Hardening the OS is not enough. As the infamous Intel ME taught us in a different context, unless one uses only 100% open hardware, security cannot be guaranteed by software.
We need open (documented, reproducible) hardware rather than alternative OSes; until that day security on current platforms is to be considered a myth.
Review: Copperhead OS
141–150 of 162 posts
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#142The article mentions launchers; all the launchers in the app store seem sketchy. Does anyone know of a good Open Source launcher, maybe a version of the AOSP launcher compiled for current Android? I'd love to have something that reclaims the pile of space (thumb-reachable space even) devoted to the Google search bar that now stays on the bottom of the main screen all the time.
KISS. I love it. It's a input bar. You get the history when you click on it. It's common to find whatever you want to do here. You also get favorite apps bar. You can search contacts, wikipedia, shortcuts (awesome with http post shortcuts or chrome webpages shortcuts). Contacts have a sms/call button on the side and they also appear on the history list. I use it on all my phones. It's lightweight, open source and hal…
Tried that one, but I do actually want widgets and a home screen.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Builds are only available for free for Nexus devices, though -- if you want to install it on a Pixel, you have to either build from source or pay up.
This is true, but building from source isn't very hard. (I also don't care for the Pixel -- I have no desire to upgrade from my Nexus 6 and recommend it to others seeking a de-Googled phone.)
I had a nexus 6 for 2 years. Just replaced it last month with an iPhone 8+. My experience with the nexus was horrible and I will never buy another android phone. The quality of the hardware is just abysmal. I hope the iPhone proves itself better.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#144In the post the author complains about the lack of a VM inside current phones to run Google instances in it. I believe BB10 had that feat to overcome the limits of its native app ecosystem. My old Passport nowadays could almost reach the objectives of the author. Too bad due to licensing the Android kernel is stuck on 4.3
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sometimes I am wondering what Google employees think when they read headlines like this one. Hello Google employee here! I suspect we don't all have the same opinion but I can share my own since you asked. Note that I work in Cloud so I work in an area far far away from this stuff and opinions are obviously my own. Frankly the headline makes me a little bit sad because of course I would like to make things which pe…
You might be a Google employee, but you do not seem to be an Open source proponent. That's you prerogative, but you completely miss the point of the discussion if you ask why should users want to be independent from proprietary services. Sure, 99% don't want that and would click any colored and shiny button if it promises them a free Justin Bieber ringtone, but this is not the topic of the thread.
There doesn't seem to be any point to this discussion for GP to miss because the premise was plainly incorrect. As multiple people have pointed out, Android itself is completely independent from proprietary services. If you buy a Google-flavored Android device (which is a spectrum itself), your device will come with proprietary services on it. That doesn't mean you have to use them, nor does it mean you have to have a Google-flavored Android build. You're free to use apps that use Pushy or some other third party push messaging service, OpenStreetMap or some other map provider, Bing or some other search provider, Fastmail or some other mail provider, etc.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copperhead uses Grsecurity, and I used to use Grsecurity, when it was widely available, now that it's not and the developer has decided to act in hostile ways to the Linux community(1), it's made me rethink using his work and/or supporting him. Plenty of consultants make do fine without resorting to closing off their source code, and decide to act better with the community and/or companies. (1) https://www.theregiste…
CopperheadOS doesn't use grsecurity anymore afaik. https://twitter.com/CopperheadOS/status/933684025624993792
Actually, copperhead itself is sort of loosely following grsec's model, which is rather unfortunate. Their licences, where required will be GPL or compatible with upstream, but otherwise copperheadOS itself is not FOSS. I kind of get that it's hard to make money in such projects, but I really don't see how this strategy works for them, unless the goal is just to be bought out by someone.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would your solution improve on current one, where apps are sandboxed by the permissions system and communicate via Binder which is also RPC based? You just added bunch of layers to architecture for no reason - none of serious Android exploits in years would be mitigated by your approach.
> You just added bunch of layers to architecture for no reason The sandbox doesn't do the isolation that docker can. It uses user isolation like I mentioned. The difference is that Binder is Java on top of the kernel, while docker is isolating from the kernel itself. Without access to the service, it is impossible, sans-kernel-exploit, to escape the permissions jail, or even tell if you are in a permissions jail if s…
Sure, but none of serious Android exploits had anything to do with escaping from the sandbox. They were mostly in driver and HW acceleration layers, which can't be sandboxed due to performance and DRM reasons.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain how 2.) follows from 1.) ? Or at least how exactly has Google incentive to keep Android insecure (especially in terms of all the security research/hardening being done by internal teams, both for Android and iOS)?
They're seperate. Bad security follows from both. For one, too little privacy is profitable for a company selling or matching against profiles obtained from surveilling their users' activities. On 2, redoing Android security or just handling it better would cost more for Google even though the problems are externalities: they cost the users, not Google. For-profit, public comoanies ignore externalities as much as pos…
You're deliberately ignoring the constant security updates and patches Google is pushing, both monthly (https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/) and as part of OS updates: (https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/12/double-stu...).
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Created an account to share this, as it seems not many people know... You can use an AOSP such as lineage, or carbon. There are quite a few options. Then, use fdroid and a play store alternative. You DO NOT need the google play services, such as microgapps, or opengapps. Even to use Google Maps! I use google maps by downloading maps anonymously with the Yalp store, and then I don't sign in. I don't have the so called…
Well, Fdroid is great and with the automatic upgrade extension (totally optional) really easy to use. But using an Android without access to the Play Store is just kinda weird. So yes, you can remove Google completely from your smartphone, but then many things are getting much more complicated. So I don't want to remove Google completely from my phone. I just want to have easy options to turn things off I do not like…
> So yes, you can remove Google completely from your smartphone, but then many things are getting much more complicated.
> I just wish Google would respect their users wishes a little more [...] I just want to have easy options to turn things off I do not like.
This is not how things work in reality. People/corporations don't do what you want just because you're wishing it. If you are unwilling to tolerate a little bit of discomfort why should they tolerate the risk of changing their practices which have been proven to work? By continuing to buy Android devices, despite your complaints, you are, in fact, providing them with the opposite incentive.
Re: Review: Copperhead OS
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this still require you to essentially nerf application signing in order to spoof some google play crap? If so, that's really not a viable solution.
The newer version of signature spoofing patch (included in microG's LineageOS fork) allows you to control the spoofing and make sure that it's only used when necessary and permitted, so I'd say the answer is "no".
IIRC all the spoofing patches required a special app permission to spoof.