# Why Samsung phones are considered (by some) more secure than the other stock androids? **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/why-samsung-phones-are-considered-by-some-more-secure-than-the-other-stock-androids/21011 **Category:** Questions **Created:** 2024-09-20T16:41:39Z **Posts:** 86 ## Post 1 by @anon33089522 — 2024-09-20T16:41:39Z Why Samsung phones are considered more secure than the other stock androids? I watched one video (i think it was Techlore’s) where it was mentioned that Samsung kernel is 4 times larger than that of stock Android. So i have a few questions: 1. Doesn’t that make the phone extremely not secure as the attack surface is so large. Even with Knox the kernel being 4 times larger calls for a lot of potential vulnerabilities in that kernel. 2. Does Samsung deviate from the stock android security model? If they modify android so much for their phones does that mean that android security model has been modified as well? 3. If my reasonings for the above 2 points are correct then a Motorola phone or a Sony phone should in theory be more secure right? Smaller kernel, less attack surface, no OEM bloat, close to stock android. Any thoughts? --- ## Post 2 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-20T16:43:21Z Samsung phones are more secure because of hardware and firmware security features combined with proper, timely OS and security updates. --- ## Post 3 by @anon33089522 — 2024-09-20T16:44:48Z I understand what you mean and i know what Knox offers. But even with real time kernel protection don’t you think a larger kernel is more prone to vulnerabilities and thus not secure even with Knox? --- ## Post 4 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-20T16:49:45Z Linux kernel is a security disaster anyway, moving to microkernels is the way, GrapheneOS has such plans, but nobody knows when it will happen. --- ## Post 5 by @Anonymous220 — 2024-09-21T05:36:34Z more secure? since when? as i remember brand new samsung devices was hacked after only a few seconds on a Hackers Convention last time (s23, s23 Ultra) of course samsung fixed it later but… regards --- ## Post 6 by @anon33089522 — 2024-09-21T10:00:47Z This is what the consensus is in the “community” but my logic tells me this cannot be correct. For me the more bloat and more modified android = less secure. So OEMS that are closest to stock android should be more secure in theory. They do not add unnecessary attack surface and maitain android as it is. People here seem to care only about updates. --- ## Post 8 by @crossroads — 2024-09-21T11:07:28Z Samsung in general offers longer support than any other large manufacturer (after Google, not counting Fairphone). So if you plan to use your phone for more than 2 or 3 years (and you should, as hardware is good), Samsung is your best bet, as even the lower-end models, e.g. ~200€ Galaxy A35 has 4 years support. I do agree those phones are full of bloatware and/or unnecessary apps, but after you disable/remove all of them, it is ok. --- ## Post 10 by @sha123 — 2024-09-21T15:28:32Z > [@bigdzi](#): > > Samsung devices are not more secure than any other Android-powered device. GrapheneOS thinks otherwise. You can search Xitter for GrapheneOS’s comments on Samsung devices: [https://x.com/search?q=Samsung%20from%3A%40grapheneos&src=typed\_query](https://x.com/search?q=Samsung%20from%3A%40grapheneos&src=typed_query) --- ## Post 11 by @Anonymous220 — 2024-09-22T16:01:13Z Did you read it completly? --- ## Post 12 by @anon39565454 — 2024-09-22T16:50:14Z > [@anon48875053](#): > > Timely OS and security updates. This is bullshit, samsung device are supported for long, yes. But to say they got timely update is nonsensical I have a samsung [M15](https://m.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_m15-12833.php), released on March 2024. As of right now (22 sept 2024), the latest update this OS got is from 27 June 2024. Some [third party link](https://samfrew.com/firmware/model/SM-M156B/upload/Desc/0/10) for verification. Samsung doesn’t do timely updates --- ## Post 13 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-22T18:50:11Z M15 is a device that costs 100€ brand new, that explains everything. --- ## Post 14 by @ph00lt0 — 2024-09-22T20:00:08Z I actually dont have a very postive impression of Samsung’ security. It was deemed better back in thr day due to KNOX but that is a long time ago all those features are all/mostly ported in to stock Android and Google Play Services. I think the idea of Samsung phones being more secure is dated. But sure if you can’t get a Pixel or iPhone it