1150
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by MisterFrog@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

I installed NetGuard about a month ago and blocked all internet to apps, unless they're on a whitelist. No notifications from this particular system app (that can't be disabled) until recently when it started making internet connection requests to google servers. Does anyone know when this became a thing?

Edit 2: I bought my Pixel 6 phone outright, directly from Google's Australian store. I have no creditors.

Were the courts not enough control for creditors? Since when are they allowed to lock you out of your purchased property without a court order?

I don't even live in the US, so what the actual fuck?

Edit 1: You can check it's installed (~~stock~~ Pixel 6 android 14) Settings > Apps > All Apps > three dot menu, Show system > search "DeviceLockController".

I highly recommend getting NetGuard, you can enable pro features via their website if you have the APK for as low as 0.10€, but donate more, because it's amazing. You can also purchase via Google Play store.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 236 points 7 months ago

In 2020 Google claimed it was supposed to be limited to a single region in partnership with a single carrier. And was never meant to be put up on Play Store.

A spokesperson from Google reached out to clarify some details about the Device Lock Controller app. To start with, Google says they launched this app in collaboration with a Kenyan carrier called Safaricom.

Google has confirmed that the Device Lock Controller app should not be listed on the Google Play Store for users in the U.S., and they will work to take down the listing.

Source: https://www.xda-developers.com/google-device-lock-controller-banks-payments/

Of course, it was a lie since it's still on Play Store an of today and in use.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 89 points 7 months ago

It must be globally, I'm in Australia. What utter bullshit, since I would have never known if it weren't for my NetGuard firewall app.

[-] noorbeast@lemmy.zip 74 points 7 months ago

Being Australian this is likely one to report to the ACCC, as Aussies at least have basic consumer protection, though that get murky with overseas tech entities.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 31 points 7 months ago

Unfortunately the ACCC gives fewer fucks than you may expect. An airline once cancelled a flight on me and kept the cancellation fee, despite producing no evidence that any government had forced them to cancel the flight (this was during COVID).

ACCC did not care one bit

So while we do have some consumer protection (better than most) I would be surprised if they cared.

[-] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 21 points 7 months ago

It's 5 minutes out of your life to try, as an aussie, please do, for charity if nothing else, who knows, you might benefit...

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] gerowen@lemmy.world 40 points 7 months ago

I'm using CalyxOS and it's pre-installed as a system app, so this seems like something that's being built in at the AOSP level of development.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Ledivin@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago

Of course, it was a lie since it's still on Play Store an of today and in use.

FWIW, I just searched it up and it's listed as unavailable in my region (USA) 🤷‍♂️ so at the very least, they scoped it down a little bit

[-] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 17 points 7 months ago

So they region locked it from US, but it can still be pre-installed as a system app from AOSP. And it's available in EU, while was meant to be in Kenya only.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Just because it's not in the Playstore, doesn't mean it's not installed.

It's not listed in the Australian Playstore either, yet here we are with it making internet requests.

It's definitely installed.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 109 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Requests the app made today.

This is my phone I own outright, by the way. I don't have any creditors.

Update for those curious:

[-] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 46 points 7 months ago

adb shell pm uninstall --user 0 com.google.android.devicelockcontroller

If you're using Shelter, then in addition to that command, replace --user 0 with --user 10

You don't need root to do this. You can also uninstall other bloatware using this same method.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

Hero, I just have to get around to doing it 😅 (I will, but grumble, grumble this is why most people don't bother battling for privacy)

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Salix@sh.itjust.works 18 points 7 months ago

I find it interesting that yours is com.google.android.devicelockcontroller.

I checked mine on GrapheneOS and it looks like it's the AOSP version of the package: com.android.devicelockcontroller

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 97 points 7 months ago

At least it's open-source: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/packages/modules/DeviceLock/+/refs/heads/main/DeviceLockController/

And that'd be why custom roms have it. It's part of the base Android system.

