If you don’t know me, I make frequent write ups about privacy and security. I’ve covered some controversial topics in the past, such as whether or not Chromium is more secure than Firefox. Well, I will try my hand again at taking a look at some controversial topics.

I need ideas, though. So far, I would like to cover the controversy about Brave, controversy around Monero and other cryptocurrencies, and controversy around AI. These will be far easier to research and manage than Chromium vs. Firefox, for example. I’d like to know which ideas you have!

Which controversial privacy topics do you know of that you would like to see covered?

PLEASE DO NOT ARGUE ABOUT THEM IN THE COMMENTS!

Please save any debate for if/when I make a write up about the topic. Keep the comments clean, and simply upvote ideas you would like to see covered. I won’t be able to cover everything, so it helps bring attention!

Above all else, be kind, even if you don’t agree with an idea or topic :)

  • SpicyAnt@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 month ago

    Step 1 of installing GrapheneOS for de-googling your life: Buy a Google Pixel phone

    Look - I know, I know. I get it. Google allows you to unlock the bootloader while maintaining the phone’s unique and excellent hardware security features. The argument makes sense. It is compelling. Other manufacturers do not give you this freedom. I am not arguing about that. I have a Pixel phone running GrapheneOS myself.

    However… It is just so very obviously ironic that one needs to trust Google’s hardware and purchase a Google product to de-google their life through GrapheneOS. I think that it is a perfectly valid position for someone to raise their eyebrows, laugh, and remain skeptical of the concept either because they do not want to support Google at all, or because they simply will not trust Google’s hardware.

    The reason why I think that this is “controversial” is because I have seen multiple instances of someone pointing out the irony, followed by someone getting defensive about it and making use of the technical security arguments in an attempt to patch up the irony.

      • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        30 days ago

        Yeah, there is a whole “separate OS”, but, to my knowledge, there hasn’t been evidence of it casually being able to collect arbitrary data from the actual phone’s OS.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          30 days ago

          It has been made impossible to personally audit, the safe assumption, the null hypothesis is that it does until proven otherwise, which would be impossible and in any case implausible under our current surveillance capitalism.

            • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              20 days ago

              There are multiple encryption layers and the private keys are not on the device. Even a governement agency would struggle auditing some random phone. They’re not doing it, our security is not their concern. Also they don’t want us knowing about their backdoors.

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      My issue with that is that Pixels are expensive, and in some places are not sold officially (meaning they can only be bought from smaller resellers with usually much less generous return policies). The newest models are outright unaffordable new. The only ones below $150 are either secondhand or out of support, so that’s what poor people are left with? Plus, no headphone jack.

      I use Graphene myself, but I dislike absolutism. I don’t in the slightest regret buying my Pixel even though $300 is a painful sum to spend on a phone (and it was on the cheaper end if we’re talking about up-to-date models!), but I know that my mother would never spend this much on a phone - so I look into Divest or Lineage on more common and affordable phones.

    • j4p@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      30 days ago

      Bought a second hand Pixel 7 in like new condition at the time for $250 on back market (dropped it, bought another, still cheaper than the equivalent iPhone 14 lol). That at least means I am not financially contributing to Google, but I do agree that I don’t think there is a way to verify that the hardware is completely foolproof even if its the best option we currently have.

      I guess that’s true of any hardware though, and we have to make our assumptions based off known quantities such as Pixels’ unique hardware security features?

      But yeah, it’s a minefield out there. Let’s get carrier pigeons.

    • N0x0n@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      30 days ago

      Yeah… And probably all big players have somehow backdoored their phone :/.

    • bruhSoulz@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      30 days ago

      This is entirely valid as a concern. In my matrix GC someone just said pixel and oneplus are best for modding and I was like… The whole point of me trying to degoogle is to contribute less to their economy, why would I buy their bs hardware😭☠️