Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Secret Back Doors in Android

Filed under
Just talk

I am everything but a Google basher and I spent a lot of my life descending deep into research of Google foes, Google smear campaigns, lawsuits by proxy, and antitrust actions by proxy. I also advocate Android, but in recent years I have been increasingly concerned about the direction it is taking. I wish to share my latest concern. It relates to what the media characterises as "anti-theft" but is actually a facility to kill phones in a protest or convert them into hostile listening devices. Technology impacts human rights and those who control technology can be tempted to control humans.

Google habitually updates my tablet. It is a Nexus 7 tablet which Google invites itself to update remotely (shame on me for not installing Replicant, but this device does not support it yet). It is not a 3G tablet and it does not have two operation systems (unlike mobile phones) or even a carrier tracking its location all the time. It's a purely Android device with no network tying. It is network-agnostic. I only bought it because in order to replace my PDA (for over a decade) I wanted a device that is not a tracking device. Phones were out of the question.

Networks don't track the tablet. Google, however, is always out there, fully able to identify the connected user (latched onto a Gmail address because of Play), modifying the software without even the user's consent (the user is sometimes prompted to boot, without being able to opt out of the core update itself).

The update in itself is not a problem. What's problematic is its effect.

Following the latest Google update (which I was given no option to reject) I noticed that Google had added a remote kill switch as an opition. It was enabed by default. "Allow remote lock and erase" is what Google calls it and it is essentially working like a back door. Google and its partners in government are gaining a lot of power not over a smartphone but over a tablet.

The significance of this is that not only phones should be assumed to be remotely accessible for modification, including for example additional back doors. What's more, some devices that were sold without this functionality silently have it added. According to the corporate press, the FBI remotely turns Android devices into listening devices and it is getting simpler to see how.

NSA and PRISM destroy our computing. We definitely need to demand Free software, but we should go further by asking for audits, rejecting user-hostile 'features' like DRM, 'secure' boot, and kill switches. I gradually lose any remaining trust that I had in Google and even Free software such as Android.

More in Tux Machines

Open source software: The question of security

The logic is understandable - how can a software with source code that can easily be viewed, accessed and changed have even a modicum of security? opensource-security-question Open source software is safer than many believe. But with organizations around the globe deploying open source solutions in even some of the most mission-critical and security-sensitive environments, there is clearly something unaccounted for by that logic. According to a November 28 2013 Financial News article, some of the world's largest banks and exchanges, including Deutsche Bank and the New York Stock Exchange, have been active in open source projects and are operating their infrastructure on Linux, Apache and similar systems. Read more

Beer and open source with Untappd

Greg Avola loves beer and coding. He loves beer so much that he made an app, Untappd, where users track their favorite brews. He loves coding so much that he wrote a book about mobile web development. According to him, if it weren't for open source software, his app—and the projects of many other developers—simply wouldn't exist. Read more in my interview with Greg about his open source journey, his favorite beer, and why check-in apps are still relevant. Read more

What is Docker, Really? Founder Solomon Hykes Explains

Docker has quickly become one of the most popular open source projects in cloud computing. With millions of Docker Engine downloads, hundreds of meetup groups in 40 countries and dozens upon dozens of companies announcing Docker integration, it's no wonder the less-than-two-year-old project ranked No. 2 overall behind OpenStack in Linux.com and The New Stack's top open cloud project survey. This meteoric rise is still puzzling, and somewhat problematic, however, for Docker, which is “just trying to keep up” with all of the attention and contributions it's receiving, said founder Solomon Hykes in his keynote at LinuxCon and CloudOpen on Thursday. Most people today who are aware of Docker don't necessarily understand how it works or even why it exists, he said, because they haven't actually used it. “Docker is very popular, it became popular very fast, and we're not really sure why,” Hykes said. “My personal theory … is that it was in the right place at the right time for a trend that's much bigger than Docker, and that is very important for all of us, that has to do with how applications are built.” Read more