https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then,
on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when
it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that >require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then,
on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am >careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my >phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when
it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that
require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then,
on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am
careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my >> phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when
it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
This is why privacy-minded people should either not have a smartphone,
use a basic phone or use a de-Googled phone. That's the path I'll be
taking the next time around.
We have a detailed thread over here that shows you can instantly negate the DataSetIdentifier (DSID) cookie by a simple action that is trivial to do.
*Google Android "DSID" cookie, Android ID & Android System SafetyCore*
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=comp.mobile.android>
<https://newsgrouper.org/comp.mobile.android/121580/0>
<https://comp.mobile.android.narkive.com/JedCXG9A/google-android-dsid-cookie-android-id-android-system-safetycore>
If that app doesn't have over 10 times the functionality of the Google Play >> Store search engine, I'll never again post to Usenet. It's that good.
You can have a /greater/ degree of privacy by following your
instructions noted in the previous thread in relation to a Google
account and the DSID cookie.
But "privacy" isn't a term to be assumed where Android is concerned.
There's an interesting article at <https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2025/03/13/googles-android-decision-bad-news-for-all-samsung-pixel-users/>
"Google has an awkward Android problem that a recent report highlighted.
The AI space race between Google and Samsung and between Android and
iPhone has exposed long-standing issues that the companies need to
address, issues buried within Android's core."
Note in particular "...issues buried within Android's core".
"None of this changes the nature of the bad news for Google or Samsung
users given Android's tracking, or the need for transparency and clarity
as to what is being done on-device, how and by whom. It would be good to
see a thorough review of the hidden tracking taking place without
consent or opt out ¡X that means silent Android tracking and digital fingerprinting. It would be good to see default opt outs introduced
across the board."
Hmm."...hidden tracking taking place without consent or opt out ¡X that
means silent Android tracking and digital fingerprinting". And I
wonder how deep down those default op outs will be hidden if they are
forced to introduce them. :-(
(*** NB - scrolling down the article webpage results in a message: "Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the
browser console for more information)". The browser page is then lost. I
got round this by turning off my Wi-Fi immediately the page had loaded.
The whole page could then be read by scrolling down)
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 10:20:08 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote :
We have a detailed thread over here that shows you can instantly negate the DataSetIdentifier (DSID) cookie by a simple action that is trivial to do. *Google Android "DSID" cookie, Android ID & Android System SafetyCore* <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=comp.mobile.android> <https://newsgrouper.org/comp.mobile.android/121580/0> <https://comp.mobile.android.narkive.com/JedCXG9A/google-android-dsid- cookie-android-id-android-system-safetycore>
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 16 Mar 2025 13:47:34 -0000 (UTC),
Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.org> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that
require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then,
on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am
careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my >> phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when
it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions on how
to finish what you were typing. If it didn't know what you'd written,
the suggestions woudln't make sense.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions
on how to finish what you were typing.
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 19:06:46 +0000, Jeff Layman wrote :
If that app doesn't have over 10 times the functionality of the Google Play >>> Store search engine, I'll never again post to Usenet. It's that good.
You can have a /greater/ degree of privacy by following your
instructions noted in the previous thread in relation to a Google
account and the DSID cookie.
Hi Jeff,
We've worked together in the past, where privacy, like cleanliness, is something that is never fully achieved but which should be strived for.
But "privacy" isn't a term to be assumed where Android is concerned.
If, by saying that, you're comparing to iOS, then that bothers me, as there are many ways to achieve privacy on Android which are impossible on iOS.
But if you mean that privacy isn't a term to be assumed when using any computer, or worse, any phone... then I can't disagree with that statement.
Privacy is like cleanliness.
There are degrees of privacy.
But giving up isn't the correct option.
There's an interesting article at
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2025/03/13/googles-android-decision-bad-news-for-all-samsung-pixel-users/>
"Google has an awkward Android problem that a recent report highlighted.
The AI space race between Google and Samsung and between Android and
iPhone has exposed long-standing issues that the companies need to
address, issues buried within Android's core."
Note in particular "...issues buried within Android's core".
Well, the DSID cookie is definitely buried within Android's core.
But it's disabled simply by hitting that "skip" button.
So being "deeply buried" does not mean it's difficult to neuter.
