DeGoogle Yourself

8793 readers

4 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

Be respectful even in disagreement
No advertising unless it is very relevent and justified. Do not do this excessively.
No low value posts / memes. We or you need to learn, or discuss something.

Related communities

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

171

motivation to deGoogle: Creditors can lock your Android remotely if you are delinquent. (infosec.pub)

submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

88 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The technical mechanism:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.devicelock

update

To be clear, I am not the OP who experienced this problem. I just linked them from here.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I guess a closer analogy would be rental storage. If you don’t pay your mini storage bill, in some regions the landlord will confiscate your property, holding it hostage until you pay. And if that fails, they’ll even auction off your contents.

So in the case at hand the creditor is holding the debtor’s data hostage. One difference is that the data has no value to the creditor and is not in the creditor’s possession. It would be interesting to know if the contracts in place legally designate the data as the creditor’s property. If not, the data remains the property of the consumer.

This is covered by human rights law. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17 ¶2:

“No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”

If the phone user did not sign off on repossession of their data, and thus the data remains their property, then the above-quoted human right is violated in the OP’s scenario.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Lemmy moment. Claims human rights are being violated because smartphone gets locked

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Don’t try to strawman this. Human rights are violated when someone is deprived of their property (their data in the case at hand). If food is withheld from starving people in Gaza, your argument is like saying:

“Claims human rights are being violated because someone failed to drive a truck”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Someone not paying a phone bill doesn't equate to someone bombing Israel

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

They’re not at odds. We don’t have to choose between protecting UDHR Art.3 and Art.17. It’s foolish to disregard some portion of the UDHR needlessly and arbitrarily.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

He presented his logic and included well-recognised definitions and sources. He literally could not have done better without a peer review in the field 🤣🤣

So: shut up bitch