20 comments

  • greatgib 4 hours ago
    It's good to have an option like that, even being a default, but there definitively need a switch to disable that if it is your own will.

    It's not even necessarily that good enough against cops, because in a lot of shitty countries, even some pretending to be democratics, not disclosing or at least inputting your password might be a crime severely punished. If I'm not wrong, there was a guy that had to stay years in jail until he would comply with the judge order to unlock his device.

    • rvnx 3 hours ago
      Interestingly, it could also be seen the other way around; it's a potential way for Google to force deployments of system updates (potentially at the request of law enforcement). With an automatic reboot, then the update can automatically be applied without user action.
      • rixed 3 hours ago
        Except that on most phone you can already reboot the device if you long-press some button, can't you?
        • BurningFrog 2 hours ago
          You can always turn it off and on, AFAIK.
          • ffsm8 1 hour ago
            Long Press power while pressing volume down works on all Android devices I've used to date.

            And that's ignoring the fact that disconnecting power, waiting a few days and then reconnecting it will inevitably let you cold boot it, too (which this would be an equivalent to - as far as I understood it)

      • kokada 2 hours ago
        This makes no sense, Android already will reboot itself after receiving an update and being inactive for a while (generally while charging it will install the update in its secondary partition, do some verification checks and reboot if there is no user interaction).
        • kqr 1 hour ago
          This sounds vendor-specific and not general for Android. I've never had that happen on any device but Windows and I would be very upset if it did happen.
          • arghwhat 1 hour ago
            This is default on iOS and on many Android versions.

            It's often configurable, but e.g. carrier policy or local vendors can enforce it.

            To have updates automatically install overnight is the maximally desirable scenario - waiting for user approval usually result in open vulnerabilities, and if you interact with a prompt you are by definition using your device and it is therefore a much worse time than while you're asleep.

      • markus_zhang 3 hours ago
        I actually think this is the reason. But I think Android has an option to disable auto update?
      • VWWHFSfQ 2 hours ago
        It's already trivial to reboot a locked android phone
      • mystified5016 3 hours ago
        This is the real reason
    • joak 2 hours ago
      It's good to be able to disable this option: I use old Android phones as servers and don't want them to reboot every 3 days.
      • MattSayar 25 minutes ago
        Completely agree, I don't want this to disrupt the Bop Spotter

        https://walzr.com/bop-spotter

      • blackoil 2 hours ago
        https://xkcd.com/1172/

        Don't think old Androids will get this update.

        • xethos 9 minutes ago
          It's a Google Play Services update, likely explicitly to be able to push it to all (Google-using) Android phones immediately, without waiting for OS updates. This will not be a "Guess I'll get it in a few years" update.
    • oarsinsync 1 hour ago
      > in a lot of shitty countries, even some pretending to be democratics, not disclosing or at least inputting your password might be a crime severely punished. If I'm not wrong, there was a guy that had to stay years in jail until he would comply with the judge order to unlock his device.

      This sounds a lot like the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in the United Kingdom, where several people have been prosecuted and imprisoned for failing to provide encryption keys.

    • SXX 4 hours ago
      This is super annoying on newer iOS for device that I use purely for development. Before it was possible just keep iPhone unlocked indefenitely, but now it reboots and boom I have to use TouchID again.

      This is again Apple being Apple making things harder without option to disable it even when development mode is on.

      Has anyone found a way to bypass it?

      • crazysim 2 hours ago
        Do you think it's possible to jiggle it ala mouse jigglers and USB jigglers?
        • SXX 1 hour ago
          Problem is not user activity - it just needs PIN, TouchID or FaceID. Even if you logged to device via iPhone Mirroring it's still gonna reboot, get locked after 72 hours and for me personally it breaks iPhone Mirroring half of the time too.

          One physical option to bypass it on iPhone SE is to actually physically activate PIN entry and then use Voice Control command to enter the pin since it works even before first unlock. Though this is basically compromises pin and device encryption. But it's cheap since there are plenty of $2 devices that can simulate touchscreen clicks.

          I just want some easier option that works and not require agent 007 setup to just run a buld of my AI-generated crap via Xcode.

