i think guy brings up a good point and perhaps a decent solution. why not allow/encourage the dev's to explain a bit more. I'm a fairly adept nerd but when i'm installing an app sometimes i'm just not sure why in the world this app needs that permission...how is my mom or sister or anyone that i advocate Android to going to figure it out? why does this app need my coarse or fine location or full network access or access to the contact list etc...
and please do not say 'if you don't like what's listed, don't install the app'. that is exactly the point of this thread. the line items in the Review Permissions window don't always make sense. how can the average end user make a educated guess with the current system...they don't, they just start doing the same thing they do on their Windows Desktops...just click right on thru it. then what happens? some jerk writes a piece of malware. user has an issue. now its all androids fault. and viola, proof that linux based devices are still too geeky for avg use.
http://tech.shantanugoel.com/2010/08/14/android-permissions-malware.html
Unfortunately, there's no denying the cold, hard facts - ignorance is not bliss. Everything has a learning curve. Time and effort must be spent to educate users as to why <this> is happening and what it is doing for them. It's sad but true. Besides, if everything that required higher learning could be easily figured out I'm sure humanity would be freed from the shackles of poverty, war and hunger by now. So, yes, permissions are too obtuse for the average user. Unless they want to educate themselves on more generalized computing skills they'll never get it.
That's just my two cents. Sorry I couldn't be of better assistance
ok. so i wish to educate myself. please provide a full and detailed example listing why which permissions may be needed/used so that i will be able to make an educated choice. where is that link again?
i'm bringing up an issue...not asking for others to chime in and tell me how stoopid the end user base is. i'm an admin for over 10yrs. trust me ... i know. in this case i am also confused as are a large numer of folks. i understand the huge development curve android has experienced over the last 18mths. my concern is that if this issue is not addressed, even the folks that would take the time to read the Review Permissions page will give up. i know i have on more than one occasion. that's a bad trend.
Wow. You bring up a good point. Didn't mean to offend you or anything. I still don't have a good answer for you but I will let you know that I only install apps that I can trust usually after researching them via Google searches and talking about them with people here. I too am an admin (been a long, long 15 years now) and if there's 2 things I learned about recommending custom Android setups they are:
- If you think the user is going to use you as Wikipedia it's probably best to leave them at stock
and
- Only recommend this kind of stuff to users who are willing to accept responsibility for their actions otherwise you'll be the fall guy every time something goes wrong.
Again, I'm sure you know this and I didn't mean to offend you so..... bye.
Users can be pretty obtuse, and I think you're completely correct about the current permission system. However, I don't think it could be made much clearer without multiplying the number of permissions. Malware can exist because users consider certain permissions to be common. Conversely, apps with a good reputation can include permissions that make them wonder, "why would they need that?" Look at keyboards and how many people freak out when they go to enable them.
One thing that would be nice for users is if you could tap on a permission and the phone would display a short explanation of that permission. They probably aren't self explanatory for everyone.
beatblaster said:
- If you think the user is going to use you as Wikipedia it's probably best to leave them at stock
and
- Only recommend this kind of stuff to users who are willing to accept responsibility for their actions otherwise you'll be the fall guy every time something goes wrong.
Again, I'm sure you know this and I didn't mean to offend you so..... bye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no offense. i do understand. there was a point in time where i used to openly provide paid tech support to home systems of my coworkers....it was a short point in time. lol. but i digress ... i may have come off too strong in my reply, i was just trying to prevent the thread from wandering off.
I've tried to post on this topic in the past but have not nothing useful. in and of itself, i find that kinda sad. I've even seen some folks suggest that people "take a trusting stance because most developers do not intend harm". i wish i could. but i'm out of college.
it would be wonderful if someone (ie: a google dev or just someone with knowledge of these things) were able to create a page that could give real world examples and general rules of thumb. currently i have only found a couple pages that cover a couple settings. not nearly enough to be of much use.
Saturn2K said:
One thing that would be nice for users is if you could tap on a permission and the phone would display a short explanation of that permission. They probably aren't self explanatory for everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur.....I look at the permissions that apps ask for all the time. However, if I see a battery management app is asking me for full internet access and access to my contacts, I just pass on it. A lot of times you can figure out if an app is requesting bogus permissions just by using common sense.
rugedraw said:
I concur.....I look at the permissions that apps ask for all the time. However, if I see a battery management app is asking me for full internet access and access to my contacts, I just pass on it. A lot of times you can figure out if an app is requesting bogus permissions just by using common sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if your app is paid for by advertisements then it will need Internet Access so it can retrieve ads...thus paying the developer. often that's where i see 'coarse location' used as well...for regional specific ads. so in those cases, not nefarious use but a perfect example of what I'm talking about. thank you.
the problem with the current permissions system is twofold;
1) as mentioned, there is no details WHY or WHAT FOR a particular permission is required
2) its all or nothing, ie you can't give permission for network access and restrict access to contact list, etc. You have to accept all the requested permissions or deny and not install the app.
fwiw: There is an app in the market called "permissions" that tells you not only the permissions each app requires but it gets VERY specific. Within each permission category there is a whole list of specifics.
It won't help with apps you haven't installed yet but it's good info on the ones you already have.
*edit- Just revisited this app, it's not as detailed as I remember.
just a lil bump...
bumpity bump ...
nothing? at all?
Some of us use Textsecure as replacement for Stock SMS app. Textsecure provides encryption for your SMS. However, my recommendation is: stay away or at least don't update to 2.X... versions.
The developer has introduced Google Cloud Messaging, which means that even if your sms are secure, the fact you are using the app will be recorded in Google Centralized database. In addition, he removed the ability of the user to regenerate new identity key. In last couple of releases, he forced the user to allow the app to contact the internet (otherwise, the app would crash). That is even if you compile the app from sources, which I did a couple of hours ago. If you download the app from Store, you can't even use it without Google account and GSF, the latter will record your every keystroke including the password used to encrypt the messages. In further addition, the app is only available through Googleplay and the developer is actively resisting third party distribution. If that is not enough, you should know that Whisper systems is owned by Twitter, which is a red flag in of itself. The code is growing larger and is more difficult to examine for back door purposes.