[-] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 112 points 7 months ago

I was able to start some of its private activities with ActivityLauncher as root. Most of them just crash immediately, but the help page is available. And yikes, they got them covered against a possible bypass, no developer tools or sideloading.

Still disappointed this is shipped in LineageOS, but I suspect not for much longer with that publicity.

[-] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 41 points 7 months ago

So, that looks like this is less insane than it sounded... This is for if you buy your phone on a payment plan? Not for creditors more generally to have a option to repossess/dispossess your phone?

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 43 points 7 months ago

This is what small claims court is for. To me there is no excuse for this.

[-] SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yeah, this is likely something that's configured on an OS level to talk to some server when being sold.

However, note that SIM cards can have a flag that might enable this app (given how much power sim cards have over phones)

Note: no source, just assumptions

Edit: second note: this app isn't present on my EU OnePlus Nord.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Steak@lemmy.ca 76 points 7 months ago

Remember when Google said don't be evil. Ha

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 54 points 7 months ago

I think it was "don't. Be evil."

[-] H1jAcK@lemm.ee 35 points 7 months ago

"Don't be." -Evil

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] rockstarmode@lemmy.world 75 points 7 months ago

I know this is a privacy community, but I'm not sure I'm onboard with the outrage on this particular one. If you rent/lease or go on a payment plan for the device you're using, then it isn't yours, it belongs to the entity you borrowed it from.

If I don't make car payments, the bank can repossess my ride. If I dont pay my mortgage or rent, I can be evicted by my landlord or bank.

If I don't make my phone payment, the company should have recourse to prevent me from using their device.

This could open up the ability for bad actors to disable my device, and I agree that's a horrible prospect. But the idea of a legitimate creditor using this feature to reclaim their property is not something I find shocking.

[-] namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev 63 points 7 months ago

All your points are sound. The issue that I have with this is that remote disable functionality is not necessary to achieve any of these aims. Before they were connected to the internet, people were still able to rent/lease autos and the world managed to survive just fine. There were other ways for lenders to get remunerated for breaking lease terms - they could issue an additional charge, get a court order for repossession, etc. Remote disable was never needed or warranted.

So let's start by considering the due process here. Before, there was some sort of process involved in the repossession act. With remote disable however, the lender can act as judge, jury and executioner so to speak - that party can unilaterally disable the device with no oversight. And if the lender is in the wrong, there is likely no recourse. Another potential issue here is that the lender can change the terms at any time - it can arbitrarily decide that it doesn't like what you're doing with the device, decide you're in breach, and hit that remote kill switch. A lot of these things could technically happen before too, but the barriers have been dramatically lowered now.

On top of this, there are great privacy concerns as well. What kinds of additional information does the lender have? What right do they have to things like our location, our habits, when we use it, and all of the other personal details that they can infer from programs like this?

There are probably lots of other issues here, but another part of the problem is that we can't even start to imagine what kinds of nefarious behaviors they can execute with this new information and power. We are well into the age where our devices are becoming our enemies instead of our advocates. I shudder to think what the world would look like 20 years from now if this kind of behavior isn't stopped.

[-] abbenm@lemmy.ml 23 points 7 months ago

Perfectly stated! The moralizing story kind of serves as cover, as a complete blank check to excuse practically any behavior of the lender, without any limiting principle.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] tetris11@lemmy.ml 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Oh nono no, the world is much worse than that:

  • If you make all your car payments on time except one, the bank can still repossess your car.

  • If you pay your mortgage or rent on time every time except once, the bank can initiate the process of eviction.

Remember: the power triangle points down

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] smb@lemmy.ml 61 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

anyone remember the time when google removed(!) their internal "don't be evil" rule? guess this is part of the outcome of that "be evil" that came along with removal of the opposite. Abuse of this mechanism is IMHO veery predictable ;-)

There are plenty of google-free cellphones, one could easily stick to better products of better companies. help yourself, google's not gonna do that for you within the next 5billion* years as they IMHO already stated they "want" to be evil now, always remember that ;-)

*) thats round about when our sun expands too much for earth, so i currently dislike doing any predictions beyond that point ;-) i do not predict google would last that long, only that they'll keep beeing evil until their end.

