I installed NetGuard about a month ago and blocked all internet to apps, unless they’re on a whitelist. No notifications from this particular system app (that can’t be disabled) until recently when it started making internet connection requests to google servers. Does anyone know when this became a thing?
Edit 2: I bought my Pixel 6 phone outright, directly from Google’s Australian store. I have no creditors.
Were the courts not enough control for creditors? Since when are they allowed to lock you out of your purchased property without a court order?
I don’t even live in the US, so what the actual fuck?
Edit 1: You can check it’s installed (stock Pixel 6 android 14) Settings > Apps > All Apps > three dot menu, Show system > search “DeviceLockController”.
I highly recommend getting NetGuard, you can enable pro features via their website if you have the APK for as low as 0.10€, but donate more, because it’s amazing. You can also purchase via Google Play store.
I checked to see if this was on my pixel 6 pro. It wasn’t but I found this.
Not something I installed and not something I would allow.
The uninstall did not appear to work UNTIL I disabled the app and cleared the data.
this is installed by default in case you want/need to enable it (company phone). it is a system app so it cannot be uninstalled, after disableing it (which probably does not do anything when it was not setup in the first place) you can uninstall the updates (so the ‘old’ version that’s sitting in the system image is still there)
Do you use your phone for work?
Never. Keep work and personal completely separate.
damn and no one at google saw this as dystopian?
They saw this reality and thought it was awesome.
This isn’t a Google thing. It’s not normally installed on your device.
I’m using a fresh install of GrapheneOS, and this is installed too. Not sure what that suggests, except that it’s some core system level app.
I also have it on the latest version of GrapheneOS
Oh jesus, that’s crazy that it’s on GrapheneOS too.
Edit: I’m on a no-longer-supported GrapheneOS install on a Pixel 3a. I’ve checked and it’s not there for me. I also don’t live in the US (like OP). I wonder when it would’ve been added?
Removed by mod
According to people from GrapheneOS these are two different things:
To be clear, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.devicelock is not what’s included in GrapheneOS. There seems to be some confusion about that. This is the app that does what’s being described.
What you see in GrapheneOS is https://android.googlesource.com/platform/packages/modules/DeviceLock/+/b1a971a6e29f5b426b13d96d7692e9dd5a7e81e2/DeviceLockController/
https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/11639-device-lock-controller/9
Seems unlikely if you outright own it, this is for bought on a plan type stuff, no ?
There’s little to no info out there, but I did see some suggestions on a forum, that it may also be installed when setting up a Work profile. I use Shelter to create said isolated Work profile. I wonder if that’s a possibile explanation.
This may be the case, as I also have a work profile set up via Shelter.
Weird that it’s installed in GrapheneOS also though.
In any case, even if setting up a work profile, it should just not be installed.
A potential backdoor as a ransomware exploit for anyone who has a work profile on their phone, I would guess. Unless there are other apps bundled with android that also lock you out of your phone.
Using Lineage and I dont have it. Sucks for people using Google crap
Thats interesting, I am using lineage as well (oneplus 6t) and do have the app
com.android.devicelockcontrollerOut of curiosity, you’re specifically checking in the system apps?
I’ve installed graphene on my phone a while ago (bought from a carrier in germany) and this app does not exist.
edit: nevermind, it’s there
That’s deeply disturbing, what else could be hiding next to it? I sort of hope it’s somehow being installed by your phone company, as bad as that is, the alternative is worse!
I mean, I bought my Pixel 7a unlocked and paid in full, from Google. And my assumption has always been that when GrapheneOS is flashed, any previous stock bloat is wiped.
Righteous assumption. That it is not, requires investigation. That’s some serious BS.
Removed by mod
anyone remember the time when google removed(!) their internal “don’t be evil” rule? guess this is part of the outcome of that “be evil” that came along with removal of the opposite. Abuse of this mechanism is IMHO veery predictable ;-)
There are plenty of google-free cellphones, one could easily stick to better products of better companies. help yourself, google’s not gonna do that for you within the next 5billion* years as they IMHO already stated they “want” to be evil now, always remember that ;-)
*) thats round about when our sun expands too much for earth, so i currently dislike doing any predictions beyond that point ;-) i do not predict google would last that long, only that they’ll keep beeing evil until their end.
Devs still need to eat so we will need a better alternative to adsense. As long as we depend on these corporate services their stranglehold will only continue strengthen like this.
No one really depends on these corporate services. People are just too lazy and conformist to give up on the convenience that they bring.
You act like it is Google’s fault that someone found questionable software on the phone they got from Rent-a-center or Alibaba.
You act like it is Google’s fault that someone found questionable software on the phone they got from Rent-a-center or Alibaba.
