this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
210 points (97.3% liked)

DeGoogle Yourself

9005 readers
1 users here now

A community for those that would like to get away from Google.

Here you may post anything related to DeGoogling, why we should do it or good software alternatives!

Rules

  1. Be respectful even in disagreement

  2. No advertising unless it is very relevent and justified. Do not do this excessively.

  3. No low value posts / memes. We or you need to learn, or discuss something.

Related communities

!privacyguides@lemmy.one !privacy@lemmy.ml !privatelife@lemmy.ml !linuxphones@lemmy.ml !fossdroid@social.fossware.space !fdroid@lemmy.ml

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
Byereddithellolemmy@lemmy.world
chevy9294@monero.town
CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
210
Who owns your shiny new Pixel 9 phone? You can’t say no to Google’s surveillance (cybernews.com)
submitted 2 months ago by gytrash@feddit.uk to c/degoogle@lemmy.ml
124 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Google's latest flagship smartphone raises concerns about user privacy and security. It frequently transmits private user data to the tech giant before any app is installed. Moreover, the Cybernews research team has discovered that it potentially has remote management capabilities without user awareness or approval.

Cybernews researchers analyzed the new Pixel 9 Pro XL smartphone’s web traffic, focusing on what a new smartphone sends to Google.

“Every 15 minutes, Google Pixel 9 Pro XL sends a data packet to Google. The device shares location, email address, phone number, network status, and other telemetry. Even more concerning, the phone periodically attempts to download and run new code, potentially opening up security risks,” said Aras Nazarovas, a security researcher at Cybernews...

... “The amount of data transmitted and the potential for remote management casts doubt on who truly owns the device. Users may have paid for it, but the deep integration of surveillance systems in the ecosystem may leave users vulnerable to privacy violations,” Nazarovas said...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Right, like I said I've seen the reasoning. It just seems like giving money to the very company you're all trying to avoid, which in turn is just funding for Google to be more invasive.

[–] tht@mstdn.social 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@averyminya bought it secondhand, problem solved

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 3 points 2 months ago

Certainly helps!

[–] CCMan1701A@startrek.website 1 points 1 month ago

Playing them for hardware only is different from paying for hardware and then providing all your personal information 24/7 to them.