Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #56151 > unrolled thread

Anti-virus?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:54 -0400
    Re:Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:05 +0200
      Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:15 -0400
        Re: Anti-virus? Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2018-10-01 19:55 +0100
      Re: Anti-virus? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2018-10-01 22:11 +0200
        Re: Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:14 +0200
          Re: Anti-virus? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2018-10-02 06:18 +0200
        Re: Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:34 +0200
    Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-01 20:49 +0200
      Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:03 -0400
        Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:52 +0000
        Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 10:29 +0200
          Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:30 +0200
            Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:09 +0200
              Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:31 +0200
                Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 16:33 +0200
      Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:50 +0000
        Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 10:55 +0200
          Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 12:32 +0000
            Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 09:45 -0700
              Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-02 17:54 +0000
                Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 13:15 -0700
                  Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:38 +0000
                  Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 10:49 +0000
                    Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:11 +0000
                    Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 08:42 -0700
                      Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
                      Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:32 +0000
                        Re: Anti-virus? Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2018-10-03 19:02 +0100
                        Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 20:13 +0200
                          Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 20:09 +0000
                            Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 23:23 +0200
                              Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:06 +0000
                              Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 15:02 +0000
                                Google does *not* track *you*! (was: Anti-virus?) Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 15:44 +0000
                                  Re: Google does *not* track *you*! 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
                                    Re: Google does *not* track *you*! "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 22:03 +0200
                                      Re: Google does *not* track *you*! 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-07 14:23 -0700
                                  Re: Google does *not* track *you*! Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 17:07 +0000
                                Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
                Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:36 +0000
              Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:34 +0000
                Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 20:33 -0700
                  Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder  <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 04:30 +0000
                    Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 22:13 -0700
                      Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
                        Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:09 +0200
                          Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000
                        Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 08:42 -0700
                          Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
                            Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 15:52 -0700
                              Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 23:31 +0000
                                Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <123456@123456.com> - 2018-10-03 21:21 -0700
                                  Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:07 +0000
                                    Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
                Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:37 +0200
                  Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 08:44 -0400
                  Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
                    Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:06 +0200
                      Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000
                        Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:41 +0200
                          Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-08 15:00 +0000
            Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 20:42 +0200
              Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:44 +0200
                Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
                  Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:14 +0200
                    Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:31 +0200
                      Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:47 +0200
                        Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
                        Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 18:20 +0200
                          Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 17:18 +0000
                    Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:39 +0000
                      Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:49 +0200
                        Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
                Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:28 +0200
                  Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:39 +0000
                  Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:48 +0200
                    Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-07 21:40 +0200
        Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 19:33 -0400
          Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:40 +0000
            Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:55 -0400
              Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 14:08 -0400
                Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:07 +0000
                  Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-04 10:03 -0400
                    Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-06 02:56 +0000
                  Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:50 +0200
                    Re: Anti-virus?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-08 15:00 +0000
              Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:54 +0200
    Re: Anti-virus? Arlen   H  Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:47 +0000
    Re: Anti-virus? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-10-04 13:14 +0100

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

#56179

123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:
> On 10/2/2018 5:32 AM, Arlen H Holder wrote:
> 
> > HINT: I have location turned off
> 
> Hint: Google tracks users even with location data turned off.
> 
> https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/google-confirms-that-it-tracks-users-even-with-location-data-turned-off/articleshow/65435086.cms

  This has come up before and it's important to note that this is about
*Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about non-Google
apps [1].

  BTW, quite ironic: When I went to the webpage, the website asked me to
give my consent for all kinds of tracking cooking and for ... drum roll
... *Google Analytics*! Hypocritical much!? :-) c.q. :-(

[1] That doesn't mean that those don't/can't track.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56182

On 10/2/2018 10:54 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> 123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:

>> Google tracks users even with location data turned off.

>> https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/google-confirms-that-it-tracks-users-even-with-location-data-turned-off/articleshow/65435086.cms

 > This has come up before and it's important to note that this is about
> *Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about non-Google
>  apps

What about from your Android PHONE?

"Google collects an incredible amount of data about you, especially from
that device you use most, your Android phone."