might be the most update reliable phone and then and only then it may be a the best option. --- ## Post 15 by @anon80779245 — 2024-09-22T20:29:03Z Thank you OP for question. However, the question is a bit misleading. I modified the title accordingly. --- ## Post 16 by @ignoramous — 2024-09-23T10:27:35Z > [@ph00lt0](#): > > It was deemed better back in thr day due to KNOX Which was pwned rather devastatingly, back in the day. > In the mobile device world, security traditionally relied on kernel mechanisms. But history has shown us that the kernel was far from being unbreakable. For most Android devices, finding a kernel vulnerability allows an attacker to modify sensitive kernel data structures, elevate privileges and execute malicious code. > > It is also simply not enough to ensure kernel integrity at boot time (using the _Verified Boot_ mechanism). Kernel integrity must also be verified at run time. This is what a security hypervisor aims to do. RKP, or **R** eal-time **K** ernel **P** rotection, is the name of Samsung’s hypervisor implementation which is part of Samsung _KNOX_. From: [Longterm Security](https://blog.longterm.io/samsung_rkp.html) ([mirror](https://archive.is/6ClWm)). --- ## Post 17 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-23T10:49:36Z Non-exhaustive list of requirements for future devices, which are standards met or exceeded by current Pixel devices: - Support for using alternate operating systems including full hardware security functionality - Complete monthly Android Security Bulletin patches without any regular delays longer than a week for device support code (firmware, drivers and HALs) - At least 5 years of updates from launch for device support code with phones (Pixels now have 7) and 7 years with tablets - Device support code updated to new monthly, quarterly and yearly releases of AOSP within several months to provide new security improvements (Pixels receive these in the month they’re released) - Linux 6.1 or 6.6 Generic Kernel Image (GKI) support - Hardware accelerated virtualization usable by GrapheneOS (ideally pKVM to match Pixels but another usable implementation may be acceptable) - Hardware memory tagging (ARM MTE or equivalent) - BTI/PAC, CET or equivalent - PXN, SMEP or equivalent - PAN, SMAP or equivalent - Isolated radios (cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, etc.), GPU, SSD, media encode / decode, image processor and other components - Support for A/B updates of both the firmware and OS images with automatic rollback if the initial boot fails one or more times - Verified boot with rollback protection for firmware - Verified boot with rollback protection for the OS (Android Verified Boot) - Verified boot key fingerprint for yellow boot state displayed with a secure hash (non-truncated SHA-256 or better) - StrongBox keystore provided by secure element - Hardware key attestation support for the StrongBox keystore - Attest key support for hardware key attestation to provide pinning support - Weaver disk encryption key derivation throttling provided by secure element - Insider attack resistance for updates to the secure element (Owner user authentication required before updates are accepted) - Inline disk encryption acceleration with wrapped key support - 64-bit-only device support code - Wi-Fi anonymity support including MAC address randomization, probe sequence number randomization and no other leaked identifiers - Support for disabling USB data and also USB as a whole at a hardware level in the USB controller - Reset attack mitigation for firmware-based boot modes such as fastboot mode zeroing memory left over from the OS and delaying opening up attack surface such as USB functionality until that’s completed * * * Samsung devices are by far the closest to meeting these requirements, the only problem is that Samsung permanently breaks security features if you unlock the bootloader and doesn’t support alternative operating systems. --- ## Post 18 by @ignoramous — 2024-09-23T13:28:19Z What you list may be necessary, but will never be sufficient. The weakest link in Smartphones, besides the bugs in Linux and Android’s C/C++ portions, is firmware and the OEM software. The system will only ever be as strong as its weakest link. Though, this may come off as a defeatist position for typical consumers, for high-risk professionals, such paranoia is a reality. In short, we need a GrapheneOS-like project in the OEM space. I imagine it will be an insanely captial intensive endeavour, and potentially capital destructive endeavour, too. We need an absurdly motivated, relentlessly