Screen lock / smart lock

[zevv]

Hi,

I'd like my Gemini to be ready and where I left it when I open it without having to unlock using codes, swipes or passwords, but of course this is not smart from a security point of view. Fortunately, there is the new android 'smart lock' feature that keeps the device unlocked under certain circumstances - for example as long as it is moving, or when my BLE keychain dongle is in range.

That's fine and just what I need - except for the fact that when enabling a screen lock also enables the 'clock with the white info box that you have to swipe up before you can use your device' screen.

Does anyone know if it is possible to get the best of both worlds? So if the device is locked, I'm fine with swiping or passwords, but as long at is is *not* locked because of bluetooth or movement, I'd like to to open and startup without any screens that I have to swipe away.

Thanks,

[Georgius]

Not sure if relevant people Gemini read this forum, however I vote for this as well. My primary plan was to use Gemini as a note taker with a back camera with extensive battery saving. Neither Debian nor Android at athis moment fit my needs:

In Debian it is nice that after waking up I can directly type in a password and continue typing, but it seems to me that making camera work is a very long trip

In Android I have to swipe the screen all the time it is waking up and then typing the password. I am happy with a password/smart lock, but swiping means that I have to move the fingers to the screen and swipe and back to typing position, which is in my fast-typing scenario an important time loss as I would like to switch the screen off even for some minute of inactivity
habit from HP200LX)..

[graynada]

The function of Smart Lock I would like to see (beside not having to swipe the screen when lock is disabled) would be to allow it to be disabled when connected to WiFi networks the user sets eg home WiFi.  I find the location variant doesn't work for me as I really don't want location on all of the time to satisfy this feature whereas connecting to my home WiFi should be easy to recognise and thus disable the lock.

[zevv]

The function of Smart Lock I would like to see (beside not having to swipe the screen when lock is disabled) would be to allow it to be disabled when connected to WiFi networks the user sets eg home WiFi.  I find the location variant doesn't work for me as I really don't want location on all of the time to satisfy this feature whereas connecting to my home WiFi should be easy to recognise and thus disable the lock.

IIRC Google is not going to implement this: The official reason is that WIFI SSID's are easily spoofed, the real reason is probably that Google rather has you turn on location services for smart lock so they always know where you are - which is of course part of the business model of Google.

[graynada]

The function of Smart Lock I would like to see (beside not having to swipe the screen when lock is disabled) would be to allow it to be disabled when connected to WiFi networks the user sets eg home WiFi.  I find the location variant doesn't work for me as I really don't want location on all of the time to satisfy this feature whereas connecting to my home WiFi should be easy to recognise and thus disable the lock.

IIRC Google is not going to implement this: The official reason is that WIFI SSID's are easily spoofed, the real reason is probably that Google rather has you turn on location services for smart lock so they always know where you are - which is of course part of the business model of Google.

That is all very true of course but the reality is that someone would need to know what SSIDs and/or MAC address disable the screen lock and if this information were protected to the same presumably satisfactory level that what locations are needed to turn it off then surely that argument disappears in a puff of logic?  

[gidds]

allow it to be disabled when connected to WiFi networks the user sets eg home WiFi.

Nice idea.  But in addition to the spoofing issue, I'd guess a more UI-based reason, too:

When waking, it can take several seconds to connect to WiFi; sometimes longer.

If the lock screen appeared during this time, it would always appear — and then vanish a few second later.  If you were in the middle of typing a password, some of those keystrokes could get applied to whichever app was revealed.  — On the other hand, if the lock screen did not appear until it had scanned all the local networks and failed to connect to a suitable one, then you could see and interact with apps until that point, which would be a security risk (and very annoying if the lock screen suddenly appeared in the middle of tapping or typing).

So I don't think it could work as we'd want.

someone would need to know what SSIDs and/or MAC address disable the screen lock

True, but there may be scenarios where those are known.  (For example, a disgruntled ex-employee.)  Even if not, how long would it take to cycle a spoofer through all the short SSIDs?

[gymbo]

In Android I have to swipe the screen all the time it is waking up and then typing the password. I am happy with a password/smart lock, but swiping means that I have to move the fingers to the screen and swipe and back to typing position, which is in my fast-typing scenario an important time loss as I would like to switch the screen off even for some minute of inactivity
habit from HP200LX)..

You should be able to press spacebar to get to the password-screen in Android (sometimes you may need to press it more than once, maybe because the spacebar press is sometimes intercepted by some other process in Android??). So you should not HAVE to swipe first...

[zevv]

You should be able to press spacebar to get to the password-screen in Android

Well, what do you know, problem solved!

[graynada]

If the lock screen appeared during this time, it would always appear — and then vanish a few second later.  If you were in the middle of typing a password, some of those keystrokes could get applied to whichever app was revealed.  — On the other hand, if the lock screen did not appear until it had scanned all the local networks and failed to connect to a suitable one, then you could see and interact with apps until that point, which would be a security risk (and very annoying if the lock screen suddenly appeared in the middle of tapping or typing).
[/qoute]

I get that but there is a 'if connected to a certain Bluetooth device' option too. How does this work in comparison? And could be spoofed too?

I am also assuming a disgruntled employee might know where you live? Plus all of these security reasons are blown in to the water by the fact that you can disable screen lock  with the 'have it on me' mode, ie moving. This needs no technical or insider knowledge to overcome, just the ability to move?

QED WiFi disable would be no less secure than those already on offer?

[tuk0z]

Back in the days there was an Android application that allowed to gain such fine grain control: Llama location control. Dunno if it still works or has been forked?