"A list of types of movements that your phone thinks you could be doing,
by likelihood. (e.g. walking: 51%, onBicycle: 4%, in Rail Vehicle: 3%).
The barometric pressure. Whether or not you’re connected to wifi. The
MAC address—which is a unique identifier—of the Wi-Fi access point
you’re connected to. The MAC address, signal strength, and frequency of
every nearby wifi access point. The MAC address, identifier, type, and
two measures of signal strength of every nearby Bluetooth beacon. The
charge level of your phone battery and whether or not your phone is
charging. The voltage of your battery. The GPS coordinates of your phone
and the accuracy of those coordinates. The GPS elevation and the
accuracy of that."

https://bgr.com/2018/01/24/android-location-history-tracking-google/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56187

On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 13:15:33 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> What about from your Android PHONE?
> 
> "Google collects an incredible amount of data about you, especially from
> that device you use most, your Android phone."
> 
> "A list of types of movements that your phone thinks you could be doing,
> by likelihood. (e.g. walking: 51%, onBicycle: 4%, in Rail Vehicle: 3%).
> The barometric pressure. Whether or not you’re connected to wifi. The
> MAC address—which is a unique identifier—of the Wi-Fi access point
> you’re connected to. The MAC address, signal strength, and frequency of
> every nearby wifi access point. The MAC address, identifier, type, and
> two measures of signal strength of every nearby Bluetooth beacon. The
> charge level of your phone battery and whether or not your phone is
> charging. The voltage of your battery. The GPS coordinates of your phone
> and the accuracy of those coordinates. The GPS elevation and the
> accuracy of that."
> 
> https://bgr.com/2018/01/24/android-location-history-tracking-google/

As I recall, each and every one of those has threads related to how to turn
it all off.

The problem, mostly, isn't _your_ phone, since your own phone is likely set
up to NOT report that stuff.

The problem is that other people's phones are set to report things like
your home router BSSID, signal strength, SSID, and the other person's
location at the time _that_ information is reported to Google.

Hence note there are three separate problems to work out:
1. How to turn off location tracking on YOUR phone, and, 
2. How to turn off other people from reporting your router BSSID.
and maybe even the (unrelated to Android, directly)
3. How to set your router so that Google will ignore it even if idiots do 
have #2 set above to the Android defaults.

We should likely have a thread on each for the tribal archives.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56196

123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:
> On 10/2/2018 10:54 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
> > 123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Google tracks users even with location data turned off.
> 
> >> https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/google-confirms-that-it-tracks-users-even-with-location-data-turned-off/articleshow/65435086.cms
> 
>  > This has come up before and it's important to note that this is about
> > *Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about non-Google
> >  apps
> 
> What about from your Android PHONE?

  No offense, but 1) see my earlier footnote, 2) the *phone* doesn't
track, it's about the - *different* kinds of - *software* on the phone,
throwing all that software in one big bucket only leads to
misinformation and paranoia and 3) read the *whole* article and try to
understand what it *really* says and what it does *not* say, by might be
implied by the uncareful reader.

> "Google collects an incredible amount of data about you, especially from
> that device you use most, your Android phone."
> 
> "A list of types of movements that your phone thinks you could be doing,
> by likelihood. (e.g. walking: 51%, onBicycle: 4%, in Rail Vehicle: 3%).
> The barometric pressure. Whether or not you?re connected to wifi. The
> MAC address?which is a unique identifier?of the Wi-Fi access point
> you?re connected to. The MAC address, signal strength, and frequency of
> every nearby wifi access point. The MAC address, identifier, type, and
> two measures of signal strength of every nearby Bluetooth beacon. The
> charge level of your phone battery and whether or not your phone is
> charging. The voltage of your battery. The GPS coordinates of your phone
> and the accuracy of those coordinates. The GPS elevation and the
> accuracy of that."
> 
> https://bgr.com/2018/01/24/android-location-history-tracking-google/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56204

On 3 Oct 2018 10:49:40 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   No offense, but 1) see my earlier footnote, 2) the *phone* doesn't
> track, it's about the - *different* kinds of - *software* on the phone,
> throwing all that software in one big bucket only leads to
> misinformation and paranoia and 3) read the *whole* article and try to
> understand what it *really* says and what it does *not* say, by might be
> implied by the uncareful reader.

