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

Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

discuss.grapheneos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 497 posts

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#281

Post by iamnothere »

this_user wrote: post #90
moooo99 wrote: post #70

It is amazing how Volkswagen keeps messing up. I am currently in the market for a new car, an EV specifically. Volkswagen brands were at the top of my list for many reasons, among them the excellent driving assist implementation. I got an offer from a dealer three weeks ago and was going to order the car, then the API for the community integration got turned off. I decided to hold back and see what comes from it. Now…

German companies, especially old school industrial ones like VW, have a very hard time understanding open platforms. The view everything through the lense of liability and compliance first. Their thinking is that if someone runs their app on a custom ROM and uses that to manipulate the app in any way, and that causes some extremely hypothetical damage, that they might be held liable for not having prevented this situ…

I wonder if they would be ok with letting users sign a waiver to gain unrestricted API access.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#282

Post by tryauuum »

Borealid wrote: post #224
tryauuum wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like in Russia - drop wireguard / OpenVPN packets crossing the country border - analyze https traffic to detect traffic patterns not matching https fully and block such connections

The state of the art, "xray-reality", is not blockable. It's a legit tls connection with data smuggled inside it.

Are you taking from the experience that this is not blockeable in Russia?

EDIT: I might be confusing vless/xray/reality but seems like there are no problems to block it based on ip reputation + tls fingerprint + amount of connections https://habr.com/ru/articles/1044396/

Of course this would block some valid websites but when has government cared about that

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#283

Post by gene91 »

martinpw wrote: post #263
iroddis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably made worse by the fact that _every_ VW brand car I’ve driven has read about 10% high on the speedometer. I think I’m going 100 kph, but timing using the km markers on the highway show I’m going about 90. When I talked to the dealers, they said that the speedometers only have to be accurate +/- 10% according to the SAE specifications. After DieselGate I assumed that the high reading was to game the fuel consu…

> When I talked to the dealers, they said that the speedometers only have to be accurate +/- 10% according to the SAE specifications. I believe the requirement is only one way - they can read high by a certain % but they cannot read low. Which makes sense. But that means in reality they will usually read a little high.

Wow TIL. I have observed that my rental cars in Europe all have faulty speedometer. Multiple brands, multiple countries. So this is why.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#284

Post by miohtama »

moooo99 wrote: post #70

It is amazing how Volkswagen keeps messing up. I am currently in the market for a new car, an EV specifically. Volkswagen brands were at the top of my list for many reasons, among them the excellent driving assist implementation. I got an offer from a dealer three weeks ago and was going to order the car, then the API for the community integration got turned off. I decided to hold back and see what comes from it. Now…

[flagged]

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#285

Post by Terr_ »

pmontra wrote: post #199

My 2016 car has the old version of Android auto. My phone has the new one, I think from 2019 or 2020. They are incompatible. Did I miss something by not integrating my phone with my car? I don't think so. I call with Bluetooth and navigate with the screen of the phone. The only thing I'm using is the mic and speaker of the car. The mic is probably substantially better than any earpiece I could buy, because I suspect…

> My 2016 car has the old version of Android auto.

I don't know if an AAWireless adapter might operate in a way that could bridge that compatibility gap, but it might be worth a shot if you can borrow one to try it out.

I've been decently happy with it in a ~2020 car. Compared to a direct USB connection, there are some privacy implications with how it's running a low-power access point in the car, but bluetooth etc. are already a risk there.

> Did I miss something by not integrating my phone with my car? I don't think so. I call with Bluetooth and navigate with the screen of the phone.

For me the the main feature for Android Auto (over just a bluetooth connection) is navigation on the car's larger touchscreen that already has a good fixed position.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#286

Post by themafia »

mrhottakes wrote: post #255
themafia wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like that should be a warranty claim. You sold me one car with a specific set of features and now you've updated it into a different one lacking those features. It's not the same car. You broke it. Fix it or pay me for it's value.

They have plenty of boilerplate in the warranty to be sure they don't have to pay you for this.

Fortunately the government has demonstrated that it can regulate the terms of warranties.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#287

Post by HybridStatAnim8 »

summm wrote: post #273
HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GrapheneOS requires a locked bootloader and supports using deveice attestation via the generic attestation functionality in the Android Open Source Project. Play integrity is an anticompetitive tool that ignores this, and artificially limits itself on GrapheneOS. It is not due to any incompatibility.

