Google backtracks from 6 month promise to encrypt Android phones by default

[lucasjkr]

http://www.btcreporter.com/2015/03/03/who-is-doing-what-to-preserve-our-privacy-hint-not-google-who-already-backtracked-from-a-6-month-old-progress/


Not Bitcoin-related per se, but given that privacy is an important issue across the board, and one that Bitcoin users tend to feel especially strong about, not to mention that the security of whatever cryptocurrencies we happen to own depends on the security of our smartphones and computers, I felt that taking a detour into Google’s broken promise with regards to the strong default encryption it once touted would be appropriate.

It wasn’t even that long ago – just last fall, in reaction to the flurry of revalations concerning the NSA’s behavior leaked by Ed Snowden, Apple stepped right into the middle of the controversy by announcing that future versions of iOS (its operating system for iPhones and iPads) would feature strong encryption enabled by default. Law enforcement agencies across the country piled on criticism against Apple for taking that step.

(NOTE: By “strong encryption” I mean encryption that ONLY the devices user can decipher – rather than the more common approach, which has been to generate a User encryption key that that is also decodable by the hardware provider, whether they are Apple, Google or Microsoft).

Shortly after the announcement, and in a blatant “me too!” maneuver, Google announced that they, too, would be enabling strong encryption, turned on by default in the next version of Android.

Finish reading: http://www.btcreporter.com/2015/03/03/who-is-doing-what-to-preserve-our-privacy-hint-not-google-who-already-backtracked-from-a-6-month-old-progress/

[pattu1]

The government can exert a lot of pressure in subtle ways.
Google would have felt it.

[Wilikon]

http://www.btcreporter.com/2015/03/03/who-is-doing-what-to-preserve-our-privacy-hint-not-google-who-already-backtracked-from-a-6-month-old-progress/


Not Bitcoin-related per se, but given that privacy is an important issue across the board, and one that Bitcoin users tend to feel especially strong about, not to mention that the security of whatever cryptocurrencies we happen to own depends on the security of our smartphones and computers, I felt that taking a detour into Google’s broken promise with regards to the strong default encryption it once touted would be appropriate.

It wasn’t even that long ago – just last fall, in reaction to the flurry of revalations concerning the NSA’s behavior leaked by Ed Snowden, Apple stepped right into the middle of the controversy by announcing that future versions of iOS (its operating system for iPhones and iPads) would feature strong encryption enabled by default. Law enforcement agencies across the country piled on criticism against Apple for taking that step.

(NOTE: By “strong encryption” I mean encryption that ONLY the devices user can decipher – rather than the more common approach, which has been to generate a User encryption key that that is also decodable by the hardware provider, whether they are Apple, Google or Microsoft).

Shortly after the announcement, and in a blatant “me too!” maneuver, Google announced that they, too, would be enabling strong encryption, turned on by default in the next version of Android.

Finish reading: http://www.btcreporter.com/2015/03/03/who-is-doing-what-to-preserve-our-privacy-hint-not-google-who-already-backtracked-from-a-6-month-old-progress/

Now that net neutrality is the law, google does not need to pretend anymore. Every news bits are related to each other...

[Spendulus]

The government can exert a lot of pressure in subtle ways.
Google would have felt it.

Come to think of it, 2 step authorization is affected.

Is 2 step significantly degraded if the 2 steps are on a combination of devices such as the following pairs?

chrome netbook and android phone

Microsoft PC and microsoft phone

Mac and Iphone

[Wilikon]

w

The government can exert a lot of pressure in subtle ways.
Google would have felt it.

Come to think of it, 2 step authorization is affected.

Is 2 step significantly degraded if the 2 steps are on a combination of devices such as the following pairs?

chrome netbook and android phone

Microsoft PC and microsoft phone

Mac and Iphone

As long as those systems are not open sourced and not on a decentralized network we should assume everything is affected. We've learned the NSA has compromised all the hard drives too. The next logical step would be a truecrypt like distributed solution. I believe people were working on something like that: you would rent space on your drive and then get paid for renting it without accessing that encrypted space (it would be like noise to your OS). If someone remembers what I am talking about please post the link.

[lucasjkr]

The government can exert a lot of pressure in subtle ways.
Google would have felt it.

I don't think that's government; after all, why hasn't the Government put the screws to Apple.

I just think that Google has never cared that much for user privacy - really, if you consider what Eric Schmidt has said in the past, they've been pretty much opposed to it in fact. So even though they said they'd encrypt android devices by default, they never actually prioritized that idea.

[Spendulus]

w

The government can exert a lot of pressure in subtle ways.
Google would have felt it.

Come to think of it, 2 step authorization is affected.

Is 2 step significantly degraded if the 2 steps are on a combination of devices such as the following pairs?

chrome netbook and android phone

Microsoft PC and microsoft phone

Mac and Iphone

As long as those systems are not open sourced and not on a decentralized network we should assume everything is affected. We've learned the NSA has compromised all the hard drives too.....

I need to state things more clearly.  The three cases above are cases where Google, Microsoft or Apple is the supplier of the two devices on which the two step authentication occurs.  It may be a security breach if two step is not on two unlike devices.