Live data from Hacker News

A big win for Android interoperability

openhomefoundation.org

61–70 of 194 posts

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#62
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This ruling seems to be targeted at AI specifically. It is a great ruling, because it allows proper competition of other assistants with Google's (and Bixby). However, IMO the bigger evil is all the anti-competitive stuff that make it impossible for competitors to Android/iOS to enter the market, including European products like SailfishOS, such as remote attestation and the things that flow from it (e.g. no…

I agree that attestation is the biggest deal. My current hope is that the upcoming GrapheneOS phones will be able to achieve that. It's really up to a manufacturer being able to strong-arm third-parties - banks and such - into accepting their chain of trust, and Motorola may be able to do that.

I don't think the upcoming Motorola phones will change this by themselves. As far as I understand, Motorola will not directly sell GrapheneOS phones. They will make phones that fulfill the hardware requirements and work with the GrapheneOS team to make the firmware available, etc. It will still be up to the user to install GrapheneOS.

That has benefits - you do not have to trust Motorola not to ship stuff that you wouldn't want in the image. They are pristine images that the GrapheneOS project provides. But it also probably doesn't get Motorola in hot water with Google, since they partially do the same as Google does (provide phones with unlocked bootloaders) and what Google used to do (open drivers, device trees, etc.). Plus there are other OEMs that have similar partnerships with other projects (e.g. Fairphone).

into accepting their chain of trust

It's GrapheneOS who will sign the images, not Motorola.

Speaking of Europe, Motorola is probably not big enough here to strong-arm parties. Besides that, I don't think they will do that, since they have to stay in good graces with Google for distributing GMS Android.

I think for Motorola, there are three wins: 1. GrapheneOS has hundreds of thousands of users now, for a smaller OEM capturing some of that market is a significant addition; 2. they want to have a security-focused offering; GrapheneOS can provide that; and 3. they probably want to strengthen their position towards Google. Samsung has their own app store, device finding ecosystem, etc., this tells Google - if you take too much power, we can go our own way. If the Motorola-GrapheneOS experiment is successful, this could provide a similar contingency plan that might hold Google from trying to reign in OEMs too much. This is a real risk for Google - Pixel is so small in terms of marketshare that if, say Samsung, would go on its own, Google Android is pretty much dead.

At any rate, I think Motorola-GrapheneOS can have more of an indirect effect. I think Play Integrity remote attestation will fall if GrapheneOS can quickly get so many users that they become a force to reckon with. In the past, it helped when GrapheneOS users e-mailed an app developer that switched to strong Play Integrity. This will be much more powerful if the GrapheneOS user base grows 10x and more growth is probably possible if there are non-Google devices (especially because part of the potential user base does not want to give a cent to Google).

Getting the EU to ban Play Integrity as-is probably has a much larger chance of succeeding though. This is why I always recommend people to file a DMA complaint/contact the DMA team when some app gets blocked on alternative ROMs due to Play Integrity. The DMA team needs to see/feel that this affects a lot of real people.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#63
post #50

I don't care about any of these, I just want to be able to have whatever Google pay does without Google. You could claim that's not an android problem but if you do I don't think you've ever had to explain to people your phone doesn't have a Google Play store.

Why would anyone who cares enough about security/privacy to run a de-googled phone want to use a tap to pay app?

Because it’s convenient?

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#64
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone who cares enough about security/privacy to run a de-googled phone want to use a tap to pay app?

Because it’s convenient?

I agree, it's very convenient to have a phone full of corporate malware. But I thought the point of GrapheneOS was to escape that. My corporate malware only runs on my secure card processor which sits in a pocket glued to my phone.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#65
post #60
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We desperately need to break Visa's stranglehold on access to the consumer side of commerce. As long as everyone's only innovating and competing on the merchant side of things, we're not really going to get anywhere.

You're free to make your own card network. How will you convince banks to issue your cards and merchants to accept them?

You mean like the EU digital wallet

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#66
post #50

I don't care about any of these, I just want to be able to have whatever Google pay does without Google. You could claim that's not an android problem but if you do I don't think you've ever had to explain to people your phone doesn't have a Google Play store.

Why would anyone who cares enough about security/privacy to run a de-googled phone want to use a tap to pay app?

Some people like to have choices other than "all" and "nothing"

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#67
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a normal card is superior in most practical cases?

It is? I haven’t carried my wallet around in years, because Apple Wallet does everything I need. Concert tickets, boarding passes, bank cards, public transport cards, etc. A physical wallet and cards in comparison feels like stone age technology.

And your battery goes empty, and you just lost everything. Or your phone falls to the ground and breaks.

And to add to payments, the store loyalty apps are the worst... Lidl over here has an app only (no physical loyalty card), and they should be hanged for developing that... first of all, you're waiting in line while a grandma takes her phone out of her purse, then unlock it, and of course android is not satisfied with her fingerprint right then but also wants a pin... then all apps, then scroll down to L, find LidlPlus app, tap on it... QR code? Nope, not yet! First you get a daily coupon wheel of fortune, tap, wait for it to spin, see what your award is... and if it's something that she just bought, she has to manually activate that coupon in the menu (again, tap, find, tap, tap back), and then click the card button to get the qr code to scan... it's literally minutes sometimes of just waiting, instead of scanning a simple qr code on a plastic card pulled from the wallet.

We even had one of our telcos break down (full internet loss, country wide), POS terminals not working at all, and there are actually people with zero cash with them, not even like 50 euros (for just-in-case (like this))... and then you have to wait for them to turn around, take their stuff back and go home hungry.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#68
post #50

I don't care about any of these, I just want to be able to have whatever Google pay does without Google. You could claim that's not an android problem but if you do I don't think you've ever had to explain to people your phone doesn't have a Google Play store.

Why would anyone who cares enough about security/privacy to run a de-googled phone want to use a tap to pay app?

People use alternatives for many different reasons (or multiple at the same time):

- They might want privacy from Google. Using Google Pay probably doesn't make much sense.

- Security protection against Google. Google can remotely brick devices with unsandboxed Play Services. After blocking of ICC officials and all the Greenland threats, it's not odd that some European citizens would like to block this Google/US government attack vector.

- They want a clean phone without all kinds of crap like Gemini preinstalled.

- They want to reduce dependence on big tech/Google product in general.

In cases 2-4, using Google Pay with sandboxed Google Play services may be an acceptable compromise for convenience.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#69

I don't care about any of these, I just want to be able to have whatever Google pay does without Google. You could claim that's not an android problem but if you do I don't think you've ever had to explain to people your phone doesn't have a Google Play store.

There's Curve Pay which works on GrapheneOS

What cards & banks does it work with these days? Last time I checked, it wasn't really a serious alternative.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#70

I don't care about any of these, I just want to be able to have whatever Google pay does without Google. You could claim that's not an android problem but if you do I don't think you've ever had to explain to people your phone doesn't have a Google Play store.

You are free to reverse engineer the whole system and find a way to make it work. The world will love you. I suspect there will be a Google hardware attestation at the core of it, but understanding how it works is still huge progress.
Post reply on HN