671–680 of 927 posts
I've resigned to the fact that I'll need to use two phones, one with locked down Android/iOS for banking applications and government services (those require strong bank ID around these parts), another with some kind of a Linux or unlocked Android for literally everything else. Oh well, such is life, most people don't care enough about this to pressure Google/Apple/banks/governments into yielding. A big reason why a n…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't seen new data from celbrite in awhile, but I believe that grapheneos was the only truly secure phone from it for both bfu and afu as of a couple years ago. Apple lost my confidence after they removed Advanced Device Encryption for British users (plus implemented age verification for them). https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14344-cellebrite-premium-ju...
I think it's been said that nobody has yet cracked Apple's Lockdown Mode, but that's likely not truly comparable?
https://support.apple.com/en-ca/105120
You're thinking of Apple saying they haven't detected a case of a device with Lockdown Mode exploited in the wild themselves. Extremely few devices use Lockdown Mode and Apple has very little insight into successful exploits so there isn't much opportunity for them to detect it in the first place. Lockdown Mode bundles everything together and has very inconvenient changes many people won't accept. That greatly reduces usage even by people fully aware of it who want a lot of what it provides. For example, there's
Apple has said they haven't seen a case of a device with Lockdown Mode being exploited which is extremely misleading. Apple doesn't have that much visibility into devices being exploited and would mostly seen failed attempts. All of the Lockdown Mode functionality being bundled together contributes to it barely being used. There's no opt-out system for most of it beyond disabling it as a whole. Only a subset of the Safari restrictions can be partially disabled per-app and per-site which doesn't fully restore web compatibility. It's more that hardly anyone is using it and that Apple doesn't have much insight into apps and the OS being exploited successfully in the first place. Lockdown Mode is definitely useful but people should read about what it actually does and compare that to how devices get exploited. Apple's memory corruption exploit protections aren't tied to Lockdown Mode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's been said that nobody has yet cracked Apple's Lockdown Mode, but that's likely not truly comparable?
How is then law enforcement getting what they need from people's iphones? Because I understand they do, in some way. And I'm not asking about forcing people to hand over pin or fingerprints, but just by themselves.
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/Xcode/enabling-enh...
Someone here on HN used the term "cloud terminal" for modern electronic devices, and I think that is a very fitting name for phones and tablets. They are definitely not computers because they do not actually give the user access to general purpose computing in the sense that the users can control exactly what computations the device is going to execute. They are just terminals whose production costs we cover but whic…
IDK, not really a fan of redefining computer to make a rhetorical point. It seems counter-productive to tell people the computing device they think as a computer isn’t really a computer. It’s like saying my car isn’t really a car because I can’t adjust spark timing. Someone could make that semantic argument but it’s hard to imagine anyone would care.
What if it only drives along select predetermined monetised routes?
Let me play out a scenario, imagine to use a Desktop Hardware like a complete built rig, you would need a specific OS like Windows 11 and you could not run Linux on it, just because it's a vendor lock-in. Why is this acceptable for phones but would not for the case above? I know a lot of people don't care, and that's ok, but we should root for an open choice for the users.
So you mean, Macs and macOS? All modern devices are appliances, not computers. They perform the specific functions that they were programmed to perform, and do not allow arbitrary execution of calculations on the underlying hardware. Many people, mostly folks who adopt the Apple ecosystem, see this as a positive thing that allows them to delegate undifferentiated decisions on security and ways of working to the vendo…
Why? And how does that bother you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if they don't give you an apple dev account, or close yours, you can't. Case in point.
Did you just move the goalposts from “you can’t run arbitrary code today” to “hypothetically, in the future, Apple could prevent running arbitrary code”?
> Apple has locked my Apple ID, and I have no recourse. A plea for help* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46252114
> Apple bans entire dev account, no reason given https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44601548
> "dismiss more scare screens" This whole website is a scare screen. There's a lot that is not being said on this page, such as the advantages of the new system, and the motivations of the authors of this site. There's a reasonable discussion to be had about trade-offs here, but this is entirely one sided, in somewhat bad faith in my personal opinion.
The point of "keepandroidopen.org", in my understanding, is to be a quick PSA on why the author of the website thinks this is a problem with some call-to-action. It's not supposed to be a place for discussion, it's at best a discussion starter, one of the sides of the discussion to consider. Obviously they present their side, as Google has presented their side.
And anyway, how are users supposed to hold this "reasonable discussion" with a corporation? I know that Google had some sort a feedback form about this, and that they made some changes, but that is not a discussion. I didn't really actually see any "reasonable discussion" being held on this topic ever, anywhere, ever, nor do I really see how it would happen. I don't even really see a good reason for Google to hold such a discussion. It's a decision made by a corporation, about their product, after all.
Could you present your how you see this "reasonable discussion" being had? Where? How?
> Starting September 2026, a silent update, nonconsensually pushed by Google, will block every Android app whose developer hasn't registered with Google, signed their contract, paid up, and handed over government ID. This is false. Google will provide two other flows for app distribution that are different than this. > Every app and every device, worldwide, with no opt-out. Again, false. There is an opt-out called th…