Live data from Hacker News

GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

discuss.grapheneos.org

591–600 of 653 posts

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#591

With Google making side loading extremely difficult soon, there's never been a better time to switch to a more secure OS for your phone. There are some apps I can't do without like ReThink DNS, NewPipe and other open source apps which I use regularly. All would get blocked under Googles new regime.

Rethink DNS is in the Play Store though: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.celzero.br...

Its there. Before rethink I used DNS66 which is similar. Only available on F-Droid.

Occasionally, these play store versions of apps are heavily watered down. Termux is an example. Always get that from F-Droid, not the play store version.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#592
post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MicroG requires privileged access. It also downloads and runs proprietary google code within this privileged context. MicroG additionally has very poor app compatibility and has had severe privacy issues in the past. Sandboxed google play does not grant google code any kind of privileged access. It is confined to the same app sandbox and permission model as all other apps and can be installed and uninstalled like any…

Thanks, but there's no way anybody here hasn't already heard all of that. GrapheneOS' statements are inevitably reposted to every thread and subthread that touches on the topic. Yes, I knew it's in a sandbox at the time of writing my comment above; no, that doesn't make it a privacy paradise compared to microG. The sandbox still needs internet access for a lot of GMS' functions and lots of apps send information into…

note where I wrote:

> su'ing to the user ID of [another app]

Look, I have root, so you can hack me! And my bootloader is wide open, too! In your words:

> > Root access and an unlocked bootloader are insecure, even for low threat models. These devices are vulnerable and should not be used for any sensitive data.

I'm serious that anyone should feel free to prove the point by sending me a responsible disclosure notice about having found a way in, but the threat clearly isn't serious enough for that to actually be concretely possible. Which is not to say that it's never relevant, but "such a device shouldn't be used" is not valid as a blanket statement

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#593
post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GrapheneOS is designed for everyone, including average users. It does not require a high threat model, and the features it provides are not only useful to people with high threat models. Contrary to popular belief, exploitation of vulnerable devices is a lot more common, and a lot easier than people pretend it is. You dont need to be targeted either, mass exploitation can, has, and will occur. LineageOS does not have…

> Contrary to popular belief Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Got any? The rest of the comment consists of even vaguer statements about how it's better in every way and then (circularly) drawing the conclusion that it's always the right choice because it's better in every way. I have no idea how to respond to these opinions than either writing a book that goes into every subtopic you're touching o…

You cant respond to any opinion because I have not provided any. Security is objective. What security someone may need can vary, yes, but that does not change how the security of a device works. You are downplaying serious issues and claiming features that nearly everyone benefits from are unnecessary.

Every month, vulnerabilities are published and publicly accessible. The more out of date a device becomes, the more vulnerabilities are available. This is made worse when the integrity of the operating system cannot be verified and root access is exposed. Avoiding this is not a high level threat model, that is the bare minimum.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use a basic OTP password instead of Microsoft's ironically less secure (see SMS as 2FA) with my work MS account. Perhaps your org disabled it but it is definitely something a Microsoft account can do.

Proper Microsoft authenticator setup is more secure than OTP because it's pushed based and doesn't allow users to copy paste their OTP codes into phishing sites. Google also prefer push based MFA for this reason.

Push based, sure. Allowing SMS, I still hold, undermines all of this.

They "secure" this behind password which you entered to trigger the SMS push in the first place.

Offering an "out" to a more secure flow means your secure flow may as well not exist.

Additionally, phishing a pushed OTP is not really much harder since you can trigger the push and then just have the user finish off the flow for you, provided they don't read the IP or whatever you display them (they won't, they think they're signing in), effectively the same as a TOTP.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#595
post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MicroG requires privileged access. It also downloads and runs proprietary google code within this privileged context. MicroG additionally has very poor app compatibility and has had severe privacy issues in the past. Sandboxed google play does not grant google code any kind of privileged access. It is confined to the same app sandbox and permission model as all other apps and can be installed and uninstalled like any…

Thanks, but there's no way anybody here hasn't already heard all of that. GrapheneOS' statements are inevitably reposted to every thread and subthread that touches on the topic. Yes, I knew it's in a sandbox at the time of writing my comment above; no, that doesn't make it a privacy paradise compared to microG. The sandbox still needs internet access for a lot of GMS' functions and lots of apps send information into…

For context, GMSCompat is Google Mobile Services Compatibility. GrapheneOS installed the google play store and services as normal apps, and worked backwards to make it behave. There is no google specific sandbox, rather it uses the standard android user app sandbox. This means google is bound by the same rules, as special casing anything creates more maintenance burden and attack surface. GMSCompat is fully open source.

> "Thanks, but there's no way..."

Its reposted because the information is accurate, and misinformation regarding it is very prevalent.

> "Yes, I knew it's in a sandbox..."

Relative to MicroG, sandboxed google play is much more private, secure, and usable. I would not describe it as a privacy paradise, but MicroG does not improve upon this, and instead makes these aspects worse.

> "The sandbox still needs internet access..."

Most google libraries operate independently of google services and do not depend on them to function. FCM is an exception due to how push notifications are optimized (by using one app for the connection). MicroG does not avoid this.

> "For example, Signal will actively reach..."

You do not need to provide an identity to google. This can also be avoided with a VPN, and is not specific to google. There is the concern of metadata but Signal sends empty notifications without any identifying info. They are only used to wake the app up to fetch its own notifications.

