this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
138 points (99.3% liked)

Android

19104 readers
170 users here now

The new home of /r/Android on Lemmy and the Fediverse!

Android news, reviews, tips, and discussions about rooting, tutorials, and apps.

πŸ”—Universal Link: !android@lemdro.id


πŸ’‘Content Philosophy:

Content which benefits the community (news, rumours, and discussions) is generally allowed and is valued over content which benefits only the individual (technical questions, help buying/selling, rants, self-promotion, etc.) which will be removed if it's in violation of the rules.


Support, technical, or app related questions belong in: !askandroid@lemdro.id

For fresh communities, lemmy apps, and instance updates: !lemdroid@lemdro.id

πŸ’¬Matrix Chat

πŸ’¬Telegram channels / chats

πŸ“°Our communities below


Rules

  1. Stay on topic: All posts should be related to the Android OS or ecosystem.

  2. No support questions, recommendation requests, rants, or bug reports: Posts must benefit the community rather than the individual. Please post to !askandroid@lemdro.id.

  3. Describe images/videos, no memes: Please include a text description when sharing images or videos. Post memes to !androidmemes@lemdro.id.

  4. No self-promotion spam: Active community members can post their apps if they answer any questions in the comments. Please do not post links to your own website, YouTube, blog content, or communities.

  5. No reposts or rehosted content: Share only the original source of an article, unless it's not available in English or requires logging in (like Twitter). Avoid reposting the same topic from other sources.

  6. No editorializing titles: You can add the author or website's name if helpful, but keep article titles unchanged.

  7. No piracy or unverified APKs: Do not share links or direct people to pirated content or unverified APKs, which may contain malicious code.

  8. No unauthorized polls, bots, or giveaways: Do not create polls, use bots, or organize giveaways without first contacting mods for approval.

  9. No offensive or low-effort content: Don't post offensive or unhelpful content. Keep it civil and friendly!

  10. No affiliate links: Posting affiliate links is not allowed.

Quick Links

Our Communities

Lemmy App List

Chat and More


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 44 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Call your carrier to blacklist the IMEI. Done.

It has always worked this way, well before the smartphone era.

The only way to overcome is to find a country the phone works with and has carriers not part of the blacklisting networks. Doesn't make for a very practical resale market...

So, now that's out of the way, what control is Google actually trying to sneak in then?

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 weeks ago

Same as Apple: total platform control. Like HP and printer ink.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 5 points 2 weeks ago

Some carriers/MVNOs won't allow that request (Fi, Orange, US Cellular, etc.)

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

That assumes it's attached to a carrier. I had a phone stolen out of the mail.

[–] throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Doesn't do much.

Only your carrier would honor it, maybe even all carriers in your country, but they'll ship it off to some other country and the phone would still work (might be missing a few bands, but still fuctional).

The only way for it to actually deter theft is for the entire device to essentially become a brick unless unlocked.

The idea itself is a good thing. The only bad thing about FRP is that it's online-based instead of a local-lock.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wonder how few people do this these days

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Apparently most

[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

While this sounds good. It's not, at all

Assumed as much without opening article

[–] psud@aussie.zone 7 points 2 weeks ago

It's good for the common user who's happy to use all Google services and can remember (or has written down) their credentials.

It's absolutely useless for those out of the Google ecosystem

It's annoying through to disastrous for people supporting other peoples' phones

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Geetnerd@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Rent Based Economy.

All these corporations want to make all their properties subscription based, in some form.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 16 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Here's a better idea: how about NOT making phones such stupidly high value items where thieves can access your bank account, make an instant loan and steal that, too?

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I used to work on phones, it was so great getting to help design these pocket computers the way I wanted to use them. I honestly saw the future being something like, "ok, cloud is a bit of a trust reach, but on the other hand, your phone becomes a cheap access terminal." I assumed we'd hit a point, with how cheap the hardware inside the machine is, (to this day) where phones would ostensibly become something you could grab from a vending machine. They'd eventually become highly recyclable so you could just take an old phone and chuck it in a recycling bin to have the parts repurposed/recycled.