They say it was made at the behest of a service provider in Kenya. Given that I can’t find the app and it’s not on my phone I’m inclined to believe them. It certainly sounds like something a service provider would request too.
So then send the URL to the play store page from the app posted in ops photo. Go ahead, waiting.
So then send the URL to the play store page from the app posted in ops photo. Go ahead, waiting.
lol, what? i did, in another comment, shortly before you posted this. here it is again: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.devicelock
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.devicelock
There you go. Just so you know, you could’ve Googled this instead of making a pedantic ass of yourself.
Google-free phones? What are they? I know only Pinephone and Librem 5.
ok, i have to admit, that i was thinking of google-“services” free phones like the new ones from huawei. but sure android is made by google (but not “owned” by them). however i can try to “rescue” my argument by saying something like “just use a nokia 3310! they’re still working and the batterie should still last a week if not more” ;-)
however projects like lineage os might be a good choice to have threeth (as in more than “both”), more security, less dependency from google, and also more influence on the actual software included in the build, if it’s not even possible to just compile it yourself and have freedom of changing every line of code as you wish.
Huawei doesn’t even provide possibility to unlock bootloader, so it’s big NO. Currently I’m using Lineage OS on my primary phone and Linux on secondary phone. But the main problem is big amount of proprietary staff like modems, that can even work bypassing SOC and OS. I found only one phone with truly open-source hardware. It’s Liberty phone from Purism. It costs 2000$ and has perfomance comparable to 50$ Android phone.
my idea currently is to finish some projects that have priority and afterwards then look for lineage os on raspberry pi, combined with gsm modem and maybe a gps module, all powered by a slim powerbank. might make up a huge bulky phone but i almost want to start building it now. On the other hand if i wait until my other projects are finished, the whole thing might be ready made available for self assembly…
I thought about it too, but I want to make a tablet based on RPI 5. I have a 3D printer, so I hope to be able to make an adequately sized case.
anyone remember the time when google removed(!) their internal “don’t be evil” rule?
I remember when media falsely reported clickbait articles that they did and people bring that up to this day. They moved it from the introduction to the closing statement. Which you can argue makes it less prominent or whatever, but it was never removed.
Of course it makes no difference, it wasn’t followed either way, and definitely isn’t followed now. But no, it was never removed. You can see it yourself right here at the end: https://abc.xyz/investor/google-code-of-conduct/
The only reason this ever got any attention was to push an agenda.
effectively redundant statement
And yet it needs to be said because even 6 years after this didn’t happen people are still convinced that it did. It’s brought up way too often and I’m beyond tired of it at this point. Hate on Google for things they actually do, not because they moved 3 words to the bottom of a webpage.
my point was that the only reason anything ever receives attention in any way is due to an agenda
It’s ok. You can just make some calls and settle your arrears.
don’t even live in the US, so what the actual fuck?
I live in the US and the Google play store says this app isn’t available in my region.
It pings out to google constantly regardless of where you are. You should be able remove it with adb, or use an app like NetGuard to block it from acessing the internet.
NetGuard is how I discovered it even existed haha
So for me, it shows up in my settings but netguard does not show it. Did i do something wrong setting up netguard?
Also, does anyone know if my carrier will get mad if i remove it? I do technically owe money on my phone (they give me a credit each month so i dont have to pay it)
🤔
There’s a setting to enable showing system apps in NetGuard.
Thanks! I missed the settings somehow.
Requests the app made today.
This is my phone I own outright, by the way. I don’t have any creditors.
What app are you using to see this traffic?
Thank you!
adb shell pm uninstall --user 0 com.google.android.devicelockcontrollerIf you’re using Shelter, then in addition to that command, replace
--user 0with--user 10You don’t need root to do this. You can also uninstall other bloatware using this same method.
I tried this on a Pixel 7 and am getting:
panther:/ $ pm uninstall --user 0 com.google.android.devicelockcontrollerFailure [DELETE_FAILED_INTERNAL_ERROR]I also tried disable and got:
Cannot disable a protected package: com.google.android.devicelockcontrollerAh. I guess you have to have root, then and just delete the apk.
Hero, I just have to get around to doing it 😅 (I will, but grumble, grumble this is why most people don’t bother battling for privacy)
New to this depth of phone administration, where are you entering this command? Is there a developer CLI I should be looking for or is this done with a third party app or something?
Look up “adb” or “Android platform tools” on your favorite search engine. It’s something you do on your PC with your phone plugged in.
Right on, thank you!
You could also give Shizuku a try! Connects to android’s adb bridge over WiFi, right from your phone! From there you can use something like termux to shell straight into your phone!
