Tekpro doesn't exist since 2017?! The Name oft the company was tekpro and is now "Envista Forensics" as i know. This company is populär in Sweden, Danmark and the netherlands .....
Potential appearances of GrapheneOS in mobile forensic reports
quepasabebe Signal? His hotspot through the iphone or maybe the router at home?
How would any of these possibly be a weak link? I don't get it.
Most likely he had a weak security code or he gave it to them, or he had another phone.
Does this mean GOS is illegal in SE??
The Google Pixel phone is very heavily encrypted and there is no legal use for such a phone. Based on this, the Google Pixel phone should be considered a criminal tool.
[deleted]
The disk encryption on stock Pixel and one with GrapheneOS is implemented in the same way. Should we then sum it up with saying, that whoever uses Google Pixel phone is a potential criminal? I don't think so.
- Edited
quepasabebe I'm kinda curios of how? In the documents it shows that the accused had been sharing internet from his iphone to the pixel and been connected to wifi. What was the weak point? Signal? His hotspot through the iphone or maybe the router at home?
User error.
All of those things wouldn't ever be a factor in device compromise. They can't read signal messages, that's kind of why they need to extract the phone in the first place. Hotspot / WiFi access point history is also a common forensic source, you can access them on both devices easily.
The document openly claims it can't get into a Google phone in normal circumstances:
"Det hittades även en till Googletelefon inne i själva bilen (punkt 3) men denna har i skrivande stund juni 2024 inte gått att extrahera eller knyta till brukare."
MACHINE TRANSLATION: Another Google phone was also found inside the car itself (point 3), but this has not worked at the time of writing in June 2024 to extract or link to users.
This conclusion matches the expected outcome of our Cellebrite document sources exactly.
The document claims they got into it 'manually', and the pictures show them taking a camera to the phone's screen instead of screen recording. Worth noting screen / display capture for unlocked devices is a standard Cellebrite feature but they didn't do it, weird why they didn't if they had the option. I guess it's practice over in Sweden.
IT-forensiker har gått in i telefonen manuellt och fotograferat användarens eget alias
MACHINE TRANSLATION: IT forensics have entered the phone manually and photographed the user's own alias
If it was done manually they evidently had knowledge of the credential or they were consented. Targeting of other people involved, CCTV, forensics of fingerprints on the display, sharing the PIN with the iPhone, tons of potential factors would have led up to his failure.
Quite frankly I personally don't care about the heaps of trouble that scumbag gang bangers and drug dealers get into. They deserve prison and I am happy they've been arrested. I'm only making this response to debunk before people get concerned about it. If they were talking about all their acts on the iPhones they had by the looks of it then clearly they're not the brightest and GrapheneOS wouldn't protect them and hopefully it stays that way. There's tons of factors that would have brung this person down even without the phone's data I'm sure.
[deleted]
Can't say I have read every word of this post nor anything of the Swedish reports,
What jumps out at me is, Graphene is not the problem, as ever the weakest link is the average Joe using the phone making the assumption it turns them into something akin to a untraceable super villain.
Snatched whilst unlocked, jeez, there an app for that scenario.
Is Graphene illegal, no, what matters is intent, I have a car, cars kill people, does that make cars illegal, no intent is what counts. These people stopped are not random they are on someone's radar already. A heavily encrypted device on them is something to be expected, an unlocked one is manna from heaven!
It seems like android 15 will have a feature which is called ' Theft Detection Lock'.
Automatic AI-powered screen lock for when your phone is snatched. Theft Detection Lock is a powerful new feature that uses Google AI to sense if someone snatches your phone from your hand and tries to run, bike or drive away. If a common motion associated with theft is detected, your phone screen quickly locks – which helps keep thieves from easily accessing your data.
Source: https://blog.google/products/android/android-theft-protection/
Does anybody know if this feature will be available on AOSP, and consequently in Graphene?
r134a It is a Play Services feature. We want to implement something like it, although it will likely not be as "fancy" as Google's machine learning implementation, and therefore may be more "crude".
You can find the open issue for it here:
I have adjusted the title of the thread to be more generic.
matchboxbananasynergy changed the title to Potential appearances of GrapheneOS in mobile forensic reports .
That's unfortunate, but hopeful to hear that the team wants to implement its own version.
I had recently read that the team has 6 developers, which is hard to grasp, given the broad aspect of knowledge required to run this project. Massive respect.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and the entire team for your incredible work.
r134a Appreciate the kind words!
r134a In the meanwhile https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.wesaphzt.privatelock/ can be used.
dc32f0cfe84def651e0e I just checked the app out, but didn't download it yet.
I see the last update was 5 years ago, is it actually still functional? Do you use it?
r134a I use it all the time. Twist of the wrist... and the device is locked requiring pin/passphrase instead of a fingerprint.
Nice, it actually works great!
However i'm still a little 'worried' that the app isn't updated for 5 years.
I see TargetSDK is 29, and i remember reading somewhere to 'avoid' apps with TargetSDK lower than 32 or 33.
I remember reading from @matchboxbananasynergy , which i assume is a GrapheneOS developer:
(https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14395-f-droid-this-app-was-built-for-an-older-version-of-android/3)
On a personal note, I'd highly recommend not using apps that target lower versions of Android like that. F-Droid doesn't remove or disallow apps with low targetSdk requirements, which is why you're finding a lot of apps like that there. New targetSDK levels can bring significant privacy and security improvements, which is why raising that level for apps is important.
I'm a little worried in the sense that, the app works and functions great.
But given i have to give that app admin acces, and is on a lower targetSDK than recommended, didn't i just defeat the whole point, and lower my 'security' in a way?
This is just a question though, as i don't actually know the downsides of using an app with lower targetSDK, especially with admin acces?