We probably should write up a tribal knowledge tutorial to help everyone
figure out the many steps it takes to ensure the software on the phone
doesn't track both us, and everyone about us, which I've done (over the
years), but I forget all the steps I did since they were done over time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56223

On 10/3/2018 3:49 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> 123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:

>>> This has come up before and it's important to note that this is 
>>> about *Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about 
>>> non-Google apps

>> What about from your Android PHONE?
> 
> No offense, but 1) see my earlier footnote, 2) the *phone* doesn't 
> track, it's about the - *different* kinds of - *software* on the 
> phone,

Exactly. It doesn't have to be ONLY Google apps as you said. The OS
and/or non-Google apps as modified and installed by the carriers can
also track you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56231

On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 08:42:15 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> Exactly. It doesn't have to be ONLY Google apps as you said. The OS
> and/or non-Google apps as modified and installed by the carriers can
> also track you.

I don't have a Google ID on my phone.
That means no Advertising ID, for example.

I don't have location tracking turned on, as another example.
(It's almost never needed ... unless I'm in the middle of the ocean where
there are no landmarks.)

And I certainly don't have my phone set to report my neighbor's
SSDI/BSSID/SignalStrength along with my location.

IMHO ... We should combine our appreciable knowledge, those of us on this
ng who are actually intelligent, to write up a tutorial to help the
_others_ set up their phones so that they report nothing to Google that the
user doesn't want reported.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56234

123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:
> On 10/3/2018 3:49 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
> > 123456789 <12345@12345.com> wrote:
> 
> >>> This has come up before and it's important to note that this is 
> >>> about *Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about 
> >>> non-Google apps
> 
> >> What about from your Android PHONE?
> > 
> > No offense, but 1) see my earlier footnote, 2) the *phone* doesn't 
> > track, it's about the - *different* kinds of - *software* on the 
> > phone,
> 
> Exactly. It doesn't have to be ONLY Google apps as you said. The OS
> and/or non-Google apps as modified and installed by the carriers can
> also track you.

  Yes, but in the context of these paranoid and scaremongering 'news'
articles, the *point* is, *does* Android - the OS and only the OS -
actually track 'you' or not!?

  Untill now, we've only seen unspecific innuendo, but no actual *proof*
that *Android* *does* actually track 'you'.

  N.B. I put 'you' in scare quotes, because tracking does not track a
person, but a device and the activity on and of that device. And yes,
there are people who claim that the information of said tracking, can
and does really identify a specific person by name, (living) address,
etc., etc., but also they fail to provide proof of said identification.

  N.B.2. *If* said personal information is used without the person's
specific consent or/and without telling what the information is used for
or/and without telling the person which information is kept about hir
or/and without giving the person the opportunity to redact/remove that
information or/and ..., in the EU the GDPR can and will be enforced and
the culprits will be hit with a ton of bricks (read: multi-billion
dollar fines). That has been done in the past with much success and is
the only way to get the likes of Google to get their act together. (As
we speak, Facebook could face :-) a $1.6 billion fine in the EU, because
of the recent security hole that exposed some 50 million accounts.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56236

On 03/10/2018 18:32, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
>    Yes, but in the context of these paranoid and scaremongering 'news'
> articles, the *point* is, *does* Android - the OS and only the OS -
> actually track 'you' or not!?

As far as that goes, I don't know, but ...

>    Until now, we've only seen unspecific innuendo, but no actual *proof*
> that *Android* *does* actually track 'you'.

... although it's not Android as such, anyone connecting to the internet 
can often be tracked, often regardless of their platform or browser 
settings.  As it happens, recently there has been in similar debate in a 
subthread of this in alt.windows7.general:

"CCleaner Is Silently Updating Users Who Turned Off Automatic Updates"
http://www.pcbanter.net/showthread.php?page=2&t=1105856

You may care to note particularly my own contributions ...

http://www.pcbanter.net/showpost.php?p=3767984&postcount=21
http://www.pcbanter.net/showpost.php?p=3768042&postcount=26

... in which I give several examples of people being tracked by 
differing technologies, including testing the uniqueness (read 
trackability) of this PC's browser  -  its fingerprint is unique, and 
therefore I am completely trackable.