My advice: stay away from this development, which in my view is compromised...
Edit. In January of this year, the developer left Twitter. Interestingly, he is still working on Textsecure and it is published under Whisper, which is Twitter. About the same time, all those things described above started to happen. Also interesting is that the developer was put on federal watch list and was continuously harrased by various agencies when flying. So, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that his new employer is the previous harraser...
All more reasons to stay away from this app.
optimumpro said:
Some of us use Textsecure as replacement for Stock SMS app. Textsecure provides encryption for your SMS. However, my recommendation is: stay away or at least don't update to 2.X... versions.
The developer has introduced Google Cloud Messaging, which means that even if your sms are secure, the fact you are using the app will be recorded in Google Centralized database. In addition, he removed the ability of the user to regenerate new identity key. In last couple of releases, he forced the user to allow the app to contact the internet (otherwise, the app would crash). That is even if you compile the app from sources, which I did a couple of hours ago. If you download the app from Store, you can't even use it without Google account and GSF, the latter will record your every keystroke including the password used to encrypt the messages. In further addition, the app is only available through Googleplay and the developer is actively resisting third party distribution. If that is not enough, you should know that Whisper systems is owned by Twitter, which is a red flag in of itself. The code is growing larger and is more difficult to examine for back door purposes.
My advice: stay away from this development, which in my view is compromised...
Edit. In January of this year, the developer left Twitter. Interestingly, he is still working on Textsecure and it is published under Whisper, which is Twitter. About the same time, all those things described above started to happen. Also interesting is that the developer was put on federal watch list and was continuously harrased by various agencies when flying. So, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that his new employer is the previous harraser...
All more reasons to stay away from this app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And here is some more fresh evidence. Today I posted this info on Cyanogen site related to Textsecure Push for CM.
http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/whisperpush-secure-messaging-integration
The site says it is neither censored no monitored. Within 5 minutes, the post has disappeared... . So, stay away from this app as the development has been compromised. In my view, of course...
You have no clue what youre talking about.
Corndude said:
You have no clue what youre talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, pal... for a very, very thorough, thoughtful and factual argument.
Edit: by the way, what does no gapps project have to do with textsecure being compromised?
Thanks for the heads up. Something is really amiss, and I won't want to directly experience it. I'm staying away from TextSecure for sure.
abdelazeez said:
Thanks for the heads up. Something is really amiss, and I won't want to directly experience it. I'm staying away from TextSecure for sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most messenger apps today work with Google Push Notifications, seems to be no problem for people there. Funny that it is here. As for SMS, I would never use that through another app. Besides, the phone carrier companies save those probably too, whats so different with that you said ? Text Secure is a very nice app I think. Right now people on iOS don't have that app yet, which makes it hard to establish in mixed system userbases among people. But I hope that will change.
Besides, most people here probably use Twitter. Funny to complain about something that might be related to Twitter then, isn't it ?
Wolfseye
wpkwolfseye said:
Most messenger apps today work with Google Push Notifications, seems to be no problem for people there. Funny that it is here. As for SMS, I would never use that through another app. Besides, the phone carrier companies save those probably too, whats so different with that you said ? Text Secure is a very nice app I think. Right now people on iOS don't have that app yet, which makes it hard to establish in mixed system userbases among people. But I hope that will change.
Besides, most people here probably use Twitter. Funny to complain about something that might be related to Twitter then, isn't it ?
Wolfseye
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The difference is that Textsecure/Whisperpush/CMpush tell you your SMS are encrypted. If they are indeed encrypted and there are no backdoors, your carrier (and others) can only get encrypted SMS (good luck to them trying to decipher). All other SMS apps are in plain text. In my view earlier versions of Textsecure are indeed secure. Starting from version 2.X, we no longer know that considering all the facts I mentioned in the OP.
You should really get your facts straight. Twitter bought Whisper Systems in 2011, mainly to get Moxie and the other Whisper Systems folks to work for them.
Moxie went on to lead Twitters security team. Twitter allowed them a month or so after they aquired Whisper Systems to open source their apps TextSecure and RedPhone. In January 2013 Moxie left Twitter and started Open Whisper Systems with a few others. They took the newly open sourced apps and developed them further.
This is also covered in their FAQ.
You can see all of their code on GitHub.
And if you don't have GAPPS installed, you will simply get a message that you won't be able to use push messages and that's it. Several friends of mine use it for SMS only, with Xprivacy restricting the internet access. It doesn't crash or anything.
If you experience this, you may either have a problem with your build or it's a bug specific to your device/Android version.
Moxie also wrote exactly why he doesn't want TextSecure to be released via F-Droid: for security reasons. They use central signing, which may very well compromise the update channel.
The whole discussion can be found in the most infamous thread in their GitHub: #127
lindworm said:
You should really get your facts straight. Twitter bought Whisper Systems in 2011, mainly to get Moxie and the other Whisper Systems folks to work for them.
Moxie went on to lead Twitters security team. Twitter allowed them a month or so after they aquired Whisper Systems to open source their apps TextSecure and RedPhone. In January 2013 Moxie left Twitter and started Open Whisper Systems with a few others. They took the newly open sourced apps and developed them further.
This is also covered ir FAQ.
You can see all of their code on GitHub.
And if you don't have GAPPS installed, you will simply get a message that you won't be able to use push messages and that's it. Several friends of mine use it for SMS only, with Xprivacy restricting the internet access. It doesn't crash or anything.
If you experience this, you may either have a problem with your build or it's a bug specific to your device/Android version.
Moxie also wrote exactly why he doesn't want TextSecure to be released via F-Droid: for security reasons. They use central signing, which may very well compromise the update channel.