"None of this changes the nature of the bad news for Google or Samsung
users given Android's tracking, or the need for transparency and clarity
as to what is being done on-device, how and by whom. It would be good to
see a thorough review of the hidden tracking taking place without
consent or opt out �X that means silent Android tracking and digital
fingerprinting. It would be good to see default opt outs introduced
across the board."
While Apple's on-device SSID tracking is actually far worse than Google's off-device SSID tracking, I can't disagree that "hidden tracking" is evil.
Hmm."...hidden tracking taking place without consent or opt out �X that
means silent Android tracking and digital fingerprinting". And I
wonder how deep down those default op outs will be hidden if they are
forced to introduce them. :-(
While we'll never know what we can't know, much of that silent tracking is self inflicted. If someone is dumb enough not to hit the "skip" button, for example, then I can rightly claim that they deserve no privacy if they
won't even lift a finger (almost literally, although to hit the button you have to lift and then drop the finger) to opt out of Google's silent tracking.
It's not too strong of a statement for me to say nobody has the right to claim they can't have privacy if they don't hit that skip button.
They're just whining. Which isn't helpful. Because they're dead wrong.
(*** NB - scrolling down the article webpage results in a message:
"Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the
browser console for more information)". The browser page is then lost. I
got round this by turning off my Wi-Fi immediately the page had loaded.
The whole page could then be read by scrolling down)
Let me look at that Forbes article... using the Epic Privacy Browser...
Works for me.
My problem with the media is that they don't know how iOS & Android work. They only know the propaganda spewed by Google & Apple (and others).
Rarely does the media talk about a device, for example, which doesn't have the Apple or Google mothership account set up on it - which my devices are.
It makes sense that they talk about devices where people do EXACTLY what
the Apple/Google marketing teams tell them to do - as most people do that.
But having NOT hit the "skip" button, they have no right to claim that privacy is not possible - since they've never really thought about it.
For example, the Forbes article says (verbatim) this, which is wrong.
"a study published by Trinity College, Dublin has exposed Google's
decision to track Android phones through cookies, identifiers and
other data that Google silently stores on Android handsets,
through the default apps that are pre-installed. This happens
despite there being no consent sought for storing any of this
data and no opt out."
Given that's dead wrong, how can you believe anything in that article?
Having hit that "skip" button for, oh, I don't know, at least five or six years running, my firm opinion is that anyone who complains that they can't have privacy is no different than a slave complaining they can't have freedom.
The first step in breaking free, is to hit that "skip" button.
That alone, gives you more privacy than you could possibly imagine.
On 2025-03-16 16:10, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 16 Mar 2025 13:47:34 -0000 (UTC),
Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.org> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that
require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then, >>> on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am
careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my >>> phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when
it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions on how
to finish what you were typing. If it didn't know what you'd written,
the suggestions woudln't make sense.
It depends on your keyboard choice, and it is clearly stated when you
select it.
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:01:16 +0100, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-03-16 16:10, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 16 Mar 2025 13:47:34 -0000 (UTC),
Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.org> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that >>>> require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then, >>>> on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am >>>> careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my >>>> phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when >>>> it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions on how
to finish what you were typing. If it didn't know what you'd written,
the suggestions woudln't make sense.
It depends on your keyboard choice, and it is clearly stated when you
select it.
Maybe in Spain it's clearly stated, or maybe if you actually select it
and don't just use the default that comes installed, or maybe both. At
any rate, I don't think I ever saw it stated that what I type could be
read by someone else. Or even an implication that another keyboard
would not allow this.
But if you mean that privacy isn't a term to be assumed when using any
computer, or worse, any phone... then I can't disagree with that statement.
That's what I intended. I know nothing about iOS except that it's an
"unknown unknown" (or maybe that should be a "known unknown" as we know
we know nothing of what goes on under the hood!).
Privacy is like cleanliness.
There are degrees of privacy.
Indeed. The problem with Android is that there are aspects of privacy we
can, and /should/ be responsible for, but we can't know it all. When we
do know about it - such as the DSID cookie - we can do something about it.
Given that's dead wrong, how can you believe anything in that article?
I don't know that it's dead wrong. Once you've hit that Google Account button, are you asked for consent? Or is it just assumed or perhaps
hidden in thousands of words in "Privacy Statements" or "Terms and Conditions"? Are you sure that Google doesn't store other data silently
on Android phones? See above GrapheneOS comment about "open source"
But, yes, you have to be careful of such articles. Journalism has a responsibility for accuracy which unfortunately can be lacking. :-(
The first step in breaking free, is to hit that "skip" button.