          • crazysim 58 minutes ago
            Issue is, you kinda have a agent 007, sort of setup with the advanced data protection thing. I think you need an appropriate solution.
            • SXX 39 minutes ago
              But all I want is "Please dont reboot my phone! Very please!" setting in options.
      • nativeit 2 hours ago
        Considering this is all about Android adopting a very similar feature, it doesn’t sound like “Apple being Apple”…
        • Mountain_Skies 2 hours ago
          It's Apple being a trailblazer and leading the industry. Sometimes that lead is in a bad direction.
          • OneDeuxTriSeiGo 30 minutes ago
            If I remember correctly, Apple actually picked up the feature after seeing it implemented in GrapheneOS. I think some people associated with Graphene were calling on Apple to add it for security reasons.
          • dagmx 1 hour ago
            The rest of the industry are adults and can be responsible for their own decisions though.
            • anonymars 23 minutes ago
              Doesn't seem like it. I remember when Samsung ads mocked Apple for the camera notch and removing the headphone jack.

              For obvious reasons those ads are long gone...

            • SXX 1 hour ago
              I'm 99% sure that Android version will be toggagle via Developer Options.
      • layer8 4 hours ago
        > I have to use TouchID again.

        Don’t set it up with a passcode in the first place?

        • SXX 3 hours ago
          Unfortunately I use Advanced Data Protection on my Apple account so I kind a need that passcode. And moving to having completely different Apple account for development is PITA.
          • elashri 2 hours ago
            But I think connecting a device that can be used as authentication method without choosing a defense would negate the purpose of advanced data protection of your account and other devices.
            • SXX 1 hour ago
              Let's say I'm not super heavy Apple service user. For me Advanced Data Protection is defence against Apple itself and ability to keep little information I share via iCloud somewhat secret: mostly another backup of some photos and few other things.

              It's not like I'm trying to defend against some state actors or whatver.

    • kwanbix 3 hours ago
      I don't get the difference. Today after 72 hours (3 days) my phone asks me for my password and won't accept biometrics. Also, this is a problem for all the people that use them as alarm clocks. I use Alarm Clock Xtreme for example.
      • xrisk 3 hours ago
        (At least on iOS) shutting down the phone has something to do with wiping credentials/keys from RAM from where they can potentially be dumped. A just-booted phone is fully encrypted with no keys in memory.
      • krisoft 1 hour ago
        > Also, this is a problem for all the people that use them as alarm clocks.

        Yes. But quite honestly the right solution for that would be Apple providing an alarm clock API. The alarm clock application could call it with the next scheduled alarm’s time and the os would just wake up at that time and let the application do the sound / alarm thing.

      • h4x0rr 3 hours ago
        The phone doesn't accept biometrics but is still in AFU state. Encryption keys are in memory.
    • gcanyon 4 hours ago
      For this use case there needs to be a reasonably quick way to erase/permanently lock a phone. Or maybe it needs to be something that is both 1. Less severe than that 2. Secure against personal inducements 3. More automatic.

      So maybe something like a paired app with a friend/someone who is beyond the reach of the authorities, and if the phone isn't unlocked in a given definable period (or it can be triggered immediately), it then can't be unlocked without that person's active cooperation.

      That's off the top of my head, so I'm sure there are optimizations.

      • dsr_ 4 hours ago
        GrapheneOS offers hardening before first unlock, and an optional distress code that wipes the storage rather than unlocking.

        Currently only available for Pixel phones, 6 and later. Offers many other security-related features.

      • hypeatei 4 hours ago
        You might get even more charges for doing that, though. Destroying evidence, obstruction or some made up charge.
        • gcanyon 1 hour ago
          Sure, I'm just saying there's a way to put unlocking the phone in the hands of someone who at least is not under the control of a hostile authority.
      • NekkoDroid 3 hours ago
        This just gave me an idea: How about the phone accepting 2 password. One is the regular password and brings you into your regular account and then a dummy password that brings you into a dummy (but somewhat plausible, maybe user set up) account. That way you can still enter your normal account whenever you feel like it and if you are being pressured you just put in your "alternative password" and it just brings you to the dummy account.
        • greatgib 2 hours ago
          It would be a kind of duress password.

          But the problem is that when authority wants you to unlock your device, they kind of already know why, what they are expected to find but they would that as a more complete proof. But from external input they would expect some downloaded files or accounts (like social accounts you were connected with your phone a minute ago), some SMS they saw passing, some call logs, so connection to your known accounts...

