Just two questions, if anyone may know:

1) Does GOS airplane mode completely disable e911 tracking? I don't mean user calling them, but them using e911 pings/capabilities as a means to track YOU.

For instance a journalist/whistleblower being tracked by a corrupt office using e911.

2) In general when location is found, what if subject is in a multiple floor area? Wouldn't location just show target's position from overhead view, not being able to see what floor? Ex. if person is in 5 floor building.

Btw interesting to note even CNN recommends privacy methods for its journalists and those contacting them.

    GeorgeSoros 1) Does GOS airplane mode completely disable e911 tracking? I don't mean user calling them, but them using e911 pings/capabilities as a means to track YOU.

    Already answered here https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/15180-pixel-9-and-satellite-tracking/13

    If you're connected to a mobile network, the phone's location can be triangulated. Not sure why you keep asking about this one thing.

      other8026 and if you connect through a portable router like the mudi v2 and do not insert the card into the phone only through the router?

        Anti2030 whatever it is which emits rf, can in theory be triangulated. If that mudi v2 router connects to a cell tower, it can be triangulated. I don't know how a mudi v2 connects to a tower, with what identifieing data (imsi). So i don't know if that triangulation can identify u, but it can be triagulated.

        GeorgeSoros Does GOS airplane mode completely disable e911 tracking? I don't mean user calling them, but them using e911 pings/capabilities as a means to track YOU.

        I am curious as to what sort of answer would be convincing. My hunch is that the GrapheneOS developers are software people, not RF engineers. If somebody here claimed to be an RF engineer, and claimed to have checked, would those claims be believable?

        What would count as a convincing answer?

          AlphaElwedritsch 2) is not possible
          although, even in very, very tall buildings ;)

          Can you elaborate? What exactly isn't possible... location would only show top view? Perhaps additional equipment on site would be required to determine which floor the journalist is at...

            other8026 If you're connected to a mobile network, the phone's location can be triangulated.

            The reason it was asked again (and tweaked to be precise) is because the initial response was unclear. So you are saying even with airplane mode on in GOS, a unit could theoretically still activate e911 capabilities to ping a journalist's phone for location because you're still technically connected to a mobile network?

              GeorgeSoros So you are saying even with airplane mode on in GOS, a unit could theoretically still activate e911 capabilities to ping a journalist's phone for location because you're still technically connected to a mobile network?

              In airplane mode the cellular modem is OFF. The device is not "technically connected".

              Source:

              Activating airplane mode will fully disable the cellular radio transmit and receive capabilities, which will prevent your phone from being reached from the cellular network and stop your carrier (and anyone impersonating them to you) from tracking the device via the cellular radio. The baseband implements other functionality such as Wi-Fi and GPS functionality, but each of these components is separately sandboxed on the baseband and independent of each other. Enabling airplane mode disables the cellular radio, but Wi-Fi can be re-enabled and used without activating the cellular radio again. This allows using the device as a Wi-Fi only device.

              de0u What would count as a convincing answer?

              GeorgeSoros just a clear open full answer to the specifics of the qn.

              OK, a clear, open answer has been provided, citing a source. And you said that would be convincing. So hopefully the issue is resolved?

              The question from OPs post in this thread:

              Does GOS airplane mode completely disable e911 tracking? I don't mean user calling them, but them using e911 pings/capabilities as a means to track YOU.

              other8026 From that linked answer:

              By making an emergency call, you're explicitly asking to disable airplane mode. If you don't want to make an emergency call, don't make an emergency call.

              I think the question asked in this thread is different from the answer linked in that other thread.

              OP's assumptions in this thread are:
              Airplane mode is on
              No outgoing calls from the users device
              Can triangulation via e911 still occur?

              The answer linked in another thread is assuming that the device is "making an emergency call", but that's not the case for the question asked in this thread.

              I think OP got confused and made some mistakes in the last thread.
              But the question asked in this thread is better formulated IMO.

              I can see why this could be important to know for some threat models.

              • de0u replied to this.

                zzz OP's assumptions in this thread are:
                Airplane mode is on
                No outgoing calls from the users device
                Can triangulation via e911 still occur?

                [...]

                I can see why this could be important to know for some threat models.