The whole discussion can be found in the most infamous thread in their GitHub: #127
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which fact did I not get straight? You can't get the app anywhere other than from Googleplay and for Googleplay you need GSF, which records your every keystroke. And by the way, try to restrict getnetworkinfo in internet settings in Xprivacy and the app will crash as soon as you try to open a conversation (checked on several devices). And why was it necessary to prevent users from generating new identity key? Why not have an app available on Whisper's github, as many devs do. And by the way, I asked the same questions on github and f-droid threads and in response got a suggestion to build an equivalent of Google's GCM, so then Moxie would stop using Google.
optimumpro said:
Which fact did I not get straight? You can't get the app anywhere other than from Googleplay and for Googleplay you need GSF, which records your every keystroke. And by the way, try to restrict getnetworkinfo in internet settings in Xprivacy and the app will crash as soon as you try to open a conversation (checked on several devices). And why was it necessary to prevent users from generating new identity key? Why not have an app available on Whisper's github, as many devs do. And by the way, I asked the same questions on github and f-droid threads and in response got a suggestion to build an equivalent of Google's GCM, so then Moxie would stop using Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are not even trying to learn/understand why things are done the way they are done, but instead chose to blast an open source project by a security expert who has spoken at defcon various times and who is on a national security list and gets severely hassled by the TSA every time he tries to travel because of his involvement with secure communication projects.
You don't show the slightest form of objectiveness either. The truth content of what you are writing varies between "flat out wrong" and "there is a reason for how they do it that way, which you either didn't care to research or willingly ignored".
1. You can sideload the apk either from http://apps.evozi.com/apk-downloader/ or any of the dozens of sites that mirror packages from the app store.
They do not provide apks because it is a security risk: there is no automated upgrade channel from where a user can get a new version which may fix serious security flaws.
Everybody who is able to compile from source however should understand the importance of updating regularly and can do so on his/her own.
Moxie stated all of that in the github ticket I linked to.
2. GSF doesn't record your keystrokes.
3. If you had bothered to look it up, getNetworkInfo returns if a certain interface (like wifi) is used for internet.
This leaks no interesting information whatsoever. And it especially doesn't mean that TextSecure doesn't work without internet, because this permission does not give an app internet access. Xprivacy actually expects this behaviour by apps, that's why those fields are by default not restricted even if you restrict internet access of an app.
The program crashes without this, because it expects to get a needed value returned, which you chose to block. This is not something they willingly built in, to stop you from using it without Google Play.
If you can't manage the complexity of the permissions, you should use a simple firewall like AFwall+ to restrict internet access.
4. This was probably removed because it doesn't add any significant security and adds clutter to the user interface, because average users have no idea what it's for. The identity keys you are talking about are long term identity keys. TextSecure uses different keys in every message and actually uses the most secure protocol I know of. It has excellent forward secrecy, future secrecy and deniability. More so than OTR, which it is derived from.
You can learn more about that in their blog:
https://whispersystems.org/blog/simplifying-otr-deniability/
https://whispersystems.org/blog/asynchronous-security/
https://whispersystems.org/blog/advanced-ratcheting/
5. You asked them to not use the only free world wide push network that has contracts with all major providers to not kill idle TCP connections.
Moxie always answered that they would love to use something else, but none exists. And that they don't have the resources to build a push network themselves.
This is all in the comments to https://whispersystems.org/blog/the-new-textsecure/ and on ycombinator:
https://pay.reddit.com/r/Android/co..._cyanogenmod_is_integrating/cdyfxhm?context=3
https://pay.reddit.com/r/Android/co..._cyanogenmod_is_integrating/cdyfrv0?context=3
They are however working on using emails as identifiers and websockets as an alternative to GCM. Websockets are already implemented on the server side and people are working on the client side.
Right now you can use encrypted SMS without GCM, no problem at all. If you want to use it over the internet, you can help to speed up the websocket development:
https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure/issues/1000
lindworm said:
You are not even trying to learn/understand why things are done the way they are done, but instead chose to blast an open source project by a security expert who has spoken at defcon various times and who is on a national security list and gets severely hassled by the TSA every time he tries to travel because of his involvement with secure communication projects.
You don't show the slightest form of objectiveness either. The truth content of what you are writing varies between "flat out wrong" and "there is a reason for how they do it that way, which you either didn't care to research or willingly ignored".
1. You can sideload the apk either from http://apps.evozi.com/apk-downloader/ or any of the dozens of sites that mirror packages from the app store.
They do not provide apks because it is a security risk: there is no automated upgrade channel from where a user can get a new version which may fix serious security flaws.
Everybody who is able to compile from source however should understand the importance of updating regularly and can do so on his/her own.
Moxie stated all of that in the github ticket I linked to.
2. GSF doesn't record your keystrokes.
3. If you had bothered to look it up, getNetworkInfo returns if a certain interface (like wifi) is used for internet.
This leaks no interesting information whatsoever. And it especially doesn't mean that TextSecure doesn't work without internet, because this permission does not give an app internet access. Xprivacy actually expects this behaviour by apps, that's why those fields are by default not restricted even if you restrict internet access of an app.
The program crashes without this, because it expects to get a needed value returned, which you chose to block. This is not something they willingly built in, to stop you from using it without Google Play.
If you can't manage the complexity of the permissions, you should use a simple firewall like AFwall+ to restrict internet access.
4. This was probably removed because it doesn't add any significant security and adds clutter to the user interface, because average users have no idea what it's for. The identity keys you are talking about are long term identity keys. TextSecure uses different keys in every message and actually uses the most secure protocol I know of. It has excellent forward secrecy, future secrecy and deniability. More so than OTR, which it is derived from.
You can learn more about that in their blog:
https://whispersystems.org/blog/simplifying-otr-deniability/
https://whispersystems.org/blog/asynchronous-security/
https://whispersystems.org/blog/advanced-ratcheting/
5. You asked them to not use the only free world wide push network that has contracts with all major providers to not kill idle TCP connections.