That alone, gives you more privacy than you could possibly imagine.
Well, yes, but "*more* privacy" isn't "privacy".
Care to summarize? All that is a huge read.
On 2025-03-17 17:05, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:01:16 +0100, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-03-16 16:10, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 16 Mar 2025 13:47:34 -0000 (UTC),
Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.org> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that >>>>> require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then, >>>>> on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am >>>>> careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my
phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when >>>>> it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions on how >>>> to finish what you were typing. If it didn't know what you'd written, >>>> the suggestions woudln't make sense.
It depends on your keyboard choice, and it is clearly stated when you
select it.
Maybe in Spain it's clearly stated, or maybe if you actually select it
and don't just use the default that comes installed, or maybe both. At
any rate, I don't think I ever saw it stated that what I type could be
read by someone else. Or even an implication that another keyboard
would not allow this.
The normal keyboard is silent. But some of the variants you can enable
have a text that say that google reads what you type. For instance, the dictation "keyboard". And they warn you about it in the context of
typing passwords.
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:04:52 +0000, Jeff Layman wrote :
But if you mean that privacy isn't a term to be assumed when using
any computer, or worse, any phone... then I can't disagree with that
statement.
That's what I intended. I know nothing about iOS except that it's an
"unknown unknown" (or maybe that should be a "known unknown" as we
know we know nothing of what goes on under the hood!).
I've had iOS and Android devices since forever, where iOS is "safer"
out of the box in terms of privacy but iOS is a toy compared to
Android.
For example, the Tor browser isn't allowed on iOS, but it's on every
other platform, including the Mac. Another example is GPS spoofing
isn't allowed on iOS. Another example is system-wide firewalls aren't
allowed on iOS.
Probably 1 out of a million people know that above, none of whom are
editors of the major magazines since they only spout the propaganda.
But probably the biggest flaw in privacy with iOS is you can't
download and install apps without logging into the Apple servers and -
only one out of ten million people are aware that your *unique*
tracking ID is *inserted* by Apple into every downloaded IPA. Which is
really very bad for privacy.
But only one out of millions knows this privacy stuff. Now you do too!
:)
Privacy is like cleanliness.
There are degrees of privacy.
Indeed. The problem with Android is that there are aspects of privacy
we can, and /should/ be responsible for, but we can't know it all.
When we do know about it - such as the DSID cookie - we can do
something about it.
Well, most people (again, 999,999 out of a million) assume you can't
have privacy which is like assuming you can't have clean teeth - so
you don't brush.
Hitting that "skip" button on Android is the single most effect step
to privacy from Google. How many people know this? Probably just you &
me. :(
The good news is the phone becomes 10X more functional when you do it.
:)
Given that's dead wrong, how can you believe anything in that
article?
I don't know that it's dead wrong. Once you've hit that Google
Account button, are you asked for consent? Or is it just assumed or
perhaps hidden in thousands of words in "Privacy Statements" or
"Terms and Conditions"? Are you sure that Google doesn't store other
data silently on Android phones? See above GrapheneOS comment about
"open source"
Well... OK. The "consent" part is up to the lawyers to figure out.
If there truly is no consent whatsoever, I'm sure some class-action
lawyer is on it by now, right? So we don't have to worry about that
for now. :)
But, yes, you have to be careful of such articles. Journalism has a
responsibility for accuracy which unfortunately can be lacking. :-(
I've never read an article about privacy on the Internet that
understood even the most basic things, whether it's Apple or Android
or Windows.
They all spout propaganda.
Even AI spouts propaganda!
Day 1: <https://i.postimg.cc/2SyDDk91/apple-battery-propaganda.jpg>
Day 2: <https://i.postimg.cc/9QYqvBSm/one-day-later.jpg>
The good news is that AI will change its mind when it's fed the facts. <https://i.postimg.cc/6ppvxZNC/working-together.jpg>
Most people can't change their mind because they get all their
"science" from marketing propaganda (e.g., ask anyone which has better support). <https://i.postimg.cc/d0m2BKZZ/ai01.jpg> Who has the worst
hotfix support? <https://i.postimg.cc/6qSn3Wgg/ai02.jpg> Not
propaganda, but in writing? <https://i.postimg.cc/4N7p0chg/ai03.jpg>
What's Apple's written promise?
