add anti-theft to FAQ
This commit is contained in:
parent
61e3ad9e22
commit
f1f2e6e508
@ -96,6 +96,7 @@
|
||||
<li><a href="#updates">How do I keep the OS updated?</a></li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</li>
|
||||
<li><a href="#anti-theft">Does GrapheneOS provide Factory Reset Protection?</a></li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2 id="device-support">
|
||||
@ -580,6 +581,32 @@
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Updates can be <a href="/usage#updates-sideloading">sideloaded via
|
||||
recovery</a>.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2 id="anti-theft">
|
||||
<a href="#anti-theft">Does GrapheneOS provide Factory Reset Protection?</a>
|
||||
</h2>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>No, since this is strictly a theft deterrence feature, not a security feature, and
|
||||
the standard implementation depends on having the device tied to an account on an
|
||||
online service. The only advantage would be encouraging thieves to return a stolen
|
||||
device for a potential reward after realizing that it has no value beyond scrapping it
|
||||
for parts.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Google's Factory Reset Protection ties devices to a Google account using a tiny,
|
||||
special region of persistent state not wiped by a factory reset. It prevents a thief
|
||||
from wiping the device to a fresh state for resale without being stuck at a screen for
|
||||
authenticating with the Google account persisted on the device after wiping.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>It would be possible to make an implementation not reliant upon an online service
|
||||
where the user has the optional to enable Factory Reset Protection and is given a seed
|
||||
phrase required to use the device after wiping data from recovery. However, since this
|
||||
has no security value and the ability to deter theft is questionable, implementing
|
||||
this is an extremely low priority.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Providing the option to disable wiping from recovery would be simpler, but would be
|
||||
incompatible with features designed to wipe data automatically in certain cases. This
|
||||
will not be implemented by GrapheneOS since it isn't a good approach and it conflicts
|
||||
with other planned features.</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<footer>
|
||||
<a href="/"><img src="https://grapheneos.org/logo.png" width="512" height="512" alt=""/>GrapheneOS</a>
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user