Potential appearances of GrapheneOS in mobile forensic reports

ryrona

Clark Does this mean GOS is illegal in SE??

No. The quote says Google Pixel phones, not GOS. Google Pixels are actively sold in Sweden by reputable major resellers as well as Google themselves, and is marketed towards regular users.

[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!

r134a

[deleted]

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?

matchboxbananasynergy

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:

https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/207

dc32f0cfe84def651e0e

r134a In the meanwhile https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.wesaphzt.privatelock/ can be used.

matchboxbananasynergy

I have adjusted the title of the thread to be more generic.

r134a

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.

matchboxbananasynergy

r134a Appreciate the kind words!

r134a

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?

dc32f0cfe84def651e0e

r134a I use it all the time. Twist of the wrist... and the device is locked requiring pin/passphrase instead of a fingerprint.

r134a

dc32f0cfe84def651e0e

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?

« Previous Page