persistent, insanely competent lead to pull-off such a project (like Daniel Micay has). Andrew “Bunnie” Huang sounds like someone who can make it happen. --- ## Post 19 by @sha123 — 2024-09-23T14:34:16Z > [@ignoramous](#): > > The weakest link in Smartphones, besides the bugs in Linux and Android’s C/C++ portions, is firmware and the OEM software. While this is a problem, some of it should be mitigated. Some (all?) firmware should be isolated through IOMMU. System processes should only be able to access the hardware’s drivers through sandboxed HALs. > [@ignoramous](#): > > In short, we need a GrapheneOS-like project in the OEM space. GrapheneOS tried to work with a vendor to make a smartphone with better security. --- ## Post 20 by @Anonymous220 — 2024-09-23T15:29:15Z No this is not number one project. They did think about but some time ago --- ## Post 21 by @anon39565454 — 2024-09-24T01:25:23Z Sure, let’s do something more expensive then. [Samsung A55](https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_a55-12824.php), their latest highest end mid-range. The time between updates is still often reaching [3-4 weeks](https://samfrew.com/firmware/model/SM-A556B/region/EUX/upload/Desc/0/10) So it’s better, but not exactly good either. Let’s do something more high end, samsung S24+. [Ranges between 3 days and 3 weeks with no obvious pattern](https://samfrew.com/firmware/model/SM-S926B/region/PLS/upload/Desc/0/10) You can’t just say Samsung has good update schedule, and need to specify which model (because even their high end has questionable schedule). My point stands, samsung updates are not timely nor consistent --- ## Post 22 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-24T04:50:24Z > [@anon39565454](#): > > My point stands, samsung updates are not timely nor consistent Okay, point me to an OEM that does it on par or better than Samsung. Google Pixel devices are excluded. --- ## Post 23 by @anon64393658 — 2024-09-24T05:03:56Z Apple’s iOS Lockdown mode is the closest to an out of the box secure option. It would be great if an Android OEM made a similar product. I’m actually surprised Google hasn’t given their Advanced Protection option they have for Google Accounts. A GAP mode for Pixel seems a natural addition. --- ## Post 24 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-24T05:04:49Z > [@anon64393658](#): > > Apple’s iOS Lockdown mode is the closest to an out of the box secure option. Unless you buy a Google Pixel with GrapheneOS already flashed, from someone like NitroKey. --- ## Post 25 by @anon64393658 — 2024-09-24T05:06:00Z Didn’t even know that was a thing, thank you for educating me. --- ## Post 26 by @anon39565454 — 2024-09-24T05:07:02Z Never said the others are better, just that Samsung sucks (Android as a whole really, nobody except google does “timely OS and security updates”). Lineage does have better update schedule though, so I’m assuming that Samsung and every other manufacturers are just lazy --- ## Post 27 by @asanyan — 2024-09-24T05:19:47Z Does Samsung or other large OEMs ship their own kernel modules? Could also be a big problem if so --- ## Post 28 by @water — 2024-09-24T11:01:08Z wouldn’t that count as openbox/refurbished, since it’s not from the manufacturer of the phone. I haven’t checked what are the warranty implications on that (if any). --- ## Post 29 by @water — 2024-09-24T11:03:49Z If I have to guess, it’d be more because of the number of devices Samsung supports and the different aspects of OneUI (usually on a trickle-down basis) features those devices get. Expecting optimized updates fro 8 Gen, 8s Gen, 7 Gen, 7s Gen, Mediatek SOCs to be done at the same speed as Tensor series chip would be a bit too much imho. --- ## Post 30 by @anon39565454 — 2024-09-24T11:54:44Z It’s not really the case though, I’d argue that Samsung OneUI is sloppily optimised. Even flagship devices became laggy after one or two android updates, try asking around lineage development spaces and you’ll understand what I meant. Even more so when you consider that in comparison, even an old flagship samsung whose last update was Marshmallow could run Android 12 (lineage) just fine. Add to that the non-removeable bloat (microsoft onedrive, some facebook service, etc as a system app). They’re not optimising shit. On another note, they should’ve just stick to standard implementation of android if they want maintainability. Nobody told them to use nonstandard bootloader (download mode), non-standard partition (Samsung System As Root implementation was a massive mess), non-standard voLTE implementation (that’s why