[wutwutwat]

The £60 burner sounds like a leader on the device security front. No way it could possibly be running an ancient version of android that is no longer getting security patches, or is hacked up to shit by the device manufacture to reskin it and install their vulnerable suite of bloatware, or built off of a base os and firmware flocked to by folks for its ease of being able to gain root access/root it and run whatever you want at the kernel level.

[maccard]

There’s no guarantee your $1000 flagship isn’t doing that either.

I chose it because it’s a mainstream provider (Nokia) readily available running a supported version of android (12).

If you want to install a custom rom, you can get an older flagship (galaxy s9) and flash it for about the same price.

My point is if your threat model is devices seized at border, then a burner phone is far more suitable for you than a reboot.

[wutwutwat]

levels of trust. I have more trust in the largest most heavily scrutinized device manufacture making an attempt at security than I do with a rando burner device reseller. To be clear, I don't trust either fully, but one has way less trust than the other

[avianlyric]

The whole point of a burner is that you don’t trust it. You only store what you absolutely need to store on there, if anything, and basically assume it’s compromised the second it leaves your sight.

The advantage of a burner phone is that it can’t contain anything important, because you’ve never put anything important on it, or connected it to any system that contains important data. So it doesn’t really matter if it’s compromised, because the whole point of a burner, is that it’s so unimportant you can burn it the moment it so much as looks at you funny.

[wutwutwat]

Something a lot of people don't really consider is that people who are doing things that could get them unwanted attention, they wouldn't have incriminating evidence on any device, burner or otherwise. So the theoretical ways around not getting busted, like using a burner, are for movie villains and bond type secret agents. Real criminals (smart ones anyway) aren't conducting anything important over any network, be it ip, telephony, morse code, smoke signal, or otherwise, regardless of the burn-ability of the device they would be using to do so

[maccard]

That’s why I chose a low end mass market smartphone as my example.

My wife works for the government in a low level role that involves some amount of travel to local authorities (other major areas in Scotland). She has a phone, and strict instructions to never carry it across the border ofmany countries (as a blanket policy). They’re told they’ll be provided a device for travelling and not to install any work apps on it. It’s basic security - don’t travel with information that you can lose control over.

[maccard]

The £60 burner isn’t a rando reseller of a shitty no name phone, it’s one of the largest phone retailers in the Uk selling a low end android device that’s fully supported. So you have that option. If you want a brand new different device you have the option too, but it’ll cost you more.

If your threat model is “I think my provider and a nation state are colluding to target me” you probably wouldn’t be posting on HN about it.

[kshacker]

It could be doing all that actually but you are not obliged to install all your apps on the burner, just the basic minimum.

[wutwutwat]

You're still walking around with a microphone and gps tracker connected to a cellular network even if the only thing you do is power it on

[brewdad]

If that's your threat model, don't carry ANY phone. Probably best not to carry any modern electronic device at all.

[wutwutwat]

Real criminals who don't want to be caught don't carry phones for this exact reason.

[colimbarna]

Sometimes the alternative blows up in your face though.

[kshacker]

Too soon

[maccard]

You’re worried about this with your original phone too, right? That has nothing to do with being a burner.