                I believe it is addressed by a FAQ entry on the project web site: https://grapheneos.org/faq#cellular-tracking

                • zzz replied to this.
                • zzz likes this.

                  de0u

                  Thanks for that

                  I think this would be most relevant quote from the website's documentation:

                  Activating airplane mode will fully disable the cellular radio transmit and receive capabilities, which will prevent your phone from being reached from the cellular network and stop your carrier (and anyone impersonating them to you) from tracking the device via the cellular radio.

                  That should directly address OP's question.

                  I think the only final point of clarification would be to name the 911 services explicitly -

                  does Airplane mode fully disable emergency 911 transmit/receive, in addition to the other kinds mentioned in the documentation (transmit/receive from the carrier or carrier impersonators)?

                    zzz I think the only final point of clarification would be to name the 911 services explicitly -

                    does Airplane mode fully disable emergency 911 transmit/receive, in addition to the other kinds mentioned in the documentation (transmit/receive from the carrier or carrier impersonators)?

                    I think "fully disable the cellular radio transmit and receive capabilities" should do it, no? If the radio is neither receiving nor transmitting, what would the E911 threat vector be?

                      zzz if '911 services' make use of the cellular radio, which i can't say for certain as i didn't research the implementation of emergency services, but i assume with high certainity it is using the cellular radio.

                      Then what is stated in the faq, how its currently written, if using cellular radio, would mean '911 services' can't transmit/receive.

                      I'm no software engineer, so i could somehow understand a certain 'paranoia' (for lack of better term in my english vocubalary) for a software 'killswitch'/airplane mode. But i do trust the software engineers of this project if they state so. A phone with a hardware killswitch for the radios may be more tailored to op if he wants to be 100% certain.

                      Alternatively a high quality faraday bag would accomplish the same as a hardware killswitch.

                      • de0u replied to this.

                        de0u
                        Agreed, its enough for me personally as well.
                        I am able and willing to extrapolate and connect the dots that way and feel satisfied.

                        Still, IMO, this thread could be slightly improved by an official source explicitly mentioning that emergency 911 services is another other party whose tracking is mitigated by airplane mode.
                        (in addition to carriers and carrier impersonators already mentioned in the docs)

                        Not necessary for me or even for most people, but perhaps still useful for others with deeper fears / less immersion in the subject like OP and others.

                        The less extrapolation / thinking is needed from the reader, the easier it will be for OP and others to feel satisfied and move on from this topic (I hope).

                        de0u I think "fully disable the cellular radio transmit and receive capabilities" should do it, no? If the radio is neither receiving nor transmitting, what would the E911 threat vector be?

                        When I was still using the standard Pixel OS, it was clearly stated that receiving and transmitting emergency numbers, police, fire etc bypasses airplane mode, this is expected behavior and I don't expect it to be any different on GrapheneOS, unless there is a change in the overall design of which I am unaware. This is also supposed to work without a SIM card.

                        r134a A phone with a hardware killswitch for the radios may be more tailored to op if he wants to be 100% certain.

                        Perhaps. How does one verify that a "hardware killswitch" works? By no means am I suggesting that any particular device's "hardware killswitch" doesn't work! My question (also above de0u) is what the standard of evidence is.

                        Is some statement in the FAQ section of the GrapheneOS web site enough, or not? If the existing statement were made a little longer, to go beyond "no transmitting or receiving", to explicitly mention E911, would that be enough? Would it be necessary to add another explicit statement about "Type 0 silent SMS"? What if the GrapheneOS Foundation (hypothetically!!) were to hire an RF engineer to write a report -- would that be enough?

                        I think it would be beneficial, given the history of similar questions from the OP, for the OP to state what a convincing answer to the question would be.

                          de0u it probably can be verified by checking physically if the killswitch disables power to the radio, just as in the same way it can be verified by looking thru the code, or trusting the ones who coded it as stated in the faq.

                          For me at least it is verified by reading the faq, i assume it isn't for op, so i proposed 2 alternative options since all 3 accomplish essentially the same, but the software implementation could in theory be bypassed if the device got compromised.

                          A hardware killswitch or even faradaybag could get bypassed aswell, but would need to be physically compromised.

                          I am curious aswell on what would be a convincing answer for op. I for sure wouldn't mind a report from an rf engineer.

                          • de0u replied to this.