it’s always broken on custom rom), non-standard encryption that got breached, non-standard camera API, non-standard work profile implementation, non-standard notification system (they haven’t implemented per category notification toggle yet unlike AOSP), etc. Maintainability was an issue of their own doing Edit 1 :Do you know that they limited the Always on Display functionality on their budget phone even if the screen is OLED? Yeah that’s another variation that’ll make maintainability harder Edit 2:They should’ve considered making Samsung Phones properly compliant with [Project Treble](https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/05/here-comes-treble-modular-base-for.html), but they’re probably too focused on gatekeeping features for their high end phones so maintainability be damned --- ## Post 31 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-24T13:17:55Z > **[GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)](https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/113182676460353098)** > > @patrickleavy@mastodon.social @jashraq@mastodon.social Samsung permanently cripples their devices when you unlock as part of their warranty bit "feature" and doesn't allow using a bunch of the security features from an alternate OS so despite having... > Samsung permanently cripples their devices when you unlock as part of their warranty bit “feature” and doesn’t allow using a bunch of the security features from an alternate OS so despite having nearly all the security features we require they’re far very from actually being viable for an essentially non-technical reason. They would need to decide to provide proper alternate OS support. --- ## Post 32 by @rando1337 — 2024-09-25T08:09:35Z yes, quite some ppl talk a lot here, while you just have to read some GrapheneOS tweets to know whats up. --- ## Post 33 by @Average_Joe — 2024-09-30T16:11:48Z I’d be willing to trial GrapheneOS but they’re REALY hurting themselves for increasing their user base by only support recent Google Pixel phones… --- ## Post 34 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-30T17:25:35Z They aren’t hurting themselves at all, they’re just only supporting secure hardware, which are Google Pixel devices. --- ## Post 35 by @gregandcin — 2024-09-30T18:45:40Z > [@ignoramous](#): > > In short, we need a GrapheneOS-like project in the OEM space. Kinda relevant, but Punkt is making an OS called [Apostorphy](https://www.apostrophy.ch/) that is built off of GrapheneOS. Hopefully when the Punkt mc02 is out in consumers’ hands, we can see if it really is close enough to what we have with Pixels and Graphene, which is our gold standard. My only issue is that it is built off of the MediaTek Dimensity 900 EDIT: Didn’t realize it was already out. Just read a review and I would gather that we are still stuck with Pixels and Graphene until we get a better top down solution from a company that cares about security and privacy --- ## Post 36 by @anon48875053 — 2024-09-30T19:06:21Z > [@gregandcin](#): > > My only issue is that it is built off of the MediaTek Dimensity 900 This tells everything that we need to know about that phone. --- ## Post 37 by @Average_Joe — 2024-09-30T19:50:07Z > [@anon48875053](#): > > They aren’t hurting themselves at all, they’re just only supporting secure hardware, which are Google Pixel devices. I appreciate your reply! I guess you’re correct but only supporting the most expensive brand for Android seems really limiting for most people… --- ## Post 38 by @TinFoilHat — 2024-09-30T21:32:44Z I got a Pixel 8 for around 530USD, you can find quite a few android phones that cost much more than this. For a device with decent spec, good hardware security and expected to serve 7 years (based on its software support cycle), it is really not expensive. I still have my older Nokia and Sony smartphones, where the software update stopped in 2/3 years. They costed me around 20% less, but with 60% shorter support period. Not a very good investment. The target audiance of GOS is not the masses, as majority of the people just won’t give up convinence for some benefit that cannot be seen right away. Especially when most of the people don’t really care about firmware updates, they don’t even care about app updates, and won’t update until the app stop working. --- ## Post 39 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-01T05:12:28Z > [@TinFoilHat](#): > > I got a Pixel 8 for around 530USD I got a Pixel 7 Pro for 250 euros, no box and other accessories, but the seller added in a random cable and a GaN charger. Pixel 6a is basically around 