"Oh crap, my phone just fell out of my pocket and got run over!" Go to vending machine, chuck old phone in recycling, log in to new phone, old phone is nuked remotely if it still functions, new phone starts caching your "phone". You're back in business in minutes.

Phones would have no value to be stolen, phones are accessible to all walks of life, a fairness of technology access helps balance the world.

None of that happened, instead, it was a war of walled gardens, information hoarding, privacy violations, expense, distrust, and loan pyramid schemes so people can dump $1500 on $50-$200 worth of parts that will probably just end up being stolen and sold in aftermarket/underground markets in countries that are less well-off.

I'm kinda irked I ever tried to work on the tech to make lives better and do not regret my choice to not go back to that industry.

[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Heh, your vision is kinda like the one Google was touting back when they first announced/launched Chromebooks.
"Oh it broke? Login in on another and your computer is back!"
Don't know if the modern Chromebook/ChromeOS still works like that.

Edit: Oh wow, check out this super over the top ad they made to drive the point home, It's still on the Chrome Youtube channel!

[–] Rin@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

Doesn't your bank need 2 sets of creds to log in? Mine does.

also, i like my phone to be fast. If i wanted my phone just be a cheap thing, i'd buy a second hand google flagship from 3 years ago and flash with custom rom.

With my phone being high end, comes the risk of theft, like with virtually anything high end (watches, ice, etc)

[–] Chakravanti@monero.town 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, like access to "your" phone. Kind of stupid. It's like fuck you to all banks. Get PGP signature services and fuck off with you demanded access to my fucking camera and mic.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

On the other hand I like that my phone does those things and don't want it to be sellable in the event that someone decides to steal it.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Only if you're willing to accept Google spy services and all that shit on AOSP, this stuff doesn't work.

[–] absquatulate@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Smartphones are common targets for thieves because they contain valuable personal data and fetch high prices on second-hand markets. To protect this data, Android includesΒ theft protection featuresΒ that lock down a stolen phone. While thieves might try wiping phones they intend to sell, Android already has robust protections against unauthorized factory resets. Google announced today that these factory reset protections will become even more powerful later this year.

Self-contradicting much?

These justifications are pointless anyway, everybody knows that google and only google has the right to rummage through your data.

"We will not allow you to reset the data until we can confirm that the data is yours"

[–] throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I actually like the idea of anti-theft FRP, but only if its a local-based instead of cloud based.

You know, like a BIOS/UEFI lock on a computer, but apply it to all the components instead of motherboard only, and get rid of the "remove battery to reset password" bypass, and its a functional anti-theft system.

I imagine its probably much easier to acomplish this on a intergrated device with CPU, Storage, RAM, all on one chip (SoC) like on a phone than with computers.

Unfortunately, corporations always just love to interject and add their "cloud" nonsense to it.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 week ago

Then your kid has a friend over that sticks a password on it for the lols and doesn't know what it was

[–] db2@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Apple can't even do that and they have total control of the hardware as the only manufacturer.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Google has hardware they control. Other OEMs can choose to make it available. It's up to them to implement.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That it's not possible. Roadblocks are the best you can hope for.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Why is it not possible

[–] AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What do you mean? The activation lock means people can't use a stolen iphone so long as the person who lost it doesn't remove it from their account. Maybe you could chop it up for some parts, but the phone is functionally useless as a phone.

[–] db2@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It can be bypassed with a couple clicks.

[–] AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No it can't unless you have the icloud password

[–] db2@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have 3 desktop apps right now that can do it. They can also bypass remote management.

[–] AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Provide an example. Are you talking about corporate managed devices or personal ones? It's impossible to remove a find my activation lock on a personal device.

[–] db2@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, you're wasting my time. I'm just going to block you and move on, get your jollies somewhere else.

[–] AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Because you're full of shit and making things up. Can't bring receipts, don't open your mouth and spread lies.

[–] AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

This guy is lying.

[–] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

If they don't implement the screen lock authentication on AOSP is total useless for private systems like GrapheneOS

[–] kionite231@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

Fuck you google

[–] blinfabian@feddit.nl 3 points 2 weeks ago

hello based department? i'd like to report Google

[–] LumpyPancakes@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

My $300 G84 isn't worth nicking. Does all I need nicely though.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί