Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 381 posts

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#141

Post by kroltan »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #109
slantyyz wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel like removable SD card is a tech person solution but... As an older person, I find this observation very interesting. Today, I would consider people in general to be much more technically knowledgeable compared to people 20+ years ago. And yet, 20 years ago, removable storage was quite common, and probably expected of most devices.

Do not confuse the ability to use a phone or laptop with technical knowledge. People know how to use apps, but all the technical stuff is abstracted away. I'm pretty technical (As is nearly everyone on HN), and I have no idea where my photos are stored on my Android's file system. I have no idea where the APKs are for all my installed apps, or where their saved data sits.

But if _everything_ is always saved on the card, then you don't need the technical knowledge. Removing the card would leave the phone in a "factory clean" condition.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#142

Post by armchairhacker »

ccn0p wrote: post #51
VortexDream wrote: post #4

I'm sick of people, so I'm not going to read the inevitable comments that are going to come. Look, face it, some people like taking nude photos of themselves and they like sharing them with their partners. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's not their fault if something like this happens. People should be able to feel secure in the tech that they use, in the companies that they entrust their information…

>> I see it every time the topic comes up I hear you, and agree wholeheartedly that there is "absolutely nothing wrong with this", but maybe if the topic keeps coming up, people should have less trust in the companies (and their respective flawed human supply chains) that keep our information.... and act accordingly. Unfortunately that's easier said than done these days.

I don't trust Apple to not snoop on my iPhone and macbook, share the data with law-enforcement, and maybe use it to sell ads. I do trust them to not log in to my bank and transfer all my money to Tim Cook.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#143

Post by paulryanrogers »

armchairhacker wrote: post #134
throwaway81523 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is yet another reason to want phones to have removable storage (micro sd card). So private photos can go onto the card instead of built-in storage, and you can remove the card if you have to send in the phone. I don't take nudes but I tend to use my phone as an impromptu photocopier for stuff like bills and receipts, so the photos are full of private info such as account numbers. I worry about that sometime…

What about enabling the password to encrypt the disk (FireVault for mobile) and enabling a longer password?

Modern Android versions are encrypted by default. Though given weak/no passwords by default I believe it only helps if you remember to factory reset first.

And if it's damaged a reset or wipe may be impossible for the end user.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#144

Post by dahart »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #90
eloisius wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you probably wouldn’t ever hear someone say “maybe you should have had less trust” if Google employees snooped on your Drive account to steal financial records or something like that to use against you. Why do we tend to treat people like they’re asking for it when their nudes get compromised?

Why do we tend to treat people like they’re asking for it when their nudes get compromised? Because nudity is akin to sex and sexual ways, which are taboo in many societies. Upstanding citizens do not have nudes, in general. Especially women or nudes hinting at same-sex romance. It isn't right, but it is . Edit: I'm not saying I agree with this. But it doesn't take much to see folks putting others down for nudity. YM…

> Upstanding citizens do not have nudes, in general.

What makes you sure about this? What evidence do you have?

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#145

Post by beervirus »

floatingatoll wrote: post #27
beervirus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the victim’s fault. But still… it’s only prudent to take precautions.

Prudence is certainly a choice one can make, but in no way should it be recommended or required. Google is supposed to be trusted with the world's emails, photos, and other Android data backups. If it is necessary to take precautions against Google misusing data, then that cuts to the heart of their business model, and is a material threat to consumers that they should be informed about.

Prudence shouldn’t be recommended? Lol what nonsense is this?

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#146

Post by sodality2 »

bedhead wrote: post #60
throwaway81523 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is yet another reason to want phones to have removable storage (micro sd card). So private photos can go onto the card instead of built-in storage, and you can remove the card if you have to send in the phone. I don't take nudes but I tend to use my phone as an impromptu photocopier for stuff like bills and receipts, so the photos are full of private info such as account numbers. I worry about that sometime…

How about make it so that the "hidden" photos on a phone require a security code/biometric to access? I've always been shocked that this isn't the case with iOS (don't know Android), it seems so obvious and simple.

LG gallery has this feature

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#147

Post by beervirus »

rconti wrote: post #18
beervirus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the victim’s fault. But still… it’s only prudent to take precautions.

Taking precautions is what you do (in this case, if you can afford to do so) in order to prevent bad things happening to you. It is NOT what you do in order to determine fault if a bad thing DOES happen.

I didn’t say otherwise. It’s obviously the bad actor’s fault, not the owner of the phone.

But still. Come on.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#148

Post by Tagbert »

paulgdp wrote: post #124

To be fair, when sending a Pixel for reparations, Google very clearly and explicitly asks to factory_reset the phone. I personally didn't reset it when I sent my Pixel 3 to fix the charging port because my Pixel was fully encrypted. All Pixels are encrypted by default as long as you have any kind of lock method enabled (PIN, password, shape...). I don't really understand how this person got his files in cleartext and…

In this case, the phone would not turn on prior to repair and could not be wiped.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#149

Post by dinkelberg »

mbreese wrote: post #104
dinkelberg wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not be possible to wipe the data off the flash memory, due to how flash memory works. As you can only reset bits on the flash memory some amount of times, flash memory controllers try to avoid resetting bits and they try to distribute resets evenly on the memory (called wear leveling), so that it doesn't happen that parts of the memory are already worn out while other parts are healthy. So "deleting" and eve…

That may be true if you assume the threat is a state actor or TLA. That's not the case here. A USB based method for resetting a device would be perfectly acceptable to use before sending in a device for repair. If you're worried about a state removing the flash chips to recover data from dead/used cells, you don't send your phone in for repair. You secure the data with a drill before disposing of it. That clearly was…

> A USB based method for resetting a device would be perfectly acceptable to use before sending in a device for repair.

I think that is true, but with one caveat, you should test if the resetting actually worked.

I once had an Android phone with "full encryption" enabled that, after resetting, still had all the user data on it. It was obviously not only not reset, it wasn't even encrypted in the first place.

I am sure a lot of mobile phones have problems like that, because I think that smartphone manufacturers don't care about quality too much, as long the issues are not immediately apparent to an average user.

But if you can't recover the data afterwards yourself, I would agree that you can normally send it to recycling or repair.

Thank you. My comments might sound very strict and total. But of course everyone has different threats that they care about, and repair shops are probably not too sophisticated.

Re: Pixel sent to Google for replacement. They used it to post wife's nudes online

#150

Post by ben_w »

oxymoran wrote: post #35

This isn’t OP fault but it boggles my mind that people still use google products. How many times do companies like google and Facebook need to show that they don’t have your best interest at heart before you stop using their products? People won’t even buy genetically modified food but yet they have no problem shelling out thousands of dollars to authoritarian, surveillance centric parasites. Please stop.

IIRC, my friend who works in Google Zürich uses a Android phone for work, because Google considers its own stuff to be sufficiently secure for their own trade secrets.

(Unrelated except to your tangent, but personally I will only buy GM cheddar, as GM bacterial rennet is the only way to make it vegetarian).

Post reply on HN