-2

Other stack subforum recommended me to post it here (it will be deleted there, but why not simply move?). I do post it with full commentary. Text below.

Factory memory on phone got infected. Erase everything options even stopped working! It just does not show anymore.

I looked into and looks like I have got "com.sailer.coolbrowser", which later installed Triada trojan.

When I tried ADB, It cannot do anything against process "com.sailer.coolbrowser" because it does not have permissions.

After I noticed this infection, I have tried few rooters - none of them works, because Android 4.4 is patched against rooting after 4.2 got rooted.

Can I file court complaint against Google company violating my rights to access what I have bought? It denies my basic consumer rights to do whatever I want with my device while selling viruses and trojans.

Antiviruses do not work because Triada sits in system memory.

I did nothing wrong with my phone before that. Looks like Google infected their Store to steal money from users.

I know in Russia already been a precedent when Google got court penalties, I want to get my money from Google and compensation for lost efforts to heal that device.

It is GPLv2 linux kernel which is used by tivoization, I want to appeal to court and get compensation for violation of license, which violated my consumer rights to modify linux kernel and corresponding processes.

External links: http://www.kaspersky.com/about/news/virus/2016/Kaspersky-Lab-Discovers-Triada http://www.reuters.com/article/us-alphabet-google-russia-court-idUSKCN0WG0OS

PS. As user with expirience since CM64 era, I have no doubts that Google steals money from users via Triada. I cannot prove anything, because Linux technology is used for that. But that level of sophistication is impossible without help of Linux developers which work with Linux 24/7. I highly doubt that such specialists could work somewhere outside of Google. If they work outside of Google, they must be working for Kaspersky or Amazon, or something else like that providing their works legally.

Ideal scheme for that cybercriminals would be: hardware plants including hardware backdoors -> selling this to factory setted trojans -> they sell this to Triada network. China->Trojans->Google. Ideal Heist of Century.

PS2. I used only Official Google store apps. After infection I used APKs from www to root my phone (disconnected from www) - not worked.

==========

Commentary after it was posted on Android subforum (could bring more clarity).

Why do you think it's Google doing? Cool Browser is known malware and I don't think Google deliberately install it. Worst case, you got your device compromised in the first place. Take note that there are many Android devices that are not licensed by Google. "Looks like Google infected their Store to steal money from users", no, Google is not that stupid. We are not lawyers, we can't provide legal advice on here. If you're really interested in that, probably Law could help (note: probably). – Andrew T. 9 hours ago

Does it even matter is Android licensed or not, because it is Google's fault to deny my consumer rights in first place. I am not allowed to remove virus from phone, like really? I did not use any applications outside of Google Store. There could be errors in hardware which got exploited, and that local phone software company could do nothing about. – sanaris 9 hours ago

@sanaris You do know the difference between hardware and software, I hope. If you say that something is hardware-dependent, it means that it's your phone manufacturer's fault, obviously. Then again, you've zero proof of what you're saying. This counts as mere speculation, and speculation has no value in court. Third: Linux is extremely open - hence the term Open Source, which means that you could go see its coding by yourself. Fourth: any Android out there can be rooted, almost as any person has a weak point, so you're totally misinformed. – Death Mask Salesman 8 hours ago

@DeathMaskSalesman You can connect your phone to computer via USB developer console, log in with ADB and see for yourself that you unable to change virus process, that means that GPL is violated, I am not allowed to change what runs on my device. – sanaris 7 hours ago

@sanaris Since your phone manufacturer may customize their ROM and close its source, the ROM itself is most likely protected by copyright. Besides, there are ways to decompile an Android app, such as ApkTool, so you can follow that path, if you want to know a closed source app's inner workings. – Death Mask Salesman 7 hours ago

@DeathMaskSalesman So it basically requires to break other licenses to get things worked instead or getting compensated for license break by Google when they used linux without my permission to modify it or remove programs from phone. I am not allowed to kill or remove that virus. As I understand that was intention of Google to infect phones. I connected to developer console and there is no way to change virus process. That could not be possible without hidden knowledge about linux which is partly owned by Google. – sanaris 7 hours ago

closed as unclear what you're asking by BlueDogRanch, Dale M, user6726, user3851, Pat W. Mar 21 '16 at 13:15

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    I'm trying to extract the legal question... Is it: "Can I sue the manufacturer of an OS because I am unable to root my device?" – user3851 Mar 21 '16 at 0:27
  • Probably not since the experts say that every Android can be rooted. Maybe, alleged negligence in distributing allegedly infected software. – user6726 Mar 21 '16 at 1:33
2

Since the claims seem to be that (1) Google's intention was to infect phones with malware to extort money from its users and (2) Google is required by law to allow you to do whatever you want, I will save you some money and say that you probably don't have a snowball's chance in hell. You haven't provided a jurisdiction, but I am still fairly confident in this conclusion based on the following grounds.

  1. The law makes judgements, unless it can be proven otherwise, based on the objective intention ascertainable by the reasonable person, or else by someone with knowledge of the area.

    It is unlikely that a reasonable person would conclude, based on your suppositions (which you provide no evidence for) that Google's intention was to infect phones with malware to extort money from its users.

    Ideal scheme for that cybercriminals would be: hardware plants including hardware backdoors -> selling this to factory setted trojans -> they sell this to Triada network. China->Trojans->Google. Ideal Heist of Century.

    If you have evidence for this, get a lawyer and get to argue the case in court. But just advancing a possible scenario isn't enough in any court.

  2. You are not automatically entitled to be able to manipulate your device in anyway you choose, and even when you are, you forfeit certain statutory protections.

    For instance, you don't have the right to decompile software if you have agreed to terms stating that you won't.

    As has been pointed out, depending on your device, it may include non-open software (manufacturer "skins") and so you don't automatically get the right (in most jurisdictions - again, you haven't provided one) to do anything you want to it.

  3. Specifically, the GPL carves out exceptions where the Work can be considered independent of the GPL-licensed work and where the GPL would not apply:

    If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.

    I'm not aware of cases that have tested this in relation to Android's operating system but this alone should be enough to give you doubt in your second claim.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.