The GrapheneOS supporters are not on our sides, apparently. The seem to actually like remote attestation. They just don't like that they are not in on Play Integrity. But what is won if attestation includes official GrapheneOS releases but would still otherwise be exactly the same evil stuff that takes control of the user's device? I still am hoping that at one point they understand the full consequences of remote at…

Note that I am a GrapheneOS supporter. You seem to have a few misconceptions.

GrapheneOS is one of, if not the most vocal organization against the abuse of attestation mechanisms. GrapheneOS and its userbase feel the consequences of play integrity every single day.

Im not sure where you got the idea that all GrapheneOS wants is to be accepted by play integrity, because that is not the case. GrapheneOS has been working with regulators to get play integrity banned. Being accepted by play integrity, but nothing else changing, is not good enough for GrapheneOS. It would only be a small victory along the path of abolishing this nonsense.

So, no, GrapheneOS and its community are definitely against play integrity. The "signs" that they are "starting to notice" are not there. They are already fully aware of what attestation is and how it can be abused. They are definitely not ignorant on the subject.

You might be confusing root based attestation with pinned attestation. Root based attestation is flimsy and allows tools like play integrity to ban operating systems they do not like. Pinned attestation, on the other hand, has real security properties and cannot be abused to block certain operating systems. GrapheneOS uses pinned attestation as a part of their Auditor app, and it has other cool uses we could see in the future.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#288

Post by znort_ »

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #77
moooo99 wrote: post #70

It is amazing how Volkswagen keeps messing up. I am currently in the market for a new car, an EV specifically. Volkswagen brands were at the top of my list for many reasons, among them the excellent driving assist implementation. I got an offer from a dealer three weeks ago and was going to order the car, then the API for the community integration got turned off. I decided to hold back and see what comes from it. Now…

VW is obviously not thinking that any noticable portion of the userbase uses Graphene, and someone (somewhere) is going to get a promo by making VW infra adhere to "standards" or something

which is why shaming them is a valid attempt to get them to "think". it has worked in the past (particularly with bmw!).

specially because no car really supports grapheneos, but it can be used in any car supporting regular android provided google play is installed which ensures google's certification and validation is being preserved. if i get this right bmw is actively blocking this, which would be just a dick move.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#289

Post by Grollicus »

fodkodrasz wrote: post #249
afarah1 wrote: post #36

Driving a rental car in Germany almost makes me cheer for the ongoing bankruptcy of their auto industry. It really needs a full reset at this point. Sad thing is EU law mandates for a modem in the car as well as intrusive driving aids that actually make driving less safe by constantly driving your attention away from the road[1]. So there is no hope to get a minimally decent car in Europe in the near future, unless a…

Recently I rented Cupra for a week, its assistants were non intrusive, and helpful. It was a pleasant surprise. Now don't get me started on Toyota or Hyundai assitants... BTW the video you linked features a Toyota.

Our Mercedes:

- beeps about the speed limit, especially if it misses a sign. For example every time starting on a parking lot it keeps the 5 kph even after multiple turns

- warns about leaving the lane, including trying to stay on the lane by slightly couter steering while ignoring yellow construction lines

- Sometimes when moving off from a standstill in a queue, it triggers all "careful you're about to crash into something"-warnings. I suspect it's detecting exhaust gasses from a car in front?

- You must not, ever, touch the turn signal to announce your will switch lanes soon, while there is still a car next to you. You'll get a loud, obnoxious warning tone. This one is especially annoing as it makes sleeping as a passenger on the autobahn basically impossible.

Re: Volkswagen started blocking GrapheneOS users

#290

Post by m3galinux »

altairprime wrote: post #183
m3galinux wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux intends to be left out of all this attestation garbage because it completely undermines the point of fully owning and controlling your own devices. I don't want or need to ask permission before I run a program - not from random megacorporations, and ESPECIALLY not from any of the various governments. If some third party service wants to make sure I'm not doing anything nefarious, they should do it at the border…

> what does someone running Linux do if the government mandates online services require proprietary attestation APIs? So, in the scenario posed (quoted above again for context) that I’m responding to, where the government has mandated attestation online, it seems like you’re arguing that Linux should continue to opt-out of attestation, and thus be forced into non-internet uses only. Do I misunderstand your intended o…

The idea is that enough users insist on non-attestation devices and platforms that governments and mega corps aren't able to require them for critical services. And loudly protest, switch to different services, etc when they DO attempt to be required. Example: already personally switched banks when they tried to require a validated Android device, and let them know directly and in reviews all over the place.

Don't fall for the trap that all of this is inevitable, you have to try and resist it first.

Post reply on HN