Live data from Hacker News

Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

grapheneos.social

331–340 of 444 posts

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#331
post #143
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the existing apps are on Android and iOS. Graphene lets you run them. You can't have a bank account on a Linux phone* because they won't let you, but you can on Android including on Graphene. * before replying snarkily that Android is Linux, please take a long walk off a short pier, thanks

Banks care very little about actual security. Some force you either to SMS codes, or to their app on a hopelessly broken platform based on shoving many untrusted spying apps onto one device and hoping some SW will be able to keep them apart. Almost none support strong dedicated HW authenticators or second factors. Not even as an option to those who care. Anyway it's always possible to just reverse their web api and u…

But they care a ton about security theater. Advanced device integrity? That sounds secure to me!

I should make a chip called Super Security Sauce Silicon, and make cards with them, and market them to phone vendors so their customers won't need the card, and market them to banks so their customers will be secure. It performs Dual_EC_DRBG with my keys.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#332
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Banking apps (e.g. Revolut) block GrapheneOS actively and many other apps too. You've misunderstood something here. Revolut doesn't "block GrapheneOS actively". I'm running Revolut and most of my banking apps on GrapheneOS right now. In my experience, there are two major categories of incompatibility: - High levels of Google Play Integrity checks: app only works on releases of Android that have been allowlisted by…

>Revolut doesn't "block GrapheneOS actively". It's not happening for everyone but unfortunately: https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2085154315799314918#m

That's really unfortunate. Revolut has luckily been working well for me but time will tell...

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#333

I've never really understood why we chase Android-alikes on mobile platforms instead of trying to build on mainstream Linux. I know some folks in the nix community (nix-on-droid and other projects) have tried to bring us closer to this, but projects like Graphene seem to have a lot of traction.

AOSP has way better security and therefore privacy than desktop linux.

On my Linux laptop, I use bubblewrap sandboxes with their own encrypted filesystems and granular permissions for each of my projects. Very easy and secure with NixOS, surely better than what I could do with an Android device.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew it would be their higher end devices but I really wish they would have put it on their lower end as well. I have a Moto G running LineageOS and it's my favorite phone ever. The ability to have my 800GB of music synced to a sdcard is something I'm loath to give up.

What is your music workflow? I got stuck in Spotify for new music but that obviously doesn’t work long term

Bandcamp or buying CDs and ripping them, it doesn't take that long and each CD is a fire-and-forget task.

I'm using syncthing to avoid the chore of having to copy them into my SD card

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#335
This is very exciting. I have been an iPhone user for the last 8 years. I am entirely in Apple's ecosystem.

I would legitimately change my phone (+watch +headphones) for a vertical foldable (like razr) phone running graphene OS. I don't think Apple is releasing a vertical foldable or even a modern smaller phone. One can only hope.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#336
post #262

[flagged]

Google hasn't been able to properly do / fix Android gesture navigation for more than half a decade now. The amount that edge swipes in things like photo editing apps are detected as backswipes (sometimes destroying 10+ minutes of editing) is laughable. Technically this is because a lot of apps thumb their nose at the requirement to have safe areas around swipeable elements in their app, but as a user, that is not my…

The other real fix is for apps to use the existing apis added in Android 10 to create regions where the OS will not prioritize navigation gestures over input to the app. https://developer.android.com/reference/android/view/View#se...

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> I have read your marketing materials GrapheneOS is a non-profit open source project. We provide documentation and other information on the project. > Android is not a Linux distro nor is it directly derived from Linux Android is a family of Linux distributions. Linux is a kernel without a specific userspace and there are many different choices of libc, shell, init system, command-line utilities and far more. There…

[flagged]

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a huge problem in EU countries! The relevant regulations are Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/389 and the earlier Directive (EU) 2015/2366. While these laws are deliberately vague when it comes to specific technologies, they do require at least two independent factors from different categories, such as knowledge (password) and possession (phone). That, in and of itself, wouldn't be a problem. The way…

I see people from US being surprised when they see success stories by people from EU stating "maybe it's a US thing" and people from EU being surprised when they see success stories by people from US stating "maybe it's a EU thing". In reality, most of time it's just a matter of choosing the right bank wherever you are. I'm writing this on a GNU/Linux phone that does my banking just fine. I'm from the EU.

Where I live, the overlap between banks with physical branches and those that don’t require an app or cardTAN is nonexistent - genuinely zero. But maybe I’m just old-school for wanting to have the option to visit a branch.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#339

I've never really understood why we chase Android-alikes on mobile platforms instead of trying to build on mainstream Linux. I know some folks in the nix community (nix-on-droid and other projects) have tried to bring us closer to this, but projects like Graphene seem to have a lot of traction.