>    N.B. I put 'you' in scare quotes, because tracking does not track a
> person, but a device and the activity on and of that device. And yes,
> there are people who claim that the information of said tracking, can
> and does really identify a specific person by name, (living) address,
> etc., etc., but also they fail to provide proof of said identification.
> 
>    N.B.2. *If* said personal information is used without the person's
> specific consent or/and without telling what the information is used for
> or/and without telling the person which information is kept about hir
> or/and without giving the person the opportunity to redact/remove that
> information or/and ..., in the EU the GDPR can and will be enforced and
> the culprits will be hit with a ton of bricks (read: multi-billion
> dollar fines). That has been done in the past with much success 

I don't think it has for GDPR as such ...

"Vote Leave data firm hit with first ever GDPR notice"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45589004

... though admittedly that story is self-contradictory, in that the 
headline says "first ever", but the text says "UK's first"

> and is
> the only way to get the likes of Google to get their act together. (As
> we speak, Facebook could face :-) a $1.6 billion fine in the EU, because
> of the recent security hole that exposed some 50 million accounts.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56239

Am 03.10.2018 um 19:32 schrieb Frank Slootweg:

>    Yes, but in the context of these paranoid and scaremongering 'news'
> articles, the *point* is, *does* Android - the OS and only the OS -
> actually track 'you' or not!?

Which Android are you talking about?

1. Google Android or
2. some manufacturer-specific Android (which is based on Google Android 
for all phones targeted at western markets) or
3. AOSP or
4. Some community ROM, based on AOSP.

#1 and #2 do indeed include tracking in the core OS services.
#3 does not track in it's bare form, but is only available for very few 
devices and is pretty much useless without the gapps package, which will 
add back tracking.
#4 may or may not feature tracking. Again, if you want the play store, 
you need gapps, which will add tracking.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56240

Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> wrote:
> Am 03.10.2018 um 19:32 schrieb Frank Slootweg:
> 
> >    Yes, but in the context of these paranoid and scaremongering 'news'
> > articles, the *point* is, *does* Android - the OS and only the OS -
> > actually track 'you' or not!?
> 
> Which Android are you talking about?
> 
> 1. Google Android or
> 2. some manufacturer-specific Android (which is based on Google Android 
> for all phones targeted at western markets) or
> 3. AOSP or
> 4. Some community ROM, based on AOSP.

  2. and 1. if you mean the Android on Google's phones.

> #1 and #2 do indeed include tracking in the core OS services.

  Yes, those Android versions can/do track statistical information,
'quality' information, etc., but the issue is, do they track *personal*
information (name, adress, etc.) or/and *really* *uniquely* *identify* a
*person*, not a device.

  As I've said in the part you snipped:

> >   Untill now, we've only seen unspecific innuendo, but no actual
> > *proof* that *Android* *does* actually track 'you'.

  We're still waiting for such proof.

> #3 does not track in it's bare form, but is only available for very few 
> devices and is pretty much useless without the gapps package, which will 
> add back tracking.
> #4 may or may not feature tracking. Again, if you want the play store, 
> you need gapps, which will add tracking.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56250

Am 03.10.2018 um 22:09 schrieb Frank Slootweg:

>    Yes, those Android versions can/do track statistical information,
> 'quality' information, etc., but the issue is, do they track *personal*
> information (name, adress, etc.) 

In standard settings, your whole address book is shared with google, as 
well as your calendar and detailed location tracking information (which 
i consider personal, too). Additional information will be shared, if you 
actually use some of the google services.

It is possible to install alternate address book and calendar providers, 
but this is not something Joe Average will do or even is capable of doing.

It is possible to turn off most of the location tracking, but this 
requires multiple switches to be toggled the right way, some of which 
not being exactly obvious.

