building the metaphorical road, the truth is that we don't own it. In fact nobody truly owns it. We could shut down all the servers in the US or block outside access but that won't necessarily halt the rest of the worlds internet. Though it might be a pretty big hit on the commerce end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually there are already two internets. Public which we use and secret which the military uses, but that's beside the point.
私のEVO 3Dから送信される。

Your OnePlus customer order data may have been stolen

Just got this email claiming to be from [email protected]:
Security Notification
We are reaching out to you directly as we have discovered that part of your order information was accessed by an unauthorized party. We can confirm that your payment information, password and account are safe, but your name, contact number, email and shipping address may have been exposed.
We took immediate steps to stop the intruder and reinforce security. Right now, we are working with the relevant authorities to further investigate this incident and protect your data.
We wanted to notify you of this so that you can be alert to people pretending to be OnePlus to get further information from you, or people asking you to buy products or services from them. OnePlus will never ask you for your passwords, and any financial information should only be provided via a secure payment page on the OnePlus website or one of our partners if you are buying products from us.
We are deeply sorry about this, and are committed to doing everything in our power to prevent further such incidents. We will continue to investigate and update you as we learn more. In the meantime, please contact us with any questions or concerns at Customer Support.
After this the email ends with various links to OnePlus, an unsubscribe link and then their company address in China
So has anyone else received this?
Is it fake?
Can you post the email headers? Likely that it is legit.
Wouldn't be the first time...
Ah, just seen it IS legit. OnePlus have made a statement about this on their forums and it's in the XDA news section.
This may not be a recent data breach as the last time I bought something direct from OnePlus' online store was the OnePlus 6 early in 2018. (I got my 7T from a retailer).
I seriously should have bought mine from amazon. I knew this was likely...
Well in the EU at least they may (and should) face multi-million euro fines for this under GDPR laws considering their systems have already been hacked in the past. There's no excuse for any company to be complacent about data protection so I hope they they get what they deserve in this case.
I'm unlikely to buy from OnePlus' store again.
SpaceGooner said:
Well in the EU at least they may (and should) face multi-million euro fines for this under GDPR laws considering their systems have already been hacked in the past. There's no excuse for any company to be complacent about data protection so I hope they they get what they deserve in this case.
I'm unlikely to buy from OnePlus' store again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you aware that it may not be complacency? The criminals are constantly beating on the door trying to hack in. Its a constant battle on both sides to stay one jump ahead of the security and or the criminals. Sometimes the criminal hackers win and sometimes the companies security does..
autosurgeon said:
Are you aware that it may not be complacency? The criminals are constantly beating on the door trying to hack in. Its a constant battle on both sides to stay one jump ahead of the security and or the criminals. Sometimes the criminal hackers win and sometimes the companies security does..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes of course you're right in what you're saying. Maybe I was being too harsh when I mentioned complacency. It's just that they have now pledged to improve their data security in light of this event by partnering with a world renowned security organisation. It makes me wonder why they didn't invest in this level of security provision before this breach happened.
SpaceGooner said:
Yes of course you're right in what you're saying. Maybe I was being too harsh when I mentioned complacency. It's just that they have now pledged to improve their data security in light of this event by partnering with a world renowned security organisation. It makes me wonder why they didn't invest in this level of security provision before this breach happened.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The last time the breach happened you mean... This is just hot air being blown out by the corporation.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...ed-40000-credit-card-data-theft/#673762c677ad
It's a constant battle even with small websites with no useful data to steal. They hack in and use your site to spam Viagra and porn ads. I have had several sites I manage get hit even though I am running multiple layers of protection.

General XDA Article: Google is changing how new Android 13 devices should store driver’s licenses