Moxie always answered that they would love to use something else, but none exists. And that they don't have the resources to build a push network themselves.
This is all in the comments to https://whispersystems.org/blog/the-new-textsecure/ and on ycombinator:
https://pay.reddit.com/r/Android/co..._cyanogenmod_is_integrating/cdyfxhm?context=3
https://pay.reddit.com/r/Android/co..._cyanogenmod_is_integrating/cdyfrv0?context=3
They are however working on using emails as identifiers and websockets as an alternative to GCM. Websockets are already implemented on the server side and people are working on the client side.
Right now you can use encrypted SMS without GCM, no problem at all. If you want to use it over the internet, you can help to speed up the websocket development:
https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure/issues/1000
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your original statement was that I got my facts wrong. Since you have not cited any instance where I came up with a wrong fact, I will address your opinions.
Number one: you say GSF does not record keystrokes. How do you know? Have you seen the source (which is closed)? If you did, you work for Google and then everything you say is propaganda that has zero factual value. If you don't, then you are just speculating. You pick whichever is worse. If you use Google proprietary blobs, your device is totally open and there is no security measure/app on earth that is effective against this. That GSF phones home at regular intervals and transmits data there is a known fact. You can use encryption from Mars and yet it won't work because raw data (before encryption) is open to Google. As another user noted, having GSF and other closed source apps is like having a lock installed on your house door and not knowing who has access to it besides you.
Number two: inability to generate new identity key: It was there for a reason, the same way PGP or GPG keys have the ability to be limited in time, revoked or regenerated. It is a good security standard and removing it represents weakening. Clutter? LOL. A regular user wouldn't even be able to find it. Certainly, it does not pop up anywhere, one has to find it.
Number three: Sideload or compiling: a regular user will do neither, he/she will simply download the app from the market, which means he has to have Google blobs. Or you are suggesting that users should download the app from the market and then remove GSF and other Googleapps? LOL again.
As I said earlier, Moxie's argument that allowing third party apps on your device is a greater security risk than having closed source blobs is wrong and grand BS (especially coming from someone who is considered a security expert). It is security through obscurity, which is no security at all. The value of his open source project is completely defeated by having closed source blobs by a known private branch of known three letter agencies.
Now, these are facts. Let's get to opinions. I think that this deliberate weakening of security (again coming from a security expert) is a strong indication that development and/or developer has been compromised. And that is why I recommend to stay away from this app. But that is just my opinion, which is nonetheless based on facts.
optimumpro said:
Your original statement was that I got my facts wrong. Since you have not cited any instance where I came up with a wrong fact, I will address your opinions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you even read what I write?
If that is not enough, you should know that Whisper systems is owned by Twitter, which is a red flag in of itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I explained he does now work there any more.
You seem to have noticed that too:
Edit. In January of this year, the developer left Twitter. Interestingly, he is still working on Textsecure and it is published under Whisper, which is Twitter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you kidding me? How the flying **** did you get to this conclusion? The company that was bought by twitter was Whisper Systems.
They are publishing the new source under Open Whisper Systems. (none of those was ever called Whisper)
See the difference? They also state this here: http://support.whispersystems.org/customer/portal/articles/1474591-is-textsecure-owned-by-twitter-
And here is some more fresh evidence. Today I posted this info on Cyanogen site related to Textsecure Push for CM.
http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/whis...ng-integration
The site says it is neither censored no monitored. Within 5 minutes, the post has disappeared... . So, stay away from this app as the development has been compromised. In my view, of course...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are saying CyanogenMod is part of this grand conspiracy of yours? Come on...
GSF, which records your every keystroke.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Number one: you say GSF does not record keystrokes. How do you know? Have you seen the source (which is closed)? If you did, you work for Google and then everything you say is propaganda that has zero factual value. If you don't, then you are just speculating. You pick whichever is worse. If you use Google proprietary blobs, your device is totally open and there is no security measure/app on earth that is effective against this. That GSF phones home at regular intervals and transmits data there is a known fact. You can use encryption from Mars and yet it won't work because raw data (before encryption) is open to Google. As another user noted, having GSF and other closed source apps is like having a lock installed on your house door and not knowing who has access to it besides you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a binary blob and it sends data to google, but you have no proof whatsoever if it records keystrokes. You can know if you want to tough. Decompile it and analyze it. I don't like binary blobs, but you can't just say they do something without having any proof. I may not be able to guarantee that they don't do something, because I have not personally decompiled and analyzed every bit of it, but until you have and have proof that it does do something you can't just claim it does.
Number two: inability to generate new identity key: It was there for a reason, the same way PGP or GPG keys have the ability to be limited in time, revoked or regenerated. It is a good security standard and removing it represents weakening. Clutter? LOL. A regular user wouldn't even be able to find it. Certainly, it does not pop up anywhere, one has to find it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not something the average user should have access to, for several reasons. The TextSecure V2 protocol is NOT comparable with PGP/GPG because it has forward secrecy and deniability. The keys that are actually used to encrypt a message are not static as with PGP.
They are derived from the original keys and are changed with every message. No need to change them after X days/months/years.
Even if one key is intercepted, you would only be able to decrypt one message and not every message as it is the case with PGP.
If you get a new key, all your contacts get alerts that your key changed and that somebody may be listening in. That's not something the average user should be exposed to. If you think for whatever reason that you really want to do this, back up your conversations, uninstall TextSecure, install it again, import the backup and you have your new key.
Number three: Sideload or compiling: a regular user will do neither, he/she will simply download the app from the market, which means he has to have Google blobs. Or you are suggesting that users should download the app from the market and then remove GSF and other Googleapps? LOL again.