And still, google synchronization services will continue to run in the 
background while having access to absolutely everything stored on the 
phone. You have to *believe* that the settings behave as you expect them 
to behave - which does not necessarily match googles thinking.

> or/and *really* *uniquely* *identify* a *person*, not a device.

Smartphones are designed to be used by exactly one person and usually do 
not provide the necessary mechanisms for multi-user operation.
In case a manufacturer has enabled the multi-user feature, google knows 
which user has authenticated himself (fingerprint/faceid/pin/etc.).

>    We're still waiting for such proof.

We are not in court here.

Either you accept easily verifiable technical information. Or you 
continue to dream about a better world, where multi-billion dollar 
companies are everyone's friend and never follow their own interests.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56277

On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 23:23:48 +0200, Hergen Lehmann wrote:

> It is possible to turn off most of the location tracking, but this 
> requires multiple switches to be toggled the right way, some of which 
> not being exactly obvious.

So that others would benefit from your knowledge, please see:

 What are the common settings to change on an Android 7.0 Nougat phone for privacy? 
 <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/b9Ck9JSyKXY>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56283

Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> wrote:
> Am 03.10.2018 um 22:09 schrieb Frank Slootweg:
> 
> >    Yes, those Android versions can/do track statistical information,
> > 'quality' information, etc., but the issue is, do they track *personal*
> > information (name, adress, etc.) 
> 
> In standard settings, your whole address book is shared with google, as 
> well as your calendar and detailed location tracking information (which 
> i consider personal, too). Additional information will be shared, if you 
> actually use some of the google services.

  Sorry, but you're still/again on the Google bandwagon. We all know
that Google can and does Bad Things TM. But that's not the point, at
least my point.

  *My* *point* is that people implicitly or explicitly claim that
*Android* not only can, but actually *does* track *personal* information
(name, address, etc.), but if asked for *proof* of said alleged
tracking, they sidestep the question and divert the conversation.

> It is possible to install alternate address book and calendar providers, 
> but this is not something Joe Average will do or even is capable of doing.

  The scenario/issue is not about Joe Average. We all know that Joe
Average *is* tracked by Google. (Whether *that* tracking track
*personal* information like name, address, etc., is very debatable as
well, but my point is about tracking done by the Android OS and only the
Android OS.)

> It is possible to turn off most of the location tracking, but this 
> requires multiple switches to be toggled the right way, some of which 
> not being exactly obvious.
> 
> And still, google synchronization services will continue to run in the 
> background while having access to absolutely everything stored on the 
> phone. You have to *believe* that the settings behave as you expect them 
> to behave - which does not necessarily match googles thinking.
> 
> > or/and *really* *uniquely* *identify* a *person*, not a device.
> 
> Smartphones are designed to be used by exactly one person and usually do 
> not provide the necessary mechanisms for multi-user operation.
> In case a manufacturer has enabled the multi-user feature, google knows 
> which user has authenticated himself (fingerprint/faceid/pin/etc.).

  Again, my comment was if the *Android* part of the tracking - if any
- does *really* *uniquely* *identify* a *person*.

  But even for Joe Average, with a Google Account, all Google has - and
*has permission to use* for *its* services to that *user*, and *only* to
that user - is name, email address and probably phone number (for 2FA).

> >    We're still waiting for such proof.
> 
> We are not in court here.

  Indeed we aren't. But if people implicitly or explicitly claim things
and point to 'news' reports which do *not* support there claims, it's
reasonable to ask for proof.

> Either you accept easily verifiable technical information.

  Which sofar does *not* support the claims, mostly because the
writers of the 'news' reports don't really understand the subject matter
and the readers here don't understand what the reports *really* say and
what they do *not* say.

> 							     Or you 
> continue to dream about a better world, where multi-billion dollar 
> companies are everyone's friend and never follow their own interests.

  Please don't patronize. I asked for proof of claims made (by others).
If you don't have any, then just say so or don't respond.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56284 — Google does *not* track *you*! (was: Anti-virus?)

  This is some personal perspective with regard to the rampant paranoia
and scaremongering that 'Google tracks your every move!'.