> "So while the sandbox is definitely very useful..."

It confines google services to the same rules and restrictions as all other apps. MicroG does not. MicroG also does not avoid running unwanted software, referring to the google libraries in apps and the google code MicroG downloads.

> "Do you know what privileged context means..."

MicroG violates the security model by necessitating signature spoofing, which puts it in a position to receive data it was not intended to receive, there is also attack surface exposed by having access forbidden by the app sandbox. Sandboxed google play is bound by the same app sandbox as all other apps, and would not be any more or less capable of exploiting the device than any other app. The idea that google would try to exploit the device is nonsensical though. But granting both google and a 3rd party privileged access is still unacceptable.

> "Rather than running the unwanted proprietary (but necessary) software..."

Google play services runs in the android user app sandbox. It is not an "attempt", it is successful at doing this. MicroG being open source does not matter in regards to privacy or security. It did not change how MicroG has leaked location to apps without location permissions, it does not change how it downloads and runs google code both privileged and outside of its own APK, and it does not change how other apps are running google libraries anyway. Note that the proprietary code it downloads is not confined to the app sandbox.

> "For example, microG will replace Gmaps..."

Im unsure if you are referring to the app Google Maps, or google maps integration. GrapheneOS reroutes googlefusedlocation requests to the OS, rather than google services. You can use an app other than google maps, and apps with google map integration can simply send your location to google directly, independent of google services or MicroG.

> "It seems fairly obvious to me that less data sharing..."

Googles access to data is not limited by using MicroG, relative to sandboxed google play. And the size of proprietary code is irrelevant, that code can be anything. It can be malicious with 2 lines, or benign with 2 million. Access is what is vital, not size. Google is not permitted to "run wild", and is granted no additional access compared to any other app. Im unsure what you mean by self updating functionality, but for apps from the playstore, nearly all of them are signed with a key that google holds, and MicroG can do nothing about this. GrapheneOSs App Store is responsible for updating google play and google services, it cannot update itself.

> "What threat would sandboxed microG pose that sandboxed GMS doesn't?..."

Using MicroG necessitates GrapheneOS violate the android security model, trust a 3rd party unnecessarily, cripple 99% perfect compatibility, use code that is not near as battletested as play services, run google code as privileged, and run a software that has had serious privacy violations in the past. Not only is the base insufficient, but any finished product based on it still would not compare to GMSCompat. The logic is that GrapheneOS wants the best compatibility, the least changes to the android app sandbox, 0 privileged google components, no violations to the android security model, and no need to maintain a reimplementation when google services and store are already maintained by a huge organization.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. GrapheneOS is worth the effort of pulling a card out of my wallet.

It's infuriating that they won't do this for non Google Android. It's in the best interest of both the bank and the card owner. Credential theft risk goes down to basically zero when backed by a fingerprint authenticated virtual card.

The bank makes money on chargebacks, so they have an incentive to allow a certain level of scams.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget to update the business hours in OSM when you see they are missing / wrong

Yes but I mean special holiday opening hours etc. Most places do keep these up to date in google.

Or Google will call them and ask which automatically updates the data.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#598
post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL there has been some drama about Organic Maps, what is the difference between OM and CoMaps? Left from Maps.me to OM because of drama and intrusive features, do I need to leave OM for CM? edit: seems CM shouldnt have that annoying gift icon edit 2: CoMaps doesn't display (colored) hiking trails, so completely useless compared to Organic Maps, also can't even display tram lines after tapping on tram stop in Prague

Please don't declare software "completely useless" just because it lacks a feature you need. I personally also need hiking trails on my map, but I know people who don't and happily use CoMaps.

what's the point of the fork if it's missing basic features of the original app? it can't even display tram lines when tapping on tram stop...

and let's not get into making fork of a niche map app of a fork of a niche map app, already Maps.me was very niche app, Organic Maps even more and they make another fork because of their feelings about something?

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the OOBE of the stock image doesn't force an Internet connection, the ability to unlock the bootloader does - whether you can do it or not depends on the phone manufacturer's desire, and Android for some reason uses an Internet connection to check that. My understanding is that it is impossible to unlock the bootloader on a new recent (Android 7+ at least; possiblt earlier) Android phone until it has connected…

it should be possible on Sony and OnePlus phones and maybe other brands, though it can require obtaining code from internet on other device, but the device being unlocked itself doesn't need to have internet connection

I think LG had a system for getting unlock codes as well, but they closed it a long time ago.

Any other manufacturer may alter the deal any time. In case you have such a phone, dear reader, consider getting your code if you still can even if you won't use them yet.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main things I miss are (1) when I'm entering text I can't swipe left and right on the space bar to scroll the cursor left and right, GrapheneOS is compatible with the vast , vast majority of Android apps, so you can use GBoard or FUTO keyboard (which I recently switched to from GBoard), to get the ideal experience. FUTO recently revamped their swipe to type model and it's now more accurate than GBoard in their…

The problem I still have with the futo one is that it can't swipe type in multiple languages without switching every time. Gboard can do that. I use 3 languages intertwined constantly so I need that. So I still use gboard but block its internet access.

Have you tried Heliboard? There's a few clicks to do, but I think it has multilingual swipe input.
Post reply on HN