https://www.xda-developers.com/android-13-hardware-drivers-licenses/
February 16, 2022 10:26am Adam Conway
Google is changing how new Android 13 devices should store driver’s licenses​Carrying a wallet has become less of a necessity for me thanks to my smartphone and Google Pay, but there are a few cards that I can’t go without. A driver’s license would be one such card, though a digital driver’s license offers multiple advantages over the traditional ID card. You can’t lose it, you can wipe it remotely if your phone gets stolen which means you’re less likely to get your identity stolen, and you’ll have an easier time bringing it up on request. Google introduced the Identity Credential API in Android 11 for storing identity cards, though now it appears that devices launching with Android 13 will require additional hardware for storing digital driver’s licenses.
As reported by Esper, a recent code change suggests that chipsets launching with Android 13 must support the Identity Credential Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) at feature version 202201 or later. 202201 of the Identity Credential HAL introduces support for presenting multiple documents during a single transaction, such as simultaneously sharing your driver’s license and motor vehicle registration. Google can’t mandate that devices upgrading to Android 13 must support it, but new devices that launch with Android 13 will need to, as enforced through a test in the Vendor Test Suite, or VTS.
For context, the VTS is an automated testing suite that validates the vendor implementation is compliant with Google requirements. It consists of a set of testing frameworks and test cases, testing both the Android system’s core HALs and libraries, and the low-level system software such as the kernel, modules, and firmware.
The Identity Credential HAL enables the storing of identity documents in the device’s secure hardware, which is met by the inclusion of a Trusted Execution Environment, or TEE. This is a dedicated area of the main applications processor for executing sections of code in an isolated environment. Not many devices have actually introduced the Identity Credential HAL despite TEE implementations being widespread.
Interestingly, there’s also the Identity Credential Direct Access HAL too, though its implementation won’t be required. It essentially allows for direct access via NFC to the secure enclave that holds a user’s documents even when the battery is too low to boot the OS. This is only possible when the secure hardware features a CPU and storage device separated from the applications processor. Very few devices meet this criterion, and the only devices that currently implement the Identity Credential HAL itself are Google Pixel devices.
While mobile driver’s licenses are gaining traction across the U.S., Google intends for the identity credentials API to be generic and to hold other secure documents, too. Motor vehicle registration and vaccination records are two potential use cases. The TSA plans to begin recognizing mobile driver’s licenses as valid IDs for domestic travel soon, and at least 30 U.S. states have already issued or plan to issue them. We’ve already seen as well that with iOS 15, Apple announced that the TSA would accept its digital IDs for domestic travel.
There are obviously a ton of security concerns when it comes to storing personal identification on your smartphone, but Google is taking steps to make it as safe as possible. There’s definitely an upside to carrying your documents digitally instead of a physical card that can be lost or stolen, but additional hardware for storing those documents will go a long way towards convincing authorities to use the Identity Credential API when developing these applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is impressively backwards. Digital means *easier* to steal than something physical. Regardless of what kind of nonsense hardware is associated with it, gooble's control over their blobware means that this kind of thing OPENS UP THE DOOR to MASS identify theft.
Speaking as a computer engineer.... NO EFFIN WAY.
96carboard said:
That is impressively backwards. Digital means *easier* to steal than something physical. Regardless of what kind of nonsense hardware is associated with it, gooble's control over their blobware means that this kind of thing OPENS UP THE DOOR to MASS identify theft.
Speaking as a computer engineer.... NO EFFIN WAY.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're entitled to your opinion. I think probably 99% of the folks who regularly read in the P6P section already know your opinion on that because you feel a need to visit so many threads and repeat this, and even repeat similar or the same things in multiple threads one right after the other. Whether you're right or wrong, doesn't matter. If you could please resist the temptation to repeat it in my threads, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Maybe make a thread specifically for your purpose.
Thank you.
96carboard said:
That is impressively backwards. Digital means *easier* to steal than something physical. Regardless of what kind of nonsense hardware is associated with it, gooble's control over their blobware means that this kind of thing OPENS UP THE DOOR to MASS identify theft.
Speaking as a computer engineer.... NO EFFIN WAY.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much more fun to give myself to Google and let the ecosystem work for me.
/half sarcasm
Scary stuff. This feels like the precursor to vaccine passports, and social ranking like China. Scan your phone to see if you are allowed to eat here.
roirraW edor ehT said:
You're entitled to your opinion. I think probably 99% of the folks who regularly read in the P6P section already know your opinion on that because you feel a need to visit so many threads and repeat this, and even repeat similar or the same things in multiple threads one right after the other. Whether you're right or wrong, doesn't matter. If you could please resist the temptation to repeat it in my threads, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Maybe make a thread specifically for your purpose.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These things can't be repeated enough.

Privacy score.

Greetings everyone!
I wanted to bring attention to the site operation.
According to https://tosdr.org/ site which ranks privacy score of websites, XDA gets Grade D.
Remarks:
They store data on you even if you did not interact with the service
This service keeps user logs for an undefined period of time
This service may collect, use, and share location data
Tracking via third-party cookies for advertising
Terms may be changed any time at their discretion, without notice to the user
I think for such an important high level tech site like this, this is unacceptable.
I would prefer better privacy protections for the developers and users.
Thanks.
I'm not concerned...
Use a VPN and block 3rd party cookies

Categories

Resources