Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FSF announces Librephone project

fsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 669 posts

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#161

Post by LoganDark »

scheeseman486 wrote: post #114
hedora wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one solution to this problem that many people reading this message can contribute to: Make sure your app has a progressive web app version that has feature parity with the store apps. That way, the app will work on phones like the librephone, and, if Apple or Google decide to kick you off the store, you and your users have some recourse. As a bonus, it’s compatible with open source — users can modify the app…

This won't help if Google/Apple/Microsoft roll out integrity checks for browsers, something which they have already suggested they want to do.

It's something they've already done, they just aren't being public about it yet. Look up the X-Browser-Validation header.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#162

Post by drnick1 »

ipaddr wrote: post #50
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #4

Ultimately, I don't think the most important challenge is in binary firmware blobs, but the software which people depend upon to run their lives. What does it matter if you can run a completely free software stack on your phone, if your bank software (or your required government ID, as is looking depressingly likely) requires you to run a Big Tech approved phone OS? Perhaps the FSF can't do much about that, but that…

Get a big tech second phone. Cheapest available. Just perform the needed tasks and use your Libre phone for everything else. Does anyone remember having a copy of internet explorer that the bank required (or chrome these days) but using firefox for everything else? Apply that concept to a phone.

For people without a viable alternative such as transferring their funds to a bank that does not require Google/Apple certified devices, this seems to be the way. The second phone does not even need to have a SIM card in it, except perhaps during set up. That phone does not leave home and is ideally be powered off with its battery removed when not in use. Everything else can be done on a free device, ideally using FOSS apps. Ideally again, this means no Facebook, no Whatsapp, no IoT crapware.

Luckily, here in the U.S. this is still possible. I run Graphene on a Pixel without Play Store compatibility layer and everything just works. Most of my apps come from F-Droid, with the notable exception of Whatsapp, for which a standalone APK is available. Unfortunately, it is proving difficult to get rid of Whatsapp entirely because of friends and family.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#163

Post by kube-system »

bouncycastle wrote: post #148
kube-system wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the big barrier here, and unfortunately, it is legally impossible to open source. In most countries, the spectrum that cell phone carriers use is licensed to the carrier, under the condition they only connect devices that are guaranteed to comply with the requirements of using that spectrum. The end user (i.e. the person with the phone) has no license to use the spectrum. So in order to get regulatory certifi…

this is the same thing with wifi. There are different channels and transmission power rules depending on country. Something you cannot change even if you are root or build your own kernel, as it's built in to the wifi hardware (eg. raspberry pi)

Part 15 is a lot more permissive, and it's unlicensed. But yeah, the device still has to be part 15 certified.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#164

Post by seba_dos1 »

vfclists wrote: post #140

Looks like we will have to wait forever. I can't take these jokers seriously. Years after mobile phones came onto the market they are now planning to create their own phone.

Not sure, but perhaps it could be somewhat easier to take them seriously if you had actually clicked on the link instead of living in an alternate reality where it's about "planning to create their own phone".

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#165

Post by drnick1 »

kube-system wrote: post #7
bombcar wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really NEED to be forced to attest if you can make your phone look like any damn PC using a browser?

I can’t tap my PC to buy a burrito at Chipotle.

You seem to be part of the problem. As long as people like you are happy to run spyware on their phones for the sake of convenience or a meager discount, companies will be empowered to make such software and devices a requirement.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#166

Post by Barbing »

mikestorrent wrote: post #135
scheeseman486 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This won't help if Google/Apple/Microsoft roll out integrity checks for browsers, something which they have already suggested they want to do.

It won't just be them. I foresee Cloudflare and other CDNs offering a free checkbox: [] Require age of majority verified user And it will in turn depend on Secure Attestation, Web Credentials, and other recent W3C work to provide proof that you're the registered owner, age of majority and verified by thumbprint or other biometrics, running an unmodified device. Your ID might be escrowed with your OS vendor, email pro…

You’re probably 100% right and it’s honestly heartbreaking.

Time to donate to the EFF and FSF I guess…

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#167

Post by Arainach »

munchlax wrote: post #109
hnuser123456 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I feel like it undermines any effort to make free, featureful applications if the hardware itself can't be trusted.

You can trust hardware and software that's easy to inspect. If you can't be sure what's going on and unable to inspect or debug the hardware and software, how can you trust it's doing what you want? Proprietary hardware and software is already known to work against the interests of the user. Not knowing exactly what's going on is being taken advantage of at large scale. Let's put it this way: if you can choose betwee…

No software is "easy to inspect". Only a tiny fraction of users will ever even try. When things are inspected and problems are found, you need a way to revoke the malicious bits. You'll never notify everyone, which is one of the roles app stores play.

You trust hardware and software by establishing boundaries. We figured this out long ago with the kernel mode/user mode privilege check and other things. You want apps to be heavily locked down/sandboxed, and you want the OS to enforce it, but every time you do you go up against the principles of open source absolutists like the FSF. "What do you mean my app can't dig into the storage layer and read the raw image files? So what if apps could use that to leak user location data, I need that ability so I can tell if it's a picture of a bird"

For sensitive information - such as financial transactions - the rewards for bad actors are simply too high to trust any device which has been rooted. The banks - who are generally on the hook if something goes wrong, or at least have to pay a lot of lawyers to get off the hook - are not interested in moral arguments, they want a risk-reduced environment or no app for you - as is their right.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#168

Post by dotancohen »

thedumbname wrote: post #145
hedora wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one solution to this problem that many people reading this message can contribute to: Make sure your app has a progressive web app version that has feature parity with the store apps. That way, the app will work on phones like the librephone, and, if Apple or Google decide to kick you off the store, you and your users have some recourse. As a bonus, it’s compatible with open source — users can modify the app…

You are mixed up 3 different tech stacks: 1. React Native has nothing in common with web apps except JS runtime. It uses "native" widgets for Android and iOS. You need to add a new "native" runtime for your free OS. There are some third-party attempts to add mac/win/linux support, but they are not feature complete as officially supported platforms. Again, your free OS will be step behind. 2. Yes, you can write PWA wi…

What does a banking app need that a PWA can not provide?

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#169

Post by [deleted] »

criddell wrote: post #123
le-mark wrote: post #3

> Practically, Librephone aims to close the last gaps between existing distributions of the Android operating system and software freedom. The FSF has hired experienced developer Rob Savoye (DejaGNU, Gnash, OpenStreetMap, and more) to lead the technical project. He is currently investigating the state of device firmware and binary blobs in other mobile phone freedom projects, prioritizing the free software work done…

The time is right, but I still don’t think this project can accomplish much because people are generally happy with their phones. That said, the phone market is huge. They could sell enough devices to fund future development which might be good enough even if it doesn’t slow down Apple or Google. At least then there will be a device for those of us who are not happy with the state of things.

[deleted]

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#170

Post by drnick1 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #26
bsimpson wrote: post #11

Interesting that they chose Android as a base and not one of the desktop-Linux-for-mobile ports like postmarketOS.

It's an incredible waste and an amazing example of how useless the FSF is today. Instead of supporting real Linux phones they're focusing on trying to degunk Android even more.

I think that supporting Android as a free platform is a sensible choice. Android has benefited from more than a decade of development by Google, Samsung, and others and provides a polished experience and thousands of apps people actually want to use (and many excellent FOSS options too). AOSP is already "free software" and starting from scratch with Linux would make very little sense at this point. The FSF is right to focus on what matters here, which is hardware on which to run free Android.
Post reply on HN