[-] dev_null@lemmy.ml 59 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

anyone remember the time when google removed(!) their internal "don't be evil" rule?

I remember when media falsely reported clickbait articles that they did and people bring that up to this day. They moved it from the introduction to the closing statement. Which you can argue makes it less prominent or whatever, but it was never removed.

Of course it makes no difference, it wasn't followed either way, and definitely isn't followed now. But no, it was never removed. You can see it yourself right here at the end: https://abc.xyz/investor/google-code-of-conduct/

[-] FoxBJK@midwest.social 15 points 7 months ago

The only reason this ever got any attention was to push an agenda.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[-] lemmy_at_em@lemmy.world 51 points 7 months ago

Version 14 is installed on my Pixel 7 in the USA. I bought this phone outright, no credit, directly from the Google store.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 7 months ago

you will own nothing and be happy

[-] Naz@sh.itjust.works 36 points 7 months ago

Hey man, quit repeating that. Each time we do it becomes closer to truth. Reality is what we make of it and we if tell these fucks no means no, it'll stop.

We'll own things, and we'll be unhappy about people trying to take away the things we own and paid for.

[-] DannyMac@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

I think the point of the phrase is to generate outrage to push against it

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] alonely0@programming.dev 35 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yeah it's because they ship the same OS image for everyone, be it US on a carrier plan or otherwise. Google services has complete control over your device (more than just locking it down), and that's what you should be upset about. For you that app is just harmless bloat, what's actually spooky is google play services as a system app. Do yourself a favor and install grapheneOS.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] coffeeClean@infosec.pub 33 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The fun aspect to this is that some banks have forced customers to use an Android for all their banking ops. So:

① You’re late paying a bill
② Creditor locks your phone
③ You cannot access your bank to make the payment because your phone is locked

Brilliant.

[-] Sims@lemmy.ml 29 points 7 months ago

That's just disgusting, but still so normal in the market religion. Google act as judge and executioner above all local laws. Never ever buy a phone that can't be rooted and reconfigured. ..oh, and never again deal with anything Google.. ..oh, or any other big US tech for that matter. ..fuckit, never deal with ANY Capitalist cheater/scumbag unless you have to.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Have you tried Universal Android Debloat to disable it?

https://github.com/0x192/universal-android-debloater

Stuff like this is why I root or just flash my phones.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] stinerman@midwest.social 21 points 7 months ago
[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 22 points 7 months ago

Says it's not available in my country, but yet it is install and unremovable.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] BadNewsNobody@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago

Root the phone and remove insane garbage like that. Rip and tear until it is done.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] candywashing@infosec.pub 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Is 3+ the age restriction?

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

Hilarious right?

[-] GroundedGator@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago

I checked to see if this was on my pixel 6 pro. It wasn't but I found this.

Not something I installed and not something I would allow.

The uninstall did not appear to work UNTIL I disabled the app and cleared the data.

[-] ErwinLottemann@feddit.de 28 points 7 months ago

this is installed by default in case you want/need to enable it (company phone). it is a system app so it cannot be uninstalled, after disableing it (which probably does not do anything when it was not setup in the first place) you can uninstall the updates (so the 'old' version that's sitting in the system image is still there)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TacoThrash3r@sh.itjust.works 15 points 7 months ago

still allows access to settings

Oh thank goodness

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Quexotic@infosec.pub 15 points 7 months ago

Weird, I have project fi and don't have this app. It could be contractually required by your service provider that the app be installed on all the phones that they sell. That's a thing that they do.

Who is the carrier?

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1150 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

31775 readers
262 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS