Comments by "XSportSeeker" (@XSpImmaLion) on "Rob Braxman Tech"
channel.
-
I'm sorry, but I really don't like how this channel keeps trying to oversell de-Googled phones, which is costly not only in terms of money but also learning how to use, as the be all and end all of privacy.
Rob knows this, and I know he knows because he made other videos that didn't keep trying to push things this hard, but every now and then it seems the narrative needs to be pushed to 11 for whatever reason and then here we are again, pushing FUD that shouldn't be there.
The conflict of interest always looks bad for this channel even though I like some of what Rob has to say. I agree with most of what he says, but this spiel about deGoogled phones and the constant FUD just is not it.
Let me be clear about this for people who don't know - you will NOT have guaranteed privacy with a de-Googled phone, and it might not be worth the money and time you will be spending with one whatever little privacy you get back from it. The only guaranteed thing you'll have from deGoogled phones is the headache of having to work without Google for your everyday life stuff - nothing else is guaranteed, it's all hard work and a whole ton of knowledge to really make good use of something like that.
You lose most functionalities that a smartphone has to offer that is well known and popular, it is incredibly hard to avoid having some of your data collected even if it is using AOSP, and most people won't want to deal with any of it.
Give you an example, if you don't want Google tracking you, you won't be able to use YouTube with a personal account, you won't be able to use Google Maps, you will have to mostly get and use apps from outside Google's Play Store while avoiding malware, no social networks, none of the major games, no weather apps, and this list goes on and on. If you are not willing to do even one among those, a deGoogled phone is not for you unless you are willing to pay extra to have an extra phone - with which you won't be able to do any of that.
A very small niche of people might benefit from getting a deGoogled phone because it closes up some venues for direct access to your data, but that very small niche will be very much into the security community and will need to have a reasonable degree of expertise on the matter. Those who are not part of this niche will be trading money and time for perhaps a tiny bit of protection that is likely not worth it.
First of all, Google and Apple are not the only ones tracking you. Your ISP and mobile network also are, as well as several other services and businesses you have an account in, your bank, your credit card provider, all social networks, some games, and some software/app developers, your browser, most commonly used webpages, and the list goes on. So yes, if you want guaranteed privacy and no tracking, the only solution these days is not having a smartphone at all, not having credit cards, doing bank transactions in person only - the bank will have your data, but won't be able to track you. In fact, stay away from the Internet altogether, become a hermit and go live in a hut in some isolated forest.
Since the very basic very primary company that will be tracking you is the smartphone service provider in the first place, your mobile carrier, be it with detailed GPS data or at the very least with cell tower triangulation, it doesn't really matter if Google isn't directly tracking you - they can just pay for the data and now they have it. Complete with the other data points I mentioned.
In fact, it's an open market. Nowadays you have multiple data broker companies buying and selling private and personal data that multiple corporations have on people. And understand - all of this is completely legal in the US. ISPs and mobile carriers were already caught selling costumer data, they were not punished for it, and you simply have no control over this. Some of them can "promise" not to sell it, but you really have no guarantees. They have the data one way or another because it's needed to provide you service, and even if they don't sell it, it can always leak.
What little legal privacy protection US citizens had was terminated during Trump's administration, and things are only now slowly moving back towards more protections... but they are extremely far from being even significant in any way. It's just the sort of thing that happens when you have telecom stooge at the head of regulatory bodies.
I dunno how much you care if the data is being harvested directly from you, or just taken via middlemen, but if all you care is that others have it, then again, you should just give up on owning a smartphone, period. There is no absolute privacy no matter what type of phone you have, if you are using it for everyday life stuff.
Now, this doesn't mean you should just give up on everything and stop caring altogether. Privacy and security are not black and white, it's always a spectrum, and you can do a lot to protect yourself without spending more money. In fact, paying for it is likely the weakest strategy here. You need to learn and understand how things work first before putting any more money into it. So no, don't just get a deGoogled phone, pay for a VPN plan, or hire extra services that you don't really know how it works just know they are promising privacy to you. You need to know what exactly those will give you, what you are trading off, and what exactly you need from them. What they can offer and what are the limits of it.
Only then you can start applying certain measures depending on scenario and on what you are trying to obfuscate or hide. There is no magic bullet here.
5
-
The explainer part of RFID is very good, and part of the worries are justified, but some arguments fall apart... because physics!
As explained, an RFID tag biggest part is the antenna... and it needs to be a very specific size because of the mentioned frequency resonation/response effect.
Again, as explained, the RFID transmitter portion sends a signal that both powers and detects a response from the tag. That's how the entire system works.
The problem with the idea that you could make a clandestine RFID system that can be detected extremely long distances is twofold:
1. If you want to send signal long distance using lower frequencies, you need larger and larger antennas. For this, you can think about radio antennas, TV antennas, or something like the difference between 4G and 5G antennas. Higher frequencies also have a harder time going through dense objects - this is why millimiter range 5G has to be short distance line of sight;
2. If instead you wanna send it further away by upping the amplitude of the signal, that is power, than it also becomes a problem of either coil size, active device with battery to fit, or a combination of both. A passive device can't generate enough power, particularly if it's small, to transmit back a signal long distance.
It's in the explainer itself: the passive RFID tag needs to be powered by the scanning signal and transmit back a response. It's powered by the signal because the antenna acts both as a transmit/receive antenna, and as a coil to induct power.
Now, you have to think about wireless power tech. Qi Chargers. The entire reason why we still don't have long range high output wireless power systems is because of physics.... in order to transmit power wirelessly using coils, enough to charge a smartphone which is usually around tens of Watts, you need relatively big coils that are milimeters from each other. Fast wireless charging that are the latest in evolution are using multiple coils to reach fast charging standards.
Worse, the more power involved in a wireless power system, the more loss through heat you end up with. This is why fast wireless charger bases usually have a fan or some form of heat dissipation.
That is all to say that RFID tags are only possible because the passive tags require a teeny tiny ammount of power just enough to operate for miliseconds, send back a very weak signal, juuuust enough for it to reach the reader. It's a system that was carefully designed to hit the physical limits.
If you need a tag to send back data long distance, it'll either need more power with either a big coil or by being active with a battery, or it needs to have a big antenna, or a combination of both. Making it then, way harder to conceal.
But, the concern on just regular sized RFIDs is justified. You can have an array of detectors/listeners spread in a wide area that could collect data that way.
Only it's also worth noting that it'll need to be tied to some mass surveillance database somehow, because you really can't hold a lot of data in a chip as small as an RFID chip.
Which then leads to... it not being very feasible because we already have several other methods of collecting data and surreptitiously tagging people anyways. For instance, tracking people inside a store for commercial purposes? It's been done several times already using Bluetooth and Wi-fi from smartphones - including non consensually. You don't really need RFID dust to track people... most people already have beacon devices with them at all times. Instead of spreading RFID dust around, a honeypot for Wi-fi and/or Bluetooth should be enough for most situations.
Now, if you need to tag an individual through some method that isn't reliant on a smartphone and other electronic devices... well, perhaps it'd be interesting to track RFID tags... but it's kind of a convoluted way of doing it, and there should be plenty other cheaper and easier alternatives. Special types of paints and chemicals, active trackers, biosignatures, etc.
I was just reading about our external microbiome the other day... did you know we all basically have a microbiome floating around us at all times, one which is as unique to us as our gut flora? Yep. It's how dogs can track people by "scent"... it's not just smell as in how we conceptualize it, it's actually an entire microbiome floating around us that is rather unique to each individual. And yes, overtime it could be used as unique identifier.
So, there you go. Hope I didn't leave even more people in despair... xD
3