<https://i.postimg.cc/MKC1JGyj/ai04.jpg> Who has the longest support? <https://i.postimg.cc/d0BCCmg8/ai05.jpg> So is Apple's support the
worst? <https://i.postimg.cc/PxV83fXJ/ai06.jpg> Whose is longest &
shortest? <https://i.postimg.cc/FsHhFbVM/ai07.jpg> Have you read my
factual cites? <https://i.postimg.cc/rm5wW8D7/ai08.jpg> Which OS is
most exploited? <https://i.postimg.cc/GmZRjWnR/ai09.jpg> Why are
iPhones most exploited? <https://i.postimg.cc/PxMkTNpf/ai10.jpg>
Summarize iOS vs Android support.
The first step in breaking free, is to hit that "skip" button.
That alone, gives you more privacy than you could possibly imagine.
Well, yes, but "*more* privacy" isn't "privacy".
Agreed.
It's kind of like brushing your teeth. They're never gonna be sterile.
But it's better to do something to have some privacy than doing
nothing at all and therefore having none. But we can't complain we
can't, if we won't.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
"Google started installing SafetyCore on user devices in November 2024,
and there's no way of opting out or managing the installation. One day,
it's just there."
This is not correct. You can uninstall this package in the app list.
Also see here:
<https://www.ghacks.net/2025/02/28/android-system-safetycore-what-it-does-and-why-you-may-want-to-remove-it/>
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:59:48 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
Care to summarize? All that is a huge read.
No problem... since I'm a kind-hearted helpful (knowledgeable) guy... Researchers found that the DSID cookie (among other things) is "activated" when a user boots an Android phone that has a Google Account set up on it.
The simplest way to describe what "activation" means, is it tracks your browser actions, even when you're not browsing a Google related web site.
The article said you didn't "consent" to that tracking (which is the point that Jeff Layman is making and where I'll let the lawyers fight that out).
What only one out of millions of people seem to know, and which was NOT covered in the article, is that the simplest way to negate that tracking is to not set up a Google Account on the phone.
You can have Google Accounts (I have plenty).
Just not set up as an explicit "Account" in the Android operating system.
Because an "Account" tells Google you want to automatically log into it. Without asking for consent. (full circle completed)
On 2025-03-17 17:05, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:01:16 +0100, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-03-16 16:10, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 16 Mar 2025 13:47:34 -0000 (UTC),
Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.org> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 14:22:25 +0100 (CET), anon wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/04/google_android/
I'm pretty sure they all do this (Apple, Google, someotherguy).
I never expect ANY privacy on my phone, so never use is for things that >>>>> require privacy. I assume that Google knows every keystroke I make. Then, >>>>> on my only other device using Google (one browser on my desktop), I am >>>>> careful what I do in that browser.
This is one reason I've never trusted encrypted comm apps at all. Since my
phone can see what I type and read, so can Google. They can see it when >>>>> it's not encrypted yet, or already decrypted.
Definitely google can. That's how it's able to make suggestions on how >>>> to finish what you were typing. If it didn't know what you'd written, >>>> the suggestions woudln't make sense.
It depends on your keyboard choice, and it is clearly stated when you
select it.
Maybe in Spain it's clearly stated, or maybe if you actually select it
and don't just use the default that comes installed, or maybe both. At
any rate, I don't think I ever saw it stated that what I type could be
read by someone else. Or even an implication that another keyboard
would not allow this.
The normal keyboard is silent. But some of the variants you can enable
have a text that say that google reads what you type. For instance, the >dictation "keyboard". And they warn you about it in the context of
typing passwords.
So, since afaik I use the normal keyboard, the question is whether the google suggestions of how to finish the text in the search box come only
from what is in my computer, or from elsewhere too.
The breadth of suggestions tells me they couldn't all be found in my
little computer. I don't remember any examples right now, but as soon
as I do a google seach again, I'm sure I'll see some. And not just
google, Bing too!
that the simplest way to negate that tracking is
to not set up a Google Account on the phone.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 508 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 233:14:41 |
| Calls: | 9,984 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,833 |
| Messages: | 6,359,841 |
