Skip to content

Enabling backup when the ClientSideEncryption is enabled #68

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mintsoft
Copy link

We can safely permit WireGuard to be backed up if we enforce the clientSideEncryption requirement and maintain the users privacy on the keys.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<full-backup-content>
<include domain="sharedpref" path="." requireFlags="clientSideEncryption" />
<include domain="database" path="." requireFlags="clientSideEncryption" />
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this app use that?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll check, it was part of my default set for <include />

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ android {
namespace = pkg
defaultConfig {
applicationId = pkg
minSdk = 21
minSdk = 23
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this necessary? Can't these just be conditioned on having the right sdk value? clientSideEncryption, for example, is only available in API 28 and higher.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See below, this ensures that client encryption is enforced. Android 5 supports the backup keys, however it doesn't look at the clientSideEncryption setting, so it just ignores it and backs up anyway, which I think is undesirable behaviour.

<full-backup-content>
<include domain="sharedpref" path="." requireFlags="clientSideEncryption" />
<include domain="database" path="." requireFlags="clientSideEncryption" />
<include domain="file" path="." requireFlags="clientSideEncryption" />
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we also want the deviceToDeviceTransfer requirement?

Copy link
Author

@mintsoft mintsoft Jun 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That would prevent anything seedvault-y (i.e. my nightly backups) from backing up the app; defeating the purpose imo.

@@ -37,7 +37,8 @@

<application
android:name=".Application"
android:allowBackup="false"
android:allowBackup="true"
android:fullBackupContent="@xml/backup"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This only works for API ≤30. For API ≥31, you need android:dataExtractionRules and a different file. See https://developer.android.com/identity/data/autobackup for details.

@zx2c4
Copy link
Member

zx2c4 commented May 7, 2025

I left some comments on here. How safe is this clientSideEncryption and deviceToDeviceTransfer business? Can these be abused? Is this something we want on by default?

@mintsoft
Copy link
Author

mintsoft commented Jun 1, 2025

I left some comments on here. How safe is this clientSideEncryption and deviceToDeviceTransfer business? Can these be abused? Is this something we want on by default?

The way this is configured, Android won't backup without clientSideEncryption being enabled, part of the reason for the bumping the SDK version is so you can force android to only provide protected backups (I've got some testing here from a different PR: https://codeberg.org/Freeyourgadget/Gadgetbridge/pulls/4123#issuecomment-2347840).

The deviceToDeviceTransfer only applies in the situation where the user has unlocked 2 android phones, directly connected them and run the device transfer wizard; I've had a look I've not seen situation where this can be abused.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants