Live data from Hacker News

LineageOS 23.2

lineageos.org

1–10 of 64 posts

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#5
post #4
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this?

Most modern manufacturers disallow unlocking the bootloader and flashing unsigned firmware, which is a requirement for this kind of thing.

LineageOS isn't unsigned, it just happens to be signed by keys that are not "trusted" (i.e., allowed - thanks for the correction!) by the phone's bootloaders.

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#6
post #5
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most modern manufacturers disallow unlocking the bootloader and flashing unsigned firmware, which is a requirement for this kind of thing.

LineageOS isn't unsigned, it just happens to be signed by keys that are not "trusted" (i.e., allowed - thanks for the correction!) by the phone's bootloaders.

thats effectively the same thing.

The whole point of the majority of PKI (including secureboot) is that some third party agrees that the signature is valid; without that even though its “technically signed” it may as well not be.

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#7
post #6
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LineageOS isn't unsigned, it just happens to be signed by keys that are not "trusted" (i.e., allowed - thanks for the correction!) by the phone's bootloaders.

thats effectively the same thing. The whole point of the majority of PKI (including secureboot) is that some third party agrees that the signature is valid; without that even though its “technically signed” it may as well not be.

I disagree. If LineageOS builds were actually unsigned, I would have no way of verifying that release N was signed by the same private-key-bearing entity that signed release N-1, which I happen to have installed. It could be construed as the effective difference between a Trust On First Use (TOFU) vs. a Certificate Authority (CA) style ecosystem. I hope you can agree that TOFU is worth MUCH more than having no assurance about (continued) authorship at all.

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#8
post #5
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most modern manufacturers disallow unlocking the bootloader and flashing unsigned firmware, which is a requirement for this kind of thing.

LineageOS isn't unsigned, it just happens to be signed by keys that are not "trusted" (i.e., allowed - thanks for the correction!) by the phone's bootloaders.

not allowed is a clearer language here.

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#9

There aren't a lot of recent devices supported.

That's alright though. Recent devices still have manufacturer's support. LOS is a godsend for the older devices, often not as powerful as the new ones, that really need the lightweight, bloat free Android for smooth operation.

Re: LineageOS 23.2

#10
post #7
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats effectively the same thing. The whole point of the majority of PKI (including secureboot) is that some third party agrees that the signature is valid; without that even though its “technically signed” it may as well not be.

I disagree. If LineageOS builds were actually unsigned, I would have no way of verifying that release N was signed by the same private-key-bearing entity that signed release N-1, which I happen to have installed. It could be construed as the effective difference between a Trust On First Use (TOFU) vs. a Certificate Authority (CA) style ecosystem. I hope you can agree that TOFU is worth MUCH more than having no assura…

Yes, I understand the value of signatures, but thats not how PKI works.
Post reply on HN