        • exe34 3 hours ago
          you'll get rubber hosed just in case.
    • glenstein 2 hours ago
      >not disclosing or at least inputting your password might be a crime severely punished

      And to your point, I believe it's now the case in the U.S. that you can be legally compelled to unlock a fingerprint lock, but not a pin for whatever reason.

      • baby_souffle 2 hours ago
        Compiled unlock via biometrics is still somewhat contested. The general argument boils down to biometrics being something you can't really protect internally. A passcode that is only known inside of your gray matter can therefore can only be externalized via some sort of testimony. Being compelled to reveal a passcode violates your ride against compelled speech and self-inccrimination.
      • intrasight 1 hour ago
        In US you are protected by 5th. But it seems like the question hasn't been addressed by the Supreme Court since currently the answer depends on your jurisdiction. Which inspired me to check: here in Pennsylvania, the court cannot compel you to unlock your device with the password.
    • crazygringo 1 hour ago
      > because in a lot of shitty countries, even some pretending to be democratics, not disclosing or at least inputting your password might be a crime severely punished

      What's your point? That because it isn't useful in every country, it's not worth making available to any countries?

      It's not preventing you from providing your password.

      You started by saying it's a good option to have, so I don't understand the point of your second paragraph.

    • xg15 3 hours ago
      I was thinking this would be the final death knell to using an (unrooted) Android phone as a cheap home server. But then again, not sure if that was even possible before with all the "battery protection" logic built into Android.
  • vishnuharidas 19 minutes ago
    I found that this saves a lot of battery. My old Motorola G5G is now sitting idle, and I had to charge it every 4-5 days. I found that if the phone is restarted and NOT unlocked, it will stay charged for more than 10 days. My best guess is that a screen unlock is required to start many of the OS-level services, which takes up all the battery.

    If this is true, then the new update will save a lot of battery for those phones that are sitting idle.

    • chowells 11 minutes ago
      Everything except a very minimal core is kept on an encrypted partition. Until the password is provided, most things can't launch.
    • emrah 17 minutes ago
      A phone sitting idle is very unusual though, a very edge case
  • jfkimmes 5 hours ago
    This is a Google Play Services update. For GrapheneOS users without GApps wondering: A similar feature is already built-in: https://grapheneos.org/features#auto-reboot
    • Freak_NL 5 hours ago
      Heh, my first thought was “Don't they do this already?”, but apparently GrapheneOS was ahead of the curve there. Nice.
    • amelius 4 hours ago
      Huh, I have GrapheneOS and I never noticed it rebooting. (And when i manually reboot, the "BIOS" prevents it from booting without acknowledging that I'm aware it's a non-Google OS, so how does it work?)
      • daneel_w 3 hours ago
        The feature is not enabled by default. Also, the boot doesn't wait for you indefinitely - it just gives you a few seconds to glance the checksum and halt it, before it proceeds automatically.
      • edent 4 hours ago
        You don't have to acknowledge anything. The boot screen shows a warning which you can interrupt. If you don't do anything it'll continue to load as normal.
    • ignoramous 1 hour ago
      > This is a Google Play Services update

      As the GrapheneOS docs note, the feature is better implemented in init and not in system server or the app/services layer like Google has done here? Though, I am sure Google engs know a thing or two about working around limitations that GrapheneOS developers may have hit (in keeping the timer going even after a soft reboot, where it is just the system server, and the rest of the userspace that depends on it, that's restarted).

    • sva_ 4 hours ago
      Samsung has also had this feature for ages.
  • gumbojuice 5 hours ago
    It's not great news for my old phone used for wifi at our guesthouse (let's a few security cams and our smart lock get online)
    • rixed 3 hours ago
      Same here, using several old androids as hotspots here and there. They stopped receiving updates long ago though, so I'm not worried.
      • clort 2 hours ago
        Its not an OS update, its a Google Play Services update .. so if they still apply you would get it

        I found it strange that things like 'prettier settings screens' and 'improved connection with cars and watches' would be included in Google Play Services. Surely those things are part of the OS not part of a thing which helps you access the Play store?

        I've been using a LineageOS (prev. Cyanogenmod) phone for years and have never installed any google stuff so I don't get these updates anyway.