100 euros, not sure how Pixel devices are the most expensive ones. These Samsung, Xiaomi, and Motorola budget phones don’t even come close to Google Pixel devices in basically any way, shape, or form, so it makes sense that this kind of junk will be cheaper than proper devices, you get what you paid for. --- ## Post 40 by @anon33089522 — 2024-10-01T06:28:25Z Pixel 6a starts from atleast 200 euros second hand where i live and are very rare to come by. Most people sell their old Pixel 6a for 300-400 eur. A new Pixel 6a is 600 eur --- ## Post 41 by @rando1337 — 2024-10-01T08:43:31Z new pixel 7a are in the US under $300, in Europe under 350€ (pixel6 even less). no chance to import? --- ## Post 42 by @TinFoilHat — 2024-10-01T11:18:10Z P6 and p7 seems not a good option, although thay are 20%-40% cheaper, their software support ends much earlier than p8. Also the p6 and p7 have worse build quality (p8 seems having less hardware issues, for now) and battery life(mainly due to modem). Get a refurbished p8 /p8a seems more sensible. --- ## Post 43 by @anon46412288 — 2024-10-01T14:08:29Z > [@anon48875053](#): > > These Samsung, Xiaomi, and Motorola budget phones don’t even come close to Google Pixel devices in basically any way, shape, or form, so it makes sense that this kind of junk will be cheaper than proper devices, you get what you paid for. To be honest they do offer better specs on paper which are more attractive to normies - i.e, camera megapixels, battery sizes, processor specs etc. And genuinely useful things like a headphone jack. Would I trade a port for secure hardware, quick firmware updates and support for alternative OSes? Nah. But it is very worth mentioning. --- ## Post 44 by @anon63378630 — 2024-10-01T16:09:34Z > [@gregandcin](#): > > My only issue is that it is built off of th They slapped a subscription service on top of it too. Avoid! --- ## Post 45 by @gregandcin — 2024-10-01T16:13:38Z I am fine with subscription services if they add value to the device. Apostophy’s services are questionable at best, but it does pain me to see the amount of people in the space who are currently doing things for less than they should be making --- ## Post 46 by @anon63378630 — 2024-10-01T16:30:01Z > [@gregandcin](#): > > currently doing things for less than they should be making But they took GrapheneOS, ported it with a bunch of features missing to a trash phone, hyped it up as secure!!!1!!!, slapped a subscription on it, and set the price at 600 EUR. :clown_face: Are they going to ship system and Chromium updates same day as GrapheneOS does? No? No. A Pixel 8a with working verified boot and MTE and quickly delivered security updates until May 2031 is 549EUR and you can flash real GrapheneOS in minutes via their website. --- ## Post 47 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-01T16:32:11Z The worst part is that there were some really influential people in the privacy and security space that promoted Punkt. --- ## Post 48 by @sha123 — 2024-10-02T15:40:19Z May I ask who? --- ## Post 49 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-02T18:39:25Z Check your DMs. --- ## Post 50 by @Average_Joe — 2024-10-07T19:21:10Z I’ve been doing a lot of research and I’m going for a Samsung phone. My phone will contain my most personal data so I spent a lot of time researching and researching… :weary: :weary: :weary: First time I’m purchasing a device from Samsung but I’ll report back after I’ve done some tests on it! --- ## Post 51 by @ihateKYC — 2024-10-08T00:12:53Z Cellebrite breaks into Samsungs with 0 effort. --- ## Post 52 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-08T15:10:30Z Same goes for every other device that isn’t a Google Pixel or an iPhone. --- ## Post 53 by @exaCORE — 2024-10-08T15:11:12Z Why are you choosing a Samsung over a Pixel --- ## Post 54 by @crossroads — 2024-10-08T20:23:51Z Maybe because you can buy new Samsung phone with 2y warranty for 200€ (A35), and support until early 2028, while cheapest still supported Pixel (6a) is ~300€ with support until mid 2027. Also with better camera, modem, battery, sd card slot --- ## Post 55 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-09T08:35:35Z If you pay 300€ for a Pixel 6a, then it’s the same as just being robbed on the spot, it doesn’t cost anywhere near that. > [@crossroads](#): > > Also with better camera, modem, battery, sd card slot Better camera? How are mediocre cameras that are on A series Samsung devices better than Google Pixel 6a’s cameras? Better modem? Pixel devices use the same modem that comes with Samsung devices, and it’s not great, Snapdragon