As I said earlier, Moxie's argument that allowing third party apps on your device is a greater security risk than having closed source blobs is wrong and grand BS (especially coming from someone who is considered a security expert). It is security through obscurity, which is no security at all. The value of his open source project is completely defeated by having closed source blobs by a known private branch of known three letter agencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every average user has the google blobs, because they are preinstalled on nearly every phone and it's nearly unusable without them. This app is supposed to make encryption available to the masses.
Google may be undermined by your beloved three letter agencies, but it's not one of them. This is not to hide from them.
You have your threat model wrong.
No app alone can ever protect you from those agencies. They have hundreds of 0days for every platform and will simply own your Android, open source or not.
And this is not what TextSecure tries to do. They protect the content of every conversation with extremely strong encryption, no matter what the transport is. This does protect you from dragnet surveillance. But they can not protect you from someone who targets you and is willing to spend hundreds of thousands or millions to break into your operating systems.
If the NSA really wants you they get you, period. But TextSecure protects you from theives, cyber criminals and nearly everybody else who wants to read your messages.
You say you think the encrypted SMS mode was safe? With this your provider (and thus your government and every agency that wants it) has all the metadata. Who sent something to whom etc.
Google on the other hand has actually LESS meta data, because your phone sends the message to the TextSecure server, which relays the message to GCM. GCM then delivers the message. Because everything is encrypted none of the servers get contact data. But google only gets the receiver, not the sender. Your provider gets everything.
A global passive adversary may still do time corellation attacks, by listening who sends something when and who receives something at this time. After some sessions it's pretty clear who is talking to whom. It doesn't matter if Google is evil or not in this case. They get the metadata if they want to.
If you want protection against something like this take a look at pond, or meet i person: https://github.com/agl/pond
Now, these are facts. Let's get to opinions. I think that this deliberate weakening of security (again coming from a security expert) is a strong indication that development and/or developer has been compromised. And that is why I recommend to stay away from this app. But that is just my opinion, which is nonetheless based on facts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I explained there is no weakening whatsoever. Even if you consider google the adversary, they get less meta data than your SMS provider.
You can use this exactly as before without the google blobs if you want to.
They are actively working on a way to get away from the play store and GCM by building their own distribution method (which is finished, but not yet released, see #127 in their github) and implementing Websockets (server works, client is on the way).
Before you start slamming something you should really understand how it works, or ask if you understood it correctly.
lindworm said:
Do you even read what I write?
As I explained he does now work there any more.
You seem to have noticed that too:
Are you kidding me? How the flying **** did you get to this conclusion? The company that was bought by twitter was Whisper Systems.
They are publishing the new source under Open Whisper Systems. (none of those was ever called Whisper)
See the difference? They also state this here: http://support.whispersystems.org/customer/portal/articles/1474591-is-textsecure-owned-by-twitter-
So you are saying CyanogenMod is part of this grand conspiracy of yours? Come on...
It's a binary blob and it sends data to google, but you have no proof whatsoever if it records keystrokes. You can know if you want to tough. Decompile it and analyze it. I don't like binary blobs, but you can't just say they do something without having any proof. I may not be able to guarantee that they don't do something, because I have not personally decompiled and analyzed every bit of it, but until you have and have proof that it does do something you can't just claim it does.
It is not something the average user should have access to, for several reasons. The TextSecure V2 protocol is NOT comparable with PGP/GPG because it has forward secrecy and deniability. The keys that are actually used to encrypt a message are not static as with PGP.
They are derived from the original keys and are changed with every message. No need to change them after X days/months/years.
Even if one key is intercepted, you would only be able to decrypt one message and not every message as it is the case with PGP.
If you get a new key, all your contacts get alerts that your key changed and that somebody may be listening in. That's not something the average user should be exposed to. If you think for whatever reason that you really want to do this, back up your conversations, uninstall TextSecure, install it again, import the backup and you have your new key.
Every average user has the google blobs, because they are preinstalled on nearly every phone and it's nearly unusable without them. This app is supposed to make encryption available to the masses.
Google may be undermined by your beloved three letter agencies, but it's not one of them. This is not to hide from them.
You have your threat model wrong.
No app alone can ever protect you from those agencies. They have hundreds of 0days for every platform and will simply own your Android, open source or not.
And this is not what TextSecure tries to do. They protect the content of every conversation with extremely strong encryption, no matter what the transport is. This does protect you from dragnet surveillance. But they can not protect you from someone who targets you and is willing to spend hundreds of thousands or millions to break into your operating systems.
If the NSA really wants you they get you, period. But TextSecure protects you from theives, cyber criminals and nearly everybody else who wants to read your messages.
You say you think the encrypted SMS mode was safe? With this your provider (and thus your government and every agency that wants it) has all the metadata. Who sent something to whom etc.
Google on the other hand has actually LESS meta data, because your phone sends the message to the TextSecure server, which relays the message to GCM. GCM then delivers the message. Because everything is encrypted none of the servers get contact data. But google only gets the receiver, not the sender. Your provider gets everything.
A global passive adversary may still do time corellation attacks, by listening who sends something when and who receives something at this time. After some sessions it's pretty clear who is talking to whom. It doesn't matter if Google is evil or not in this case. They get the metadata if they want to.
If you want protection against something like this take a look at pond, or meet i person: https://github.com/agl/pond
As I explained there is no weakening whatsoever. Even if you consider google the adversary, they get less meta data than your SMS provider.
You can use this exactly as before without the google blobs if you want to.
They are actively working on a way to get away from the play store and GCM by building their own distribution method (which is finished, but not yet released, see #127 in their github) and implementing Websockets (server works, client is on the way).
Before you start slamming something you should really understand how it works, or ask if you understood it correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Decompile GSF"
You are kidding. Aren't you? If one can examine closed source the same way as open one, then all problems would be solved. And by the way, there would be no point in having proprietary software. Would it? Of course Java is easier to reverse engineer, but want to try Oracle's java?
"Google" Google has root access to your device: It can pull/install any application without you noticing it. They can install another version of TextSecure with backdoors. They can do whatever they want or told to. So, if you have Google, there is no point in any security at all. And when a developer forces users to have Google for his app to work, that's no security at all.