        • aftbit 2 hours ago
          They've been moving more and more into Google Play Services because:

          1. It's deployed to all devices and not subject to manufacturer approval for updates

          2. It's easier to update without requiring user interaction or approval

          3. It's closed source unlike Android so changes can't be incorporated by competitors

    • wizzwizz4 5 hours ago
      You should be able to switch this off, if you notice it being enabled, so (now you know about it) it should be a one-time downtime.
      • devrandoom 4 hours ago
        I skimmed through the docs, couldn't see anything about soaking disabling it.
    • pengaru 1 hour ago
      I used to do something similar for the security cams at my desert property.

      Picked up a gl.inet x300b off ebay and never looked back.

  • udev4096 5 hours ago
    They stole the idea from GrapheneOS and shipped a barely half-baked version with hardcoded time. GrapheneOS has configurable time for it since years
    • iancarroll 4 hours ago
      I would guess the more likely inspiration would be Apple recently adding this to iOS, if GrapheneOS had it for years and they didn’t add it...
    • lysace 3 hours ago
      I'd claim that Microsoft pioneered this time limit security concept with Windows 95 almost 30 years ago.

      They went with 2^32-1 milliseconds or about 49.7 days.

      We don't talk enough about Microsoft's strong legacy of security innovations, IMHO.

    • mcraiha 4 hours ago
      Can you set the time to one minute?
      • OneDeuxTriSeiGo 26 minutes ago
        Graphene's autoreboot has 12 different options (excluding disabling it) ranging from 72 hours down to 10 minutes and the timer is reset each time the device is unlocked. Tbh I think a 1 minute setting would actually be nice (for things like when you are going through customs, etc) but I get why they don't provide it.
      • devrandoom 4 hours ago
        Not against it, but I'm genuinely curious what the use case would be for that?
        • amelius 4 hours ago
          I guess as a prank, just like setting the language to Chinese for English speakers.
        • 67593874748 3 hours ago
          Could be useful in a scenario where you won't be using your phone often and really want to maximize battery life.
      • udev4096 4 hours ago
        No, that is unrealistic. Please stop trolling
        • II2II 4 hours ago
          How so?

          The system only reboots once it has been locked for a particular duration. Setting it to 1 minute basically says: put the system into a more secure state (e.g. purge unencrypted memory) and ensure that it is ready to go when I next need it. That said, while it is not unrealistic it would be problematic since accidentally letting the phone lock (e.g. input timeout) would result in a time consuming reboot.

      • ThePowerOfFuet 4 hours ago
        Why would you want it to auto-reboot after one minute?

        The minimum on GrapheneOS is 10 min and the maximum is 72 hours. It can also be disabled.

  • LinuxBender 4 hours ago
    Not bad. If I could make a feature request it would be something like, After 3 days of being idle:

    - [ ] Reboot

    - [ ] Power Off

    - [X] WIPE triple opt-in

    Maybe there is a custom phone OS for this that makes the phone act more ephemeral and network boot off my self hosted iPXE/immich server? A dumb smart phone so to speak. An ephemeral diskless phone.

    • al_borland 3 hours ago
      A wipe seems extreme. An unexpected trip to the hospital could leave someone with a wiped phone when they come to.
      • criddell 2 hours ago
        If that’s something you are worried about, don’t choose that option.
    • dist-epoch 3 hours ago
      The WIPE is doable with a custom "management app", which has the permission to wipe the phone. Maybe such a thing already exists.
  • graypegg 3 hours ago
    > ...the new Play Services will limit that exposure to three days, even if it's plugged in.

    This will be fun to track down after a long weekend in embedded devices once this android patch number is old enough to be baked into crappy payment terminals and mall kiosks.

    Probably overall a good thing though.

    • tripdout 2 hours ago
      I don't think those would be likely to have Play Services, though.
  • FeistySkink 2 hours ago
    How is this going to work with SIM cards that need a PIN? I'll be just unreachable until I notice the reboot?
    • switch007 2 hours ago
      Locking the SIM is considered part of the feature on GrapheneOS AIUI
  • rixed 3 hours ago
    « This actually caused some annoyance among law enforcement officials who believed they had suspects' phones stored in a readable state, only to find they were rebooting and becoming harder to access due to this feature. »

    Wouldn't the phones run out of battery after a few days anyway? Or do they keep them plugged in?