modems are miles ahead. Better battery? There is no way the battery life is better with all of that bloat that comes with Samsung phones when Tensor and Exynos chips are basically the same. --- ## Post 56 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-09T08:46:38Z Samsung even contacted GrapheneOS about the possibility of using some of its security features: [https://xcancel.com/GrapheneOS/status/1843906007694729317#m](https://xcancel.com/GrapheneOS/status/1843906007694729317#m) --- ## Post 57 by @TinFoilHat — 2024-10-09T11:10:39Z Samsung’s software update policy is… bad. One upside in paying extra fir your first pixel phone, is that you get much cheaper pixel phones in future when you trade in your old pixel. Definitely not a private way to get a new phone but I would say a fair trade off. --- ## Post 58 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-10T05:00:32Z I was wondering about this. My understanding is that Samsung’s have a setting to disable the USB port when the phone is locked. I wonder if that would help at all. --- ## Post 59 by @Abdalonymus — 2024-10-10T05:09:15Z You mean this? Here’s a screenshot for non-Samsung users: ![Screenshot_20241010_070812_Auto Blocker](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/c/cf00784f33e88056cf2404545c44ca5733a79e99.jpeg) --- ## Post 60 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-10T05:25:14Z Yes it is! I was watching a video by Shannon Morse and she briefly mentioned this. But I’m iPhone using scum and haven’t had an Android phone in many years so wasn’t sure if this is a Samsung thing or an AOSP basic thing. Thank you for posting the screen shot. --- ## Post 61 by @Abdalonymus — 2024-10-10T08:38:08Z I would turn it on if it were not for the McAfee auto scan which is turned on along with it… :melting_face: --- ## Post 62 by @ihateKYC — 2024-10-10T09:12:55Z I believe Cellebrite Premium still defeats Samsungs with this setting ticked on. Cat and Mouse game except the cat has rocket boosters on. Probably because they take forever to launch security updates such as the one GrapheneOS reported. --- ## Post 63 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-10T17:23:26Z Yikes. For a moment I was impressed with Samsung offering this, and now I see it comes with a poison pill. I’m always tempted by Samsung’s beautiful and capable hardware but their approach to software always puts me off. They’re like the anti-Pixel lol. --- ## Post 64 by @anon94009837 — 2024-10-10T17:30:51Z It disables sideloading too. --- ## Post 66 by @Anonymous220 — 2024-10-11T03:17:24Z Only the expensive devices comes with snapdragon… The cheaper devices comes with exynos… Also in the US --- ## Post 69 by @JohnDose — 2024-10-13T09:05:42Z May I ask if recent Samsung phones are less secure (more vulnerable) than recent iPhones even in BFU states? If the only possible option is to brute force, I would consider it secure enough (since I use very long passwords) --- ## Post 70 by @anon80779245 — 2024-10-13T19:26:05Z Of course, using trusted App Stores like F-Droid (or Epic Store I guess) is considered side-loading. For a sec perspective, Samsung could easily have a list of trusted app stores, but ofc the real aim here is money. --- ## Post 71 by @anon94009837 — 2024-10-13T19:39:23Z > [@anon80779245](#): > > For a sec perspective, Samsung could easily have a list of trusted app stores, but ofc the real aim here is money. They do. They only have the Play Store and the Galaxy Store whitelisted with no way for developers to ask Samsung to whitelist their own app stores. Epic Games is suing Samsung because of this. --- ## Post 72 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-13T21:20:04Z Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is not enough publicly available information to answer that question with high levels of confidence. If I **speculate** I think there are two possible ways Samsung is not as secure from physical exploitation as iPhone (in lockdown mode) or Pixel The first is that with Samsungs additional layers of software there _could be_ additional zero-days possible to bypass the Lock Screen. We won’t know unless someone publishes data on this. The second possibility is that there is a zero-day that allows the Samsung data to be downloaded even in its encrypted state and then vulnerable to offline attacks. If this is the case, a long complex password would mitigate this attack but not eliminate it. --- ## Post 73 by @JohnDose — 2024-10-14T04:13:30Z I was curious about whether forensic softwares like Cellebrite premium were capable of extracting and decrypting