Cyanogenmode/Conspiracy? There is no conspiracy. The US has a law that requires providers to have back doors in their software/hardware for law enforcement, and there are wild claims (by those who know (and don't) what they are talking about) of TextSecure as "weapon" against this kind of surveillance. And that is pure bull. All that the app can provide is the false sense of security, while in reality making users more transparent to surveillance.
Phone service providers vs. internet: when you use Textsecure as a pure sms app, your provider gets gibberish, but they have no way of knowing what you are using. With GCM/GSF/Googleplay, they know exactly what you are doing, as you are marked as using this particular app. So, Moxie is making life of "survaillors" much easier.
Thanks for telling me to uninstall the app if I want to generate new key. So, if I do it this way, you think my contacts won't receive a message that my key has changed?
Here is how I began to suspect foul play: First I noticed the app wanted access to the internet, then I discovered that I can no longer generate a new key, then I went to read about F-droid/Whisper problems. Then I read that he wants the app be available through Google only, because he cares about security and does not want users to allow third party apps (BS). Then I read about feds harassment. You think the 3 letter agencies wouldn't like to have him?
In my view, Moxie's arguments no longer make sense. And by the way, when he is against the wall, he tells you to create a world wide push service - alternative to GCM. LOL.
For me that's enough to stay away from the app. Others will decide accordingly...
Does anybody work on an alternativ push service in order to replace hard requirement on Google services for TextSecure, Redphone and lots of other useful apps?
I understand that GAPPS are needed to run textsecure.
Is it possible/ has anyone succeed to get it to run with the no GAPPS apps such as the blank store etc or is the app relying too much on google infrastructure?
i can use textsecure sms without internet. besides registering with push is not mandatory at all so the crash you've experienced must be a bug in the version of textsecure you're using. also why compare it to pgp/gpg? textsecure uses otr with improvements to deniability and forward secrecy. also textsecure supports mms (which uses internet).
if you're really that paranoid, avoid android at all and stop spreading FUD claiming it to be fact. i don't find the statement factual at all. it lacks any evidence (show us the code with the backdoor first).
and also avoid openguardian project too as they conspire with textsecure since they are recommending it.
and by the way, whisper and openwhisper are different.
It really is ashamed when misinformed people comment on things they do not have enough information to intelligently speak about. Especially when it discourages people from using an application that is one of the only current means of communicating over SMS in a secure manner. Is it perfect? Certainly not... Security and encryption are never perfect, and there will always be flaws to be found, but to insist that someone such as Moxie Marlinspike is somehow working against the security researcher community in some undercover role as an agent of the government or some corrupt company is really insulting. If you have some absolute proof, or even a reasonable solid suspicion, please share it, but otherwise do not taint these incredible people with false accusations. Learn a bit about encryption, reverse engineering, and packet inspection, and then come back and give an intelligent analysis of your findings of the application you suspect to be playing some nefarious role. Until then, your accusations are completely unfounded and damaging to the community as a whole. There are many people who have worked hard to make this product a reality, and I believe they should be praised for their efforts. Obviously these are my own opinions, and you are free to dismiss them outright as you have done to others in previous posts. In addition, I realize I am not an active member of the xda community, but I am an active member of the security/reverse engineering community. My job and nearly all of my free time is spent reverse engineering software and I see no basis for your accusations.
Here is more update on Textsecure: there was a major vulnerability found last October-November. And Moxie's response (not surprisingly) - fixing "feels pretty cumbersome" and "I dunno."
Also, Open Whisper is now accepted into the family of such a bastion of privacy, as Facebook (kids love it, NSA approves). So, If you had any doubt about this app before, now you can sleep well at night (sarcasm).
https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2014/001029.html
https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2014/001030.html
To those who like to attack the messenger ( I call them Google thugs or pacifier babies). One says decompile GSF, the other - false accusations and absolute proof?! Wake up and get the pacifier out of your mouth. There is no such thing in real life. I give you the dots, you can't connect them with the pacifier in your mouth.
Here is some more damning evidence that Textsecure is a totally compromised project no longer to be trusted: during 2013-2014 Open Whisper Systems received over $1.3 mln from BBG, which is an arm of US Government and its 3-letter-agencies.
http://pando.com/2015/03/01/internet-privacy-funded-by-spooks-a-brief-history-of-the-bbg/
So, Moxie, it appears, has turned from someone who was harrased by TSA in airports (presumably for a failure to cooperate with the government) to a receipient of major funds from the same government. I am not even talking about him getting a once in a life-time project to work on "securing" Facebook's What's up application. Pitty and shame...
Replacement for Textsecure
Here is a pure sms app, which replaces compromised Textsecure, as well as stock messaging. There is no over the internet messaging, no google binaries and no Google Services Framewor all closed sourse. In addition, starting from version 2.7, textsecure no longer encrypts SMS. Pitty.
Here is the latest version: http://forum.xda-developers.com/android/apps-games/sms-secure-aes-256-t3065165
Hi all, I have finally had enough of Apple (and planned obsolescence!). I have never used Android before, got myself a Galaxy Tab S and once I learn how to use it well, I will be dumping my faulty iPhone in favour of a Galaxy phone as well.
I bought a used Tab S with 4G in lovely condition. Just turned it on and it says Insert Sim. I skipped that and it said "Many features will not work without an active Sim".
Therefore the first question I have is how much to read into that message?! Do I believe it? I don\'t plan on using a data Sim, only want to use WiFi. Will the Tab S work just fine without a cellular SIM or is it going to give me constant errors and problems? If the latter I may have to sell it in favour of a non SIM version. Any advice appreciated. I quite like the idea of being ABLE to use a data SIM if I want to some time, hence why I bought it.