    • aftbit 2 hours ago
      They keep them plugged in
  • fguerraz 3 hours ago
    How about instead of patching up our societies with technology we vote for the right people / laws for once?
    • homebrewer 2 hours ago
      This won't help those of us living in countries where "elected" officials elect themselves. We haven't had a single honest election in decades (and probably won't ever have one), so measures like this are better than nothing.
    • teddyh 53 minutes ago
      This feudal system is too oppressive! Let’s put a good king on the throne!
    • dagmx 1 hour ago
      Does passing laws against a crime/overreach completely stop it happening?
    • recursive 3 hours ago
      How about both?
    • bigyabai 1 hour ago
      The "right people" aren't represented by either side of America's bipartisan system. Good luck with your mass popular movement.
  • wiseowise 3 hours ago
    > This actually caused some annoyance among law enforcement officials who believed they had suspects' phones stored in a readable state, only to find they were rebooting and becoming harder to access due to this feature.

    Lmao.

    > The early sluggishness of Android system updates prompted Google to begin moving parts of the OS to Google Play Services. This collection of background services and libraries can be updated by Google automatically in the background as long as your phone is certified for Google services (which almost all are). That's why the inactivity reboot will just show up on your phone in the coming weeks with no notification. There are definitely reasons to be wary of the control Google has over Android with elements like Play Services, but it does pay off when the company can enhance everyone's security without delay.

    All the more reasons to move to AOSP forks.

    • 67593874748 3 hours ago
      Google locking features behind the closed source, proprietary Play Services is "more reason to move to AOSP"?
      • bigyabai 1 hour ago
        You don't need Play Services for this feature to work. The design is not proprietary or even hard to reverse-engineer.
  • 627467 4 hours ago
    I'm surprised this is something taken seriously only now by stock android. Isn't it known universally that AFU devices are insecure? What's the point of adding strict password policies, biometrics etc, if data from a stolen phone can be (relatively) trivially be exfiltrated unencrypted?

    Samsung's have had some feature that lets you set days of the week for the phone to restart (IME during early morning hours) automatically. It's not perfect but it's something. iOS seems to have some unclear logic to either restart or re-request password (not biometrics).

    This should be standard

  • bobsmooth 42 minutes ago
    I misread this as reformat and was concerned for a sec. This is a good idea.
  • amelius 4 hours ago
    Can't it run two OSes, so the booting becomes instantaneous? (Like swapping graphics buffers, but now with the entire OS)
    • edelbitter 2 hours ago
      Android ships a feature called bootchart which you can use to prove that most of the time your phone spends booting.. it is actually far from bottlenecked on storage or compute - bugs to be fixed; not worked around with even more complexity. Heck, some phones do not even stop playing their vendors fancy animated logo when they are finished before the animation is.
  • booleandilemma 4 hours ago
    I just want software that will do nothing user-observable without me explicitly asking it to. No pop-ups, no suggestions, no automatic anything.

    I don't know if it'll take a fancy buzzword or what. Unobtrusive software? Silent Software?

    • bobsmooth 31 minutes ago
      This is a terrible idea for an internet connected device.
    • layer8 3 hours ago
      Inert software. Inertware?
    • mystified5016 3 hours ago
      Good software
    • kranke155 4 hours ago
      Not shit software
  • cubefox 2 hours ago
    The Ars article seems to be inaccurate. Here is what the release notes say:

    > Security & Privacy

    > [Phone] Enables a future optional security feature, which will automatically restart your device if locked for 3 consecutive days.

    So it only "enables" a "future" "optional" feature.

  • jonathanstrange 4 hours ago
    Thanks, No. I'd like to opt out of this.
  • Beijinger 4 hours ago
    Pff. Windows does this since decades. No? I vaguely remember this nag screens after unauthorized updates.
  • Aeolun 4 hours ago
    Wait, why is this presented as a good thing?

    Why would I want my phone to auto reboot without my intervention? Never mind that it’ll never make three days on a single charge even if I don’t touch it.

    • alistairSH 4 hours ago
      It’s pretty well spelled out in the article…

      The BFU state is more secure than AFU.