data from cold samsung phones. I searched the discord chat logs whoami6 provided, but failed to find any meaningful answers. Since Samsung modified original android, there is a high possibility for additional vulnerabilities to exist. But since all new androud phones use FBE, and in BFU state the decryption key resides nowhere inside the phone, I believe there shouldn’t be any way of decrypting the data other than brute forcing. As I mentioned, extracting the data itself isn’t a big concern, unless they could BF like 10^20 passwords per second or so, which is extremely unlikely even with unsecure hash functions and high computing powers --- ## Post 74 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-14T04:39:40Z Thank you for doing that search and reporting back what you found. The offline attack is mainly a concern for people using a standard PIN code or simple password. Which is most people. What has made Pixel and iPhone so resilient, to my understanding, is that the Secure Enclave/titan security chip have prevented offline attacks meaning a BF attack cannot even be attempted. But like you point out, a BF attack is only as successful as the password is weak. If you have a 30 character pass phrase then your data is very safe. If you have a six digit pin…not so much. --- ## Post 75 by @Average_Joe — 2024-10-14T09:40:32Z > [@exaCORE](#): > > Why are you choosing a Samsung over a Pixel I appreciate your reply! It just seems **SO INCREDIBLY** risky to me to have the same company that created your hardware AND software. Buying from a different hardware company seems to reduce the risk of security/privacy problems. I trust Google with much of my data but it just really seems too trusting to use the same hardware AND software manufacturer. --- ## Post 76 by @anon48875053 — 2024-10-14T10:48:54Z Sorry, but this makes absolutely zero sense. --- ## Post 77 by @anon73250778 — 2024-10-14T11:57:42Z > [@Average_Joe](#): > > It just seems **SO INCREDIBLY** risky to me to have the same company that created your hardware AND software. I think from a software engineering standpoint, having expertise on both entire stacks allows for a faster and better implementation of a product. You do have to trust Google though to do this right and they do seem to see the value of doing responsible disclosure through their [Project Zero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Zero). --- ## Post 78 by @anon46412288 — 2024-10-14T13:42:44Z > [@Average_Joe](#): > > It just seems **SO INCREDIBLY** risky to me to have the same company that created your hardware AND software. Buying from a different hardware company seems to reduce the risk of security/privacy problems. That increases your parties of trust. And Samsung is not a good example here because Samsung does actually change a lot of the standard Android components to be non-standard (such as the bootloader), which is used by only them, not other Androids. Also, having the hardware and software made by the same company can be advisable if you want quick updates. Macbooks, Surface laptops, Pixels, iPhones/iPads etc all receive extremely quick updates. --- ## Post 79 by @certainty — 2024-10-14T20:17:59Z > [@anon64393658](#): > > 30 character pass phrase Thumbs are dead after few weeks. --- ## Post 80 by @TinFoilHat — 2024-10-14T21:46:20Z > [@anon64393658](#): > > If you have a 30 character pass phrase then your data is very safe. It only holds true if adversary cannot bypass rate limiting measures, or the adversary couldn’t extract the key from memory. --- ## Post 81 by @anon64393658 — 2024-10-15T04:01:27Z Your second point is completely valid. However, with a 30 character pass phrase required for decryption you don’t need rate limiting. The entropy on that would be high enough to protect your data. --- ## Post 82 by @lepras — 2024-10-15T04:11:14Z I don’t if this has been mentioned but android fastboot tools don’t work on samsung. And there is knox too. [https://github.com/Samsung-Loki/Thor](https://github.com/Samsung-Loki/Thor) --- ## Post 83 by @TheDoc — 2024-10-15T20:14:46Z > [@anon48875053](#): > > If you pay 300€ for a Pixel 6a, then it’s the same as just being robbed on the spot, it doesn’t cost anywhere near that. I think the general point of Samsung being the best choice for those on a tight budget still holds up in some cases, [as discussed here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/150-budget-android-hardware-suggestions-needed/15399). I don’t know where to find the best deals on used phones, but here’s a quick example. In Canada (prices also in CAD) you can get a [new