I find it interesting that yours is
com.google.android.devicelockcontroller.I checked mine on GrapheneOS and it looks like it’s the AOSP version of the package:
com.android.devicelockcontrollerMvp comment there. I checked mine and I am in the US, on a phone I originally bought on credit. I do not have that app installed. Go figure. 🤷♂️
Definitely worth checking out your app list to make sure. I wonder if it accidentally came downstream from AOSP into the alt ROMs, and that’s why it’s not in my stock, proprietary, US market, flagship Google pixel device.
Just following up that it
is indeed in my apps listYour Store screenshot is not the same app. What is the ID of the app in your original screenshot cause at this point it looks like you just make things up for clout. Anyone else find it strange that people can post almost anything about Google whether true or not and the bot accounts come out from under the woodwork just to share more fake info.
Anyone else find it strange that people can post almost anything about Google whether true or not and the bot accounts come out from under the woodwork just to share more fake info.
I find it strange that in the face of obviously conclusive evidence that this is a real app that Google made and which many people in this thread have installed (despite not even having bought their phone on credit) you are here posting multiple comments arguing that it is somehow not real…and you even flagged the post. I don’t think you’re a bot but I must say that your dedication to defending Google, especially in this case, is strange to say the least.
I am at such a loss, because I can see it in NetGuard, and open it’s app details from there, but it doesn’t work even appear in system apps in Shelter.
That entire idea is terrifying.
Is 3+ the age restriction?
Hilarious right?
Are we certain it does what we think it does? Could it be something to do with the ability to lock your phone remotely if stolen, or just something to do with Lock Screen functionality?
Not what it says on the google Playstore listing, but yes it’s possible. Considering the connection requests are seemingly for other google APIs. It’s possible NetGuard is flagging the requests to this app incorrectly. (It can’t distinguish being MS office apps either, so it lumps them together, for example)
Doesn’t change the fact the app is installed though, on a phone I own outright, and it’s purposes as claimed by google are gross (in my opinion).
Where did you buy your phone? What kind of phone is it?
Australia directly from the google store, Pixel 6.
In that case I would seriously contact Google, and either completely reflash either factory Android or one of the ALTs available.
still allows access to settings
Oh thank goodness
I hope developer settings to flash a free ROM
My Pixel5a from google store has it, but my other phone where I installed Murena e/OS (which is based on LineageOS) does not have it.
How do you go for banking apps on Murena e/OS? This is basically the only thing holding me back from changing my OS to GrapheneOS.
Dual boot is sadly not a thing according to Graphene (and I have idea about such things
I will tell you my secret. I have two phones. Two identities. One that has a normal google phone with facebook messenger and instagram, to keep in contact with family, and to have bank apps. And one, where the Murena e/OS is totally de-googled. Where you will only find FOSS apps, from Lemmy to Mastodon and Pixelfed. That second identity is my real one.
The mistake people make when they write about “moving to Linux” (or similar), is that they try to fit themselves into a box where the modern life doesn’t affords them to. The wiser option is to play on both sides. You have an unassuming, clean-cut identity on one computer and phone, and you have your real self on the other, where it’s ultra-private and secured, and often IP-spoofed if required. And it’s not some kind of closeting thing, or illegal thing or anything, it’s just private. How I would like things to be by default in a Utopian system.
On top of that, I believe that Murena’s e/OS has a modified g-services app so full fledged Android apps, including bank apps, get fooled so they run. But I don’t personally run them on that phone. That phone is FOSS only.
I run /e/OS on my Fairphone 3. The only thing that doesn’t work is login with fingerprints with my banking app. Everything else works, I did not have a problem and I am now running it for more than 3 years I believe (or 4?).
Banking is a hit or miss, GrapheneOS should pass all security checks and more, but none of them is Google certified and apps start to request that, which sucks
With GrapheneOS, there’s dual profile, a main without google, and a secondary profile with all the garbage you don’t really need…
I know this is a privacy community, but I’m not sure I’m onboard with the outrage on this particular one. If you rent/lease or go on a payment plan for the device you’re using, then it isn’t yours, it belongs to the entity you borrowed it from.
If I don’t make car payments, the bank can repossess my ride. If I dont pay my mortgage or rent, I can be evicted by my landlord or bank.
If I don’t make my phone payment, the company should have recourse to prevent me from using their device.
This could open up the ability for bad actors to disable my device, and I agree that’s a horrible prospect. But the idea of a legitimate creditor using this feature to reclaim their property is not something I find shocking.
That’s not how it works, at least in Spain.
All your points are sound. The issue that I have with this is that remote disable functionality is not necessary to achieve any of these aims. Before they were connected to the internet, people were still able to rent/lease autos and the world managed to survive just fine. There were other ways for lenders to get remunerated for breaking lease terms - they could issue an additional charge, get a court order for repossession, etc. Remote disable was never needed or warranted.
