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

F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

f-droid.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 160 posts

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#51

Post by izacus »

tjpnz wrote: post #44
microtonal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Sadly the reality is that most other Android devices are simply not secure enough. Many Android phones do not have a separate secure enclave (outside Pixel and IISC Samsung flagship and A5x range), so they are vulnerable to breaking PIN-based unlocking, side channel attacks, etc. Besides that they often only provide old vendor kernel trees, old firmware blobs, etc. So, you have to wonder whether you want such…

Every GrapheneOS proponent I've seen has claimed that other devices are inferior to Pixel security wise, and that's why they're not supported. That always sounded a bit odd to me and certainly seems to have a bit more nuance based on your comment. Thank you for adding some clarity here.

There's really nothing odd that company that runs Project Zero also builds devices that are well secured.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#52

Post by thewebguyd »

saintfire wrote: post #32
microtonal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Sadly the reality is that most other Android devices are simply not secure enough. Many Android phones do not have a separate secure enclave (outside Pixel and IISC Samsung flagship and A5x range), so they are vulnerable to breaking PIN-based unlocking, side channel attacks, etc. Besides that they often only provide old vendor kernel trees, old firmware blobs, etc. So, you have to wonder whether you want such…

Reduced security has always annoyed me a bit as an argument. Sort of in the same way as signal deprecating SMS because it's insecure. I get all or nothing when your threat model is state actors. However, for most people, the benefit is just freedom from corporate agendas. Not everyone needs kernel hardening, or always E2EE (as with signal). Personally I just like the features it provides (e.g. scoped storage, disabli…

> I get all or nothing when your threat model is state actors.

The problem for those of us in the USA, that labels anyone who disagrees with the current administration and ICE as a domestic terrorist, means that now everyone's threat model is a state actor.

The threat model of every citizen that dares to exercise their first amendment rights now escalated beyond corporate agendas to "How do I make sure Israeli & Palantir spyware doesn't end up on my phone? How do I make sure if my phone does get confiscated, Cellebrite can't image it or access the data?"

Even if that weren't the case, I see no valid reason to be lax with security in 2026. There's no excuse anymore, I mean we still have OEMs selling phones that they do not issue security updates for after purchase. That's just gross negligence.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#53

Post by bentley »

Were any of the current directors or new nominees involved in the incident where F-Droid marked Bible and Quran apps as NSFW, hid them from search by default, and expressed the intent to remove them completely (https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/252#note_2578531026)? (Discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45638096)

If I’m charitable, I could assume they intended to make a controversial move to drive public attention to the growing government restrictions on innocuous apps. As far as I know, though, nobody at F-Droid admitted to this; and if they were, why didn’t they mark other widely used apps like Wikipedia and Reddit frontends that provide easy access to much more sexually explicit content in the same protest?

If I’m less charitable, and go by what F-Droid admins actually said, they took this action out of a sincere belief that these apps contained content unsafe for minors that necessitated flagging, and sincerely believed that Wikipedia and Reddit frontends somehow don’t qualify for the same. If they honestly believed this, it demonstrates (to me) poor judgment; and since the action was walked back almost immediately due to negative public response, that indicates further that they never actually believed this in the first place, and that instead somebody took it upon himself to specifically target religious apps out of his own bias.

Either way, it really soured me on the judgment of the F-Droid maintainers. After a stunt like that, I no longer trust them to fight the battle against oppressive government restrictions on operating systems effectively. Formerly an F-Droid user of many years, this caused me to switch away completely: I’ve started donating monthly to Accrescent instead, download as many apps as I can from there, and switched from F-Droid to Obtanium for any apps not yet on Accrescent.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#54

Post by hypercube33 »

miroljub wrote: post #16
microtonal wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with Google's changes, F-Droid will continue to work with Android phones that do not use Google GMS. If you care about your actually owning your device, install something else than stock OS. I would recommend GrapheneOS, since the security of some/most other alternatives is pretty bad.

GrapheneOS works only with Pixel devices, which doesn't make it much useful for the vast majority of Android users.

Huge opportunity for Lenovo/Motorola here who have been the quiet Linux favorite for a while but we shall see if they even bother.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#55

Post by wizzwizz4 »

duozerk wrote: post #25
kgwxd wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you not setup your work email through a regular email client? I thought the days of being locked into Outlook specifically went away with Exchange. Everywhere I've worked since has been able to. Also, what kind of banking are people doing that requires an app? I genuinely don't know what it could be.

> Also, what kind of banking are people doing that requires an app? I genuinely don't know what it could be. Close to every bank in the EU requires their user to have an app, for MFA (both for logging in and for validating transactions - transfers, payments). They use the smartphone's TPM. I have yet to see one that allows you to use your own MFA app. The few I've seen that don't require it will validate the same thr…

> though if you associate their app even once, you're screwed

Can you go in branch and get that fixed?

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#56

Post by CivBase »

microtonal wrote: post #45
CivBase wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if the Linux project had this same mentality. Thank goodness they don't.

Imagine if Apple had this same mentality, they would never be where they are. (/s in case it is needed.) As a smaller project, choosing a small set of hardware and supporting it really well (aside from security reasons) seems like a much better strategy than supporting tens of devices badly (go to e.g. the /e/OS forums to see what regressions people are dealing with after monthly updates).

Indeed. Apple is financially successful, but they're ultimately a minority player in pretty much every market they engage with - including desktop/laptop computers and even mobile devices globally. And for me they are just as inaccessible as GraphineOS.

But for Apple that is not necessarily a bad thing. They're a company. Their goal is to make money and they are highly successful at it. GraphineOS is not a company. They don't make money. Which begs the question of what is GraphineOS's real goal and is it valuable? Creating a maximally secure mobile OS seems valuable on its face, but that value is undercut by its inaccessibility.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#57

Post by fsflover »

izacus wrote: post #51
tjpnz wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every GrapheneOS proponent I've seen has claimed that other devices are inferior to Pixel security wise, and that's why they're not supported. That always sounded a bit odd to me and certainly seems to have a bit more nuance based on your comment. Thank you for adding some clarity here.

There's really nothing odd that company that runs Project Zero also builds devices that are well secured.

Qubes OS, operating system designed for security, doesn't prevent its installation on computers without VT-d. It will just warn you.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#58

Post by fsflover »

pmontra wrote: post #33
ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people need banking on their phones though? Banks have websites too.

This is asked again and again. Apparently you guys in the USA or in other parts of the world are still lucky, but in Europe banks must be compliant with regulation that more or less force them to do 2FA through their app with the biometric authentication of either an Android or an iOS phone. There are other ways (eg giving a hardware OTP generator to customers,) but apps are the cheapest solution.

You can still find banks in Europe that do not force Google and Apple on you. They may ask you to use their own security devices for instance.

Re: F-Droid Board of Directors nominations 2026

#60

Post by 9864247888754 »

bentley wrote: post #53

Were any of the current directors or new nominees involved in the incident where F-Droid marked Bible and Quran apps as NSFW, hid them from search by default, and expressed the intent to remove them completely ( https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/252#note_2578531026 )? (Discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45638096 ) If I’m charitable, I could assume they intended to make a controversial move t…

She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey’s and emissions like those of a horse. 21 And so, Oholibah, you relived your former days as a young girl in Egypt, when you first allowed your breasts to be fondled.

Ezekiel 23:20

Post reply on HN