Second question is I DESPISE Google and all the tracking stuff. I use a VPN much of the time. A friend of mine has a Galaxy Tab and said I should "root" the device. Can anyone tell me the main benefits of doing so? I am trying to work out how necessary is it (as I am short of time so won't do it unless it will give me benefits). I intend to use VPN and try my best to prevent google tracking what I watch on youtube, what searches I do, and just about anything else I can. I also notice that for Earth and Maps to work, I obviously need to let it know my location (which I don't generally like doing but understand the trade off and will do it in this case). Is there a way (perhaps via rooting) to enable GPS location sharing without feeding GOOGLE my whereabouts (i.e. using other map software instead of Google's)?
I am blown away by the quality of this device. thanks for anyone who has time to offer their thoughts on the above. Thanks
Welcome to the real world, Neo!
SIM Card allows having such things like mobile data (this works just the same as the iPad LTE) and voice calls from a tablet (this feature is unique to Android - you can make voice calls just like it is a big phone, using either built-in mic and speakers or via Bluetooth headset). If the SIM is not inserted, there will be no problems - you can safely dismiss the warning.
Regarding the Google-free experience and rooting. Rooting is direct equivalent to iOS jailbreak. Both result in getting root shell (# or uid 0).
To root the Tab, you must flash the CF-Autoroot via Odin: https://www.theandroidsoul.com/root...10-5-lte-sm-t805-one-click-cf-auto-root-tool/ This is for 10.5 LTE aka SM-T805, for 8.4 LTE aka SM-T705 the instruction is similar: https://www.theandroidsoul.com/root...-8-4-lte-sm-t705-one-click-cf-auto-root-tool/
Also it is good to flash the TWRP recovery after you get root to get a rich recovery environment helping you to backup and restore your device, flash custom ROMs etc.nMore info here: https://twrp.me/FAQ/
Dont hesitate to ask questions once they arise.
---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------
Ph, and forgot to mention Google free experience. Once you get root, you can debloat your stock ROM but I'd advise flashing a LineageOS ROM for newer Android version and latest security patches. Also, Google services are not present by default in LineageOs but can be flashed separately. However, I am already more than a year without Google services and apps.
For example, I use K-9 Mail + OpenKeychain from F-Droid open-source app market to use GMail with OpenPGP support.
F-Droid is the primary marketplace app having opensource applications. For closed-source apps available on Google Play, the open-source Google Play client app named Yalp Store offers the same functionality as play market but not requiring Google services.
Youtube client I use is Newpipe, opensource app available in F-Droid. There are other clients too, like SkyTube.
Google Maps can be replaced by OsmAnd+ - an opensource client for OpenStreetMap infrastructure, again available from F-Droid app store.
Office application suite I recommend is Hancom Office - it is free for Samsung devices, and it processes documents faster than Office365.
Also, I made it work on LineageOS and other custom ROMs.
I use Brave Browser as a primary Web browser, as it is opensource app based on Google Chromium code but heavily de-Googled and having some cool features like embedded ad-blocker.
Hope this helps you a bit.
gellmar said:
Welcome to the real world, Neo!
SIM Card allows having such things like mobile data (this works just the same as the iPad LTE) and voice calls from a tablet (this feature is unique to Android - you can make voice calls just like it is a big phone, using either built-in mic and speakers or via Bluetooth headset). If the SIM is not inserted, there will be no problems - you can safely dismiss the warning.
Regarding the Google-free experience and rooting. Rooting is direct equivalent to iOS jailbreak. Both result in getting root shell (# or uid 0).
To root the Tab, you must flash the CF-Autoroot via Odin: https://www.theandroidsoul.com/root...10-5-lte-sm-t805-one-click-cf-auto-root-tool/ This is for 10.5 LTE aka SM-T805, for 8.4 LTE aka SM-T705 the instruction is similar: https://www.theandroidsoul.com/root...-8-4-lte-sm-t705-one-click-cf-auto-root-tool/
Also it is good to flash the TWRP recovery after you get root to get a rich recovery environment helping you to backup and restore your device, flash custom ROMs etc.nMore info here: https://twrp.me/FAQ/
Dont hesitate to ask questions once they arise.
---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------
Ph, and forgot to mention Google free experience. Once you get root, you can debloat your stock ROM but I'd advise flashing a LineageOS ROM for newer Android version and latest security patches. Also, Google services are not present by default in LineageOs but can be flashed separately. However, I am already more than a year without Google services and apps.
For example, I use K-9 Mail + OpenKeychain from F-Droid open-source app market to use GMail with OpenPGP support.
F-Droid is the primary marketplace app having opensource applications. For closed-source apps available on Google Play, the open-source Google Play client app named Yalp Store offers the same functionality as play market but not requiring Google services.
Youtube client I use is Newpipe, opensource app available in F-Droid. There are other clients too, like SkyTube.
Google Maps can be replaced by OsmAnd+ - an opensource client for OpenStreetMap infrastructure, again available from F-Droid app store.
Office application suite I recommend is Hancom Office - it is free for Samsung devices, and it processes documents faster than Office365.
Also, I made it work on LineageOS and other custom ROMs.
I use Brave Browser as a primary Web browser, as it is opensource app based on Google Chromium code but heavily de-Googled and having some cool features like embedded ad-blocker.
Hope this helps you a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Crikey!! Can't thank you enough for the time and effort there, what a great welcome to the other side
I confess most of what you said went straight over my head, ROMS and such like, but I will learn as there are clearly some great tips in this post.
So - fine without SIM, cool thanks.
Flashing - gonna take some time to learn but I think the link you posted is what I need, I have the SM-T800
So Lineage is an OS, is that right? And it comes free of Google bloatware/spyware?
I can't believe there are ways to view youtube and maps etc without giving Google your retinal scan. JUST what I hope to do!
Brave Browser - not heard of that, was gonna look for Firefox or Waterfox and set it up myself with RTC discabled, Ublockorigin etc etc (if poss) but maybe don't need to now as Brave sounds built to do what I want already.
