this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
213 points (98.2% liked)

DeGoogle Yourself

9562 readers
113 users here now

A community for those that would like to get away from Google.

Here you may post anything related to DeGoogling, why we should do it or good software alternatives!

Rules

  1. Be respectful even in disagreement

  2. No advertising unless it is very relevent and justified. Do not do this excessively.

  3. No low value posts / memes. We or you need to learn, or discuss something.

Related communities

!privacyguides@lemmy.one !privacy@lemmy.ml !privatelife@lemmy.ml !linuxphones@lemmy.ml !fossdroid@social.fossware.space !fdroid@lemmy.ml

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
Byereddithellolemmy@lemmy.world
chevy9294@monero.town
213
Who owns your shiny new Pixel 9 phone? You can’t say no to Google’s surveillance (cybernews.com)
submitted 4 months ago by gytrash@feddit.uk to c/degoogle@lemmy.ml
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Google's latest flagship smartphone raises concerns about user privacy and security. It frequently transmits private user data to the tech giant before any app is installed. Moreover, the Cybernews research team has discovered that it potentially has remote management capabilities without user awareness or approval.

Cybernews researchers analyzed the new Pixel 9 Pro XL smartphone’s web traffic, focusing on what a new smartphone sends to Google.

“Every 15 minutes, Google Pixel 9 Pro XL sends a data packet to Google. The device shares location, email address, phone number, network status, and other telemetry. Even more concerning, the phone periodically attempts to download and run new code, potentially opening up security risks,” said Aras Nazarovas, a security researcher at Cybernews...

... “The amount of data transmitted and the potential for remote management casts doubt on who truly owns the device. Users may have paid for it, but the deep integration of surveillance systems in the ecosystem may leave users vulnerable to privacy violations,” Nazarovas said...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Dude I'm looking at the source code, there's only a binary downloaded for enabling Safety net. Why are you making false statements?

[–] sleepyplacebo@rblind.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The legacy SafetyNet check bypass may not be around much longer especially because hardware based attestation will be gradually replacing it.

https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/111504057847795464

Below is a guide for app developers who want to support third party OSs in a way that does not rely on Google. Most apps work on GrapheneOS just fine already but there are some banking apps and NFC payment systems that do not.

https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-guide

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Sigh. It just doesn't stop. But it's ok, Pokemon go required attestation and so I simply stopped playing. Thanks for your links.

I've wanted to run graphene but absolutely do not want google code running on my system if I can avoid it. If only there were some way to run microG on graphene.

[–] LoveSausage@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Sure you could root and install microG , don't see why but you can do it. GOS sanboxed playatore is a better option.

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Nah man, less Google binaries is the goal. MicroG can go wrong as root, but codebase is small enough that I'm less worried. Wish it could be sandboxed instead, that'd be the best of both worlds.