My environment:
===============

- Laptop (Windows 8.1).
- Smartphone (Android 5.1.1) and tablet (Android 5.0.2).
- Multiple Google Accounts. One used most of the time for all devices.
- All devices mostly used at home.
- All devices always on Internet (via Wi-Fi).
- Smartphone has:
  - Cellular voice/text always on.
  - Cellular data always off.
  - Bluetooth always on.
- Android devices have:
  - Local services off.
  - GPS off most of the time.
- If device(s) not at home:
  - Internet via Wi-Fi hotspots or smartphone used as a hotspot.
  - GPS used for navigation.

Results/facts/information:
==========================

- No spam (UCE/UBE), phishing mail, etc. at all.

- In-page ads in browsers. I don't mind/block.

- Ads are sometimes 'local'. Duh! 'My' IP address is in the .nl TLD.

- Ads are sometimes related to my searches. Duh! Google *does* track
  searches and search results.

- Ads do *never* contain or refer to *any* *personal* information, i.e.
  no name, address, sex (Yes, please!), telephonenumber, no nothing.

- Some ads are the opposite of personalized. From example I login in a
  webshop and buy something and then later, I get a (non-personalized)
  ad from the same webshop for the same item! Duh! I just *bought* it,
  all-knowing Google!

- SWMBO sometimes gets ads which are related to *my* search activity. So
  much for browser fingerprinting! (Duh! Yeah, we share the IP address.
  NAT router.)

Bottom line:
============

  If Google allegedly stole all that personal information of mine, then
why isn't it *used*!?

  Please let me know if you need any clarification, have questions,
etc..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56285 — Re: Google does *not* track *you*!

On 10/4/2018 8:44 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> If Google allegedly stole all that personal information of mine,
> then why isn't it *used*!?

I still find it a bit disconcerting that when I get a dentist
confirmation in Gmail, it automatically shows up on my calendar, and a
pin is automatically dropped at the dentist office location in Maps... 8-O

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56356 — Re: Google does *not* track *you*!

On 04/10/2018 18.10, 123456789 wrote:
> On 10/4/2018 8:44 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
>> If Google allegedly stole all that personal information of mine,
>> then why isn't it *used*!?
> 
> I still find it a bit disconcerting that when I get a dentist
> confirmation in Gmail, it automatically shows up on my calendar, and a
> pin is automatically dropped at the dentist office location in Maps... 8-O

Well, that's a wanted feature :-P

It happens when the email contains an attachment that is a calendar
update or notice in some standarized form - no, I do not know which it
is exactly. The mail application sends that data to the calendar
application. It needs permission, which you may have given in the past.

It is called application integration or software suite.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56357 — Re: Google does *not* track *you*!

On 10/7/2018 1:03 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 04/10/2018 18.10, 123456789 wrote:

>> I still find it a bit disconcerting that when I get a dentist 
>> confirmation in Gmail, it automatically shows up on my calendar,
>> and a pin is automatically dropped at the dentist office location
>> in Maps... 8-O

> Well, that's a wanted feature :-P

Still kinda spooky though... :)

> It needs permission, which you may have given in the past.

I'm not the paranoid type so run default settings.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56290 — Re: Google does *not* track *you*!

A little earlier, I wrote:

[...]

> - Android devices have:
>   - Local services off.

  Make that 'Location services'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56286

On 10/4/2018 8:02 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> people implicitly or explicitly claim that *Android* not only can, 
> but actually *does* track *personal* information

I think you may be right that bare bones Android may not track you.

> but if asked for *proof* of said alleged tracking, they sidestep the
>  question and divert the conversation.

Question is, is there a bare bones android available in the devices we
buy? Anyone can download the source code, fork it, mod it, and utilize
it. And the device makers all do. Don't you think they add a few sneaky
things of their own to the OS? Course they do. Is it still called the
Android OS? Yep. And then there's those apps that you can't delete or
disable and run automatically. Are they part of the OS? Technically no
but in reality?

Bottom line you may be technically correct, but in the real world (IMO)
not so much...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web