Thanks again, great post
marrteee said:
Crikey!! Can't thank you enough for the time and effort there, what a great welcome to the other side
I confess most of what you said went straight over my head, ROMS and such like, but I will learn as there are clearly some great tips in this post.
So - fine without SIM, cool thanks.
Flashing - gonna take some time to learn but I think the link you posted is what I need, I have the SM-T800
So Lineage is an OS, is that right? And it comes free of Google bloatware/spyware?
I can't believe there are ways to view youtube and maps etc without giving Google your retinal scan. JUST what I hope to do!
Brave Browser - not heard of that, was gonna look for Firefox or Waterfox and set it up myself with RTC discabled, Ublockorigin etc etc (if poss) but maybe don't need to now as Brave sounds built to do what I want already.
Thanks again, great post
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strange the T800 has no dedicated SIM slot, it is WiFi only. T805 does have a SIM card though. You can check it opening Settings - Phone info. Also you can use the dialer to enter a magic code *#1234# to get info about your firmware (pay attention to PDA and CSC values). Would be good if you provide these here before you start any flashing.
LineageOS is a community built distribution of Android OS (like Ubuntu or Debian are GNU/Linux distributions) with some additional tweaks like Privacy Guard (a framework giving you control about permissions application ask, like a consent or denial to read contacts, GPS location, phone number etc). Full disclosure: I am an official maintainer of LineageOS for SM-T805 and I belong to the team creating LineageOS for other devices on the same chipset, like SM-T800, SM-T705, SM-T700, SM-P600 etc. There are also ResurrectionRemix ROM based on LineageOS and also there are de-bloated stock ROMs based on latest available Android 6.0.1 official factory OS. The official LineageOS is based on Android 7.1.2, and there is a (not very stable) 8.1.0.
I was a long-term fan of Firefox on Android (and I still am on PC!), but Chromium engine is twice as fast on our tablet (90.08 for Brave vs 45.04 for Firefox in browser benchmark)
SORRY! The seller called it a T800 but I checked and yes it's a T805.
I am SO busy at the moment with work and family stuff, not sure when I can get round to this and it looks like I have a lot of learning to come which I am dreading a bit with my schedule as it is! Don't suppose there is any chance someone (if not yourself) on this forum offers any kind of service? By that I mean, I post the Tab with cash to cover the job, and someone roots it and does the things you have mentioned then post it back? Probably a bit too much wishful thinking, but if you don't ask.......
marrteee said:
SORRY! The seller called it a T800 but I checked and yes it's a T805.
I am SO busy at the moment with work and family stuff, not sure when I can get round to this and it looks like I have a lot of learning to come which I am dreading a bit with my schedule as it is! Don't suppose there is any chance someone (if not yourself) on this forum offers any kind of service? By that I mean, I post the Tab with cash to cover the job, and someone roots it and does the things you have mentioned then post it back? Probably a bit too much wishful thinking, but if you don't ask.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This can be done remotely via TeamViewer - you can be around and follow my commands like press home button etc. The rest is done via ADB on PC side. But write me in PM next week - I have some things to do that I promised before.
That's too kind of you. Not sure if you mean Teamviewer with the actual device or another computer. I am in no hurry at all. My device is factory stock right now, been reset and I am not doing anything with it for now.
Thanks again
I don't suppose (given your knowledge of privacy issues etc) you know of a secure alternative to Skype? I am talking mainly about a desktop app. I have researched many times over the past year and it seems to me that every time something decent gets going, they get shut down or just close down without much explanation. Sure seems suspicious in some cases. Best I could find was ViPole, which is good although has some weaknesses. I can't believe nobody has made something that can do the basic stuff Skype can do! (text, video/voice, screenshare and file share). It's so simple by today's standards! Of course plenty of options until you get to P2P or encryption, then there seems to be nothing which actually works very well at all! Just in case you know of anything?
marrteee said:
I don't suppose (given your knowledge of privacy issues etc) you know of a secure alternative to Skype? I am talking mainly about a desktop app. I have researched many times over the past year and it seems to me that every time something decent gets going, they get shut down or just close down without much explanation. Sure seems suspicious in some cases. Best I could find was ViPole, which is good although has some weaknesses. I can't believe nobody has made something that can do the basic stuff Skype can do! (text, video/voice, screenshare and file share). It's so simple by today's standards! Of course plenty of options until you get to P2P or encryption, then there seems to be nothing which actually works very well at all! Just in case you know of anything?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look for Signal and qTox.
Thanks. Tried and still use Signal, although it's got some flaws and not at all sure I trust the privacy side. I really need screenshare too which it doesn't have.
qtox and utox i have tried, tried all the tox chat programs. Completely buggy and unusable. Nice and secure though , which makes it a shame they can't make the software work properly! notifications dont work, cam, calls completely broken. unusable.
I looked at variuos others but it's all going over to apps for smartphones and tabs now, I want a desktop app. Maybe Skype through VPN would help a bit, but not ideal!
Thanks again
marrteee said:
Thanks. Tried and still use Signal, although it's got some flaws and not at all sure I trust the privacy side. I really need screenshare too which it doesn't have.
qtox and utox i have tried, tried all the tox chat programs. Completely buggy and unusable. Nice and secure though , which makes it a shame they can't make the software work properly! notifications dont work, cam, calls completely broken. unusable.
I looked at variuos others but it's all going over to apps for smartphones and tabs now, I want a desktop app. Maybe Skype through VPN would help a bit, but not ideal!
Thanks again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To accelerate the process of bringing up the quality of opensource projects, one must at least report the bugs timely. Have you filed a feature request? We all donate either our money, or our time to the community. Some of us donate both
Ha, yes I do make reports whenever I spot anything. I am talking to one of the developers about it but I don't see it getting fixed as the impetus seems to have gone and no way they will add screenshare I dont think. I will try though yes, least I can do in the hope that someone produces something useful but not "in bed" with the government!