So let’s start by considering the due process here. Before, there was some sort of process involved in the repossession act. With remote disable however, the lender can act as judge, jury and executioner so to speak - that party can unilaterally disable the device with no oversight. And if the lender is in the wrong, there is likely no recourse. Another potential issue here is that the lender can change the terms at any time - it can arbitrarily decide that it doesn’t like what you’re doing with the device, decide you’re in breach, and hit that remote kill switch. A lot of these things could technically happen before too, but the barriers have been dramatically lowered now.
On top of this, there are great privacy concerns as well. What kinds of additional information does the lender have? What right do they have to things like our location, our habits, when we use it, and all of the other personal details that they can infer from programs like this?
There are probably lots of other issues here, but another part of the problem is that we can’t even start to imagine what kinds of nefarious behaviors they can execute with this new information and power. We are well into the age where our devices are becoming our enemies instead of our advocates. I shudder to think what the world would look like 20 years from now if this kind of behavior isn’t stopped.
Perfectly stated! The moralizing story kind of serves as cover, as a complete blank check to excuse practically any behavior of the lender, without any limiting principle.
Right - they say that they’re just going to use it to defend their “property rights”. In practice, they’re going to use it for a whole lot more than just that…
Exactly. These types of changes grant corporations extrajudicial power.
I don’t disagree with anything you say. I think it’s worth mentioning that the cost of enforcement directly informs the cost of a lease/rental situation. The cheaper they can enforce the contract, the less they can theoretically charge. If they had to get a court order to lock your phone or repo your car, they’d make it more expensive or be much more selective about who they lease/rent to. This maybe enables more people to have phones or get cars?
I swear I’m not rooting for team “aggressive manipulative business behavior widens opportunities for the less well off”. Gross. Kind of how I hear about globalization of manufacturing stuff - “they get paid pennies!” “yeah, but that’s more than before the factory came? look what they can buy now” I know that’s a overly broad generalization but you see those arguments.
When I saw this on a custom ROM, it was basically the same thing, but said that my financial institution or whoever had admin access to my phone, including seeing texts and everything else, until my phone was paid off. Still not sure why that was there in a custom ROM, but I ended up not using it.
This is classic efficient market hypothesis brain worms, the kind of cognitive dead-end that you arrive at when you conceive of people in purely economic terms, without considering the power relationships between them. It’s a dead end you navigate to if you only think about things as they are today – vast numbers of indebted people who command fewer assets and lower wages than at any time since WWII – and treat this as a “natural” state: “how can these poors expect to be offered more debt unless they agree to have their all-important pocket computers booby-trapped?”
-Cory Doctorow from his blog, unintentionally addressing you
I find it funny how differently Lemmy reacts to something like this vs reddit. The Lemmy community is certainly very different than reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/jpdup2/google_app_lets_banks_lock_your_phone_if_you_dont/
What about for people like me?
I bought my device outright. No loans, no payment plans and no reason for that functionality to exist on my phone. Yet there it is, just waiting to be taken advantage of whether there is a valid reason or not.
This is the kind of apathy that leads to phrases like, “If only we had known” but we do … and do nothing about it.
I can and will at least do my part for myself and encourage others to do the same.
For every single one of those scenarios, a set of legal processes need to be exhausted. This app gives the lender the ability to do whatever they want, whenever they want, without following a set of legal processes.
That’s dystopian mentality at it’s greatest.
Not an unreasonable thought, but my question is what is the process to disable? In your examples, there are legal steps/requirements to repossess those assets.
In this case I can’t imagine the process is longer than “press the brick button and extort money”
Is it extortion if it’s contractually obliged?
¯_(ツ)_/¯ eye of the beholder I suppose
Oh nono no, the world is much worse than that:
-
If you make all your car payments on time except one, the bank can still repossess your car.
-
If you pay your mortgage or rent on time every time except once, the bank can initiate the process of eviction.
Remember: the power triangle points down
I paid off a car without ever being late, and they reported my account as unpaid and in collections at the end. They had no reason to do so and to this day I still don’t understand why they did it. I contested it and the best I was able to accomplish was getting the entire loan removed from my credit report. So 2 entire years of on-time payments and satisfactory completion of a loan resulted in no positive credit boost for me, and a big PITA, just because the company made a mistake. Companies are not responsible enough to wield the type of power that this app grants.
Yes? That’s why loans with collateral charge a lower interest rate than unsecured loans.
My point being that if said bank screws up whilst dealing with your loan, and you make a fuss to hold them accountable, the worse thing that happens to them is that they issue an apology.
-
I agree completely, but it’s an odd way to go about repossession.
And there’s the rub. Sure, it’s a financed phone. It doesn’t follow that we have to suspend judgment on the means they resort to, to enforce their terms.