    • WD-42 4 hours ago
      Just be glad it’s not windows, which does it every 3 hours.
      • recursive 3 hours ago
        Topical joke 25 years ago
    • jillyboel 4 hours ago
      For when it's sitting in an evidence baggy in the police station connected to a charger waiting for forensics
      • Aeolun 4 hours ago
        If that is a good thing what does that imply about my activities (or what an utter failure your justice system is)?
        • gruez 4 hours ago
          >or what an utter failure your justice system is

          Even if you somehow live in a jurisdiction with a perfect justice system, that doesn't mean everyone else is.

        • edoceo 4 hours ago
          No implication, it's a standard feature.

          Whos justice system? Lots of countries represented on HN. Many with questionable systems.

        • jillyboel 1 hour ago
          The goal of a security system is to keep adversaries out
    • crazygringo 4 hours ago
      It's very clearly explained in the article.
      • Aeolun 4 hours ago
        It is not clear to me at all why the ‘benefits’ presented outweigh the negatives (which is _my_ device doing anything without me instructing it to). Even if you can turn it off, this is apparently enabled by default.

        Law enforcement keeping hold of my phone for 3 days is simply not a realistic problem for me. Coming back to an annoyingly locked phone after forgetting it for a weekend very much is. The chances of law enforcement wanting anything with it are low enough that dealing with an extra unlock is more likely to be an impactful issue, even considering the potential impact that law enforcement or others stealing it could have.

        • wiseowise 3 hours ago
          > Law enforcement keeping hold of my phone for 3 days is simply not a realistic problem for me.

          That's what cops and spooks would like to have you think.

        • andybak 3 hours ago
          This is not not the question you originally asked. Indeed it's a much better question.
        • 67593874748 2 hours ago
          > Law enforcement keeping hold of my phone for 3 days is simply not a realistic problem for me.

          It's not a problem, until it suddenly is.

        • crazygringo 2 hours ago
          > Coming back to an annoyingly locked phone after forgetting it for a weekend very much is.

          It is?

          I mean, my iPhone asks me for my passcode every 7 days anyways. And that's the only thing that happens on reboot anyways.

          Also, you forget your phone for a weekend? How do you do anything during that weekend, like keep in touch with loved ones, get driving directions, pull up a boarding pass, check for delays, look up restaurants?

          • hilbert42 2 hours ago
            "How do you do anything during that weekend, …?"

            Easy, do what we did before mobile phones—civilization existed for thousands years and worked quite well without them (Rome built an empire sans mobile phones, so did the English). We even ran and coordinated the largest and most organized event in human history—WWII—without them!

            Some of us have not yet succumbed to phone addiction (I often go for quite some days without using a phone and still have a normal life).

            • crazygringo 1 hour ago
              Hey, if you want to go back to life in Ancient Rome, with the disease and lack of medicine, the slavery, the dictatorship... I sure wouldn't stop you.

              When you say civilization worked quite well for thousands of years, as an argument against mobile phones, I'm not sure you've quite thought your argument through... unless it's always been your dream to be a Russian serf, or an Egyptian slave?

          • lupusreal 1 hour ago
            > Also, you forget your phone for a weekend? How do you do anything during that weekend, like keep in touch with loved ones, get driving directions, pull up a boarding pass, check for delays, look up restaurants?

            Lmao I regularly go several days without calling family and months between any of those others.

  • imcritic 5 hours ago
    Isn't this stupid?

    Why not flush something properly in the RAM instead to wipe the "cached" secrets?

    A full restart feels like an overkill.

    • crote 5 hours ago
      That "something" is at least the entire userspace, so any attempt at doing so ends up being UX-equivalent to a full restart - while having a decent chance of leaving unintended trace data lying around in memory.

      A full restart guarantees that everything will be wiped.

    • davikr 5 hours ago
      The system is provably fully encrypted after a restart.
    • scarface_74 5 hours ago
      It’s not just the RAM. Android devices and iOS devices are not that secure after first unlock (AFU).

      https://blogs.dsu.edu/digforce/2023/08/23/bfu-and-afu-lock-s...

    • MattPalmer1086 5 hours ago
      Not really.

      Restart - simple with known and predictable effects, data no longer accessible, all secrets flushed no matter where they were or cached.

      Turn off disk encryption, suspend all running services, overwrite all secrets in the O/S wherever they are, and then restore all that on entering password. Probably can't do anything about secrets cached by actual apps. Complex, hard to maintain and probably buggy.