Samsung Galaxy A15](https://www.samsung.com/ca/smartphones/galaxy-a/galaxy-a15-5g-blue-black-128gb-sm-a156wzkaxac/) costing around $270 and I believe they provide security updates till December 2028. The next closest Pixel offering I could easily find was a (2 generations old) [used Pixel 6a](https://secondcell.ca/en/collections/telephones-usages-google/products/google-pixel-6a-noir-128go-8-10) costing around $244 and is only set to provide security updates [till July 2027](https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705?hl=en#zippy=%2Cpixel-a-pixel-pixel-pro-pixel-a-pixel-pixel-pro-pixel-fold). The used 6a is technically around $26 cheaper in upfront cost, but when you take into account the fact the new A15 will last an extra ~1.5 years in security updates and comes with official warranty, the new A15 is probably a better deal for most people. If we make a fairer price comparison by purchasing a [used Galaxy A15](https://secondcell.ca/en/products/samsung-galaxy-a15-noir-64go-9-10) at around $213, it’s even cheaper than the Pixel 6a. You might argue that these price differences are small, but for people who are financially struggling, having your device last an extra 1.5 years while costing even less than the competition might make a noticeable difference to their bank account. (I myself know people in situations where they can’t even afford that.) I probably didn’t find the best price for a used 6a, but I’d be surprised if you could find a 6a that is so cheap that it would beat out a used A15 when accounting for their security update support periods. Moreover, SecondCell supposedly offers 1-year warranty for their used devices, something you probably won’t get by finding a cheaper 6a someone is selling themselves. It’s also worth mentioning that the new Samsung A16 that is just beginning to roll out may be far more appealing if Android Authority is to be trusted. [According to their article](https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-a16-5g-release-date-specs-price-updates-availability-3488271/), it should cost around the same as the A15 (or maybe a little more at the start) and will provide users with 6 years of security updates, lasting them till 2030. **To summarize:** Older Pixel a-series devices could be a decent option for those who don’t have a lot of money. But at the same time, it’ll require that they purchase new phones more often as they may run out of security updates quicker, and that is probably not viable long-term unless they expect their financial situation to improve before then. In cases where people cannot afford to frequently purchase old Pixel a-series devices, getting the cheapest Galaxy A series device is probably their next best option. Everyone will have their own unique financial situation and threat model, and unless there actually is an abundance of _much_ better deals on used Pixels that I failed to find, we should acknowledge the Galaxy A series as a non-ideal option. --- ## Post 84 by @JohnDose — 2024-10-16T05:48:11Z Bypassing rate limiting measures such as factory reset after a certain number of consecutive fails, does not really matter. If they can extract once, then that extracted drive can be copied infinitely without much additional effort. Besides that, a 30 character long alphanumeric passcode has 62^30 possible cases, which is approximately 6\*10^53. Even supercomputers aren’t capable of carrying out such calculations. --- ## Post 85 by @hbxc0re — 2024-10-17T14:57:00Z > [@lepras](#): > > [GitHub - Samsung-Loki/Thor: An alternative to Heimdall](https://github.com/Samsung-Loki/Thor) Heres the last leaked Cellebrite report. Turn off biometrics and use a long character password on your Samsung phone. My DC restricts the use of biometrics on our company supplied Samsung phones. Set your phone to auto restart and use Autoblocker. [Cellebrite Android Report]([https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24833831/cellebrite-android-document-april-2024.pdf](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24833831/cellebrite-android-document-april-2024.pdf)[Cellebrite Android Report](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24833831/cellebrite-android-document-april-2024.pdf)) --- ## Post 86 by @jonah — 2024-10-17T15:11:59Z Threads like this, titled with a completely false premise to get a lot of views and replies, are not constructive. There’s a ton of speculation and unreliable sources throughout this discussion, and the original poster is no longer even here, so… I’m going to wrap this up here. --- ## Post 87 by @jonah — 2024-10-17T15:12:01Z