Because every attempted Linux phone gets zero battery life. I'd like to be able to leave the house for more than 3 hours.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GrapheneOS primarily exists to greatly improve privacy and security compared to the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). AOSP provides far better privacy and security than a traditional desktop Linux distribution. It has a strong mandatory app sandbox, an increasingly good permission model moving more and more towards case-by-case consent, broad use of memory safe languages throughout the OS and app ecosystem, strong…

The claim I responded to was: 1. Android has existing apps. 2. A subset of existing apps will refuse to run on various shades of non-stock/unofficial system. I pointed out that 1. the existing apps largely do run on other Linux systems via waydroid, and that 2. apps refusing to run on non-stock systems are likely to refuse GOS as well. If I cut down your page of text to the relevant points, I believe it amounts to: 1…

> Android has existing apps.

Android has a massive app ecosystem including the largest open source mobile app ecosystem. Those apps are nearly entirely available for GrapheneOS. Very few apps are unavailable for GrapheneOS. It's nearly entirely banking and government apps, but as we said 90% of those work on GrapheneOS.

AOSP and GrapheneOS have hardware-based virtualization usable to run desktop Linux software. It even provides opt-in GPU acceleration with gfxstream and will likely have native GPU virtualization support similar to NVIDIA's paid vGPU in the near future. AOSP and GrapheneOS have a very usable desktop mode which will be getting much better. Android is replacing ChromeOS and was already heavily improved for desktop use as part of being included within ChromeOS. We have that app ecosystem available too.

> the existing apps largely do run on other Linux systems via waydroid

A large portion of Android apps do not work via Waydroid. It has drastically lower compatibility than GrapheneOS and there are fundamental issues with how it approaches it.

The approach they take also severely harms privacy and security through throwing away most of the privacy and security model used by Android. That would not be the case for running AOSP in a hardware accelerated virtual machine, which is what we would recommend doing. It would still have greatly reduced compatibility due to apps using hardware APIs such as the hardware keystores and many apps actively trying to stop themselves being run in a virtual machine or other weird environment. It would work a lot better than using namespaces but would require modern hardware with virtualization acceleration.

> apps refusing to run on non-stock systems are likely to refuse GOS as well

A very tiny subset of overall Android apps entirely ban using a non-Google-certified OS. Most only have checks for the security model being intact and anti-tampering code interfering with running the apps in an atypical environment. We run into these issues with our privacy and security hardening features so we've done a lot of work to maintain compatibility.

> GOS is supported by some apps that would refuse other non-stock systems.

GrapheneOS exceeds all of the security and attestation expectations of these apps. They have no reason to ban using it and we make sure to avoid that being the case. It's only a tiny number of apps banning using GrapheneOS in the first place and a growing number of those are beginning to permit it since they don't actually have a reason to ban it. They do have a reason to ban an OS not providing the security model and attestation functionality they want. We disagree with attestation being used this way, but they can do that while supporting GrapheneOS and a growing number of these apps are doing so.

> yes you're probably ahead

GrapheneOS provides drastically better compatibility.

> waydroid is also 90% AOSP

It's a fork of outdated LineageOS with a compatibility layer to make it run as part of a non-AOSP host OS. It has SELinux disabled which means the app sandbox and other protections aren't intact along with many other major differences. Apps can see these differences and many apps ban it because they can see the security model isn't intact or detect what's happening as a form of tampering.

In practice, GrapheneOS only gets banned by services enforcing the Play Integrity API device or strong integrity level without permitting GrapheneOS via hardware attestation. A growing number of apps are permitting it since they don't have any real reason to ban it. It's easy for them to stop endless negative reviews and customer support complaints from GrapheneOS users by simply implementing Android hardware attestation with Google's open source library for it and permitting GrapheneOS. They can also simply delete the code banning using non-Google-certified operating systems which is what we'd prefer over them hard-wiring permitting GrapheneOS and specific other alternatives.

> yes GOS has gotten some buy-in, but if 90% is good enough

That was only about banking apps. Over 99.99% of overall Android apps work on GrapheneOS. The vast majority of apps are not banking or government apps.

> compatibility as your advantage

It has an immense compatibility advantage along with far better privacy, security, usability and battery life.

> Basically, either users want 100% app compat - in which case GOS is out - or they don't, in which case waydroid is likely to be an option

Most users have 100% compatibility since most people don't use the around 10% of banks banning GrapheneOS. Our userbase is also growing large enough that apps cannot ban using it without it being a huge hassle for them. They have no actual reason to ban it, so that's why a growing number of apps are removing the ban on using it. They're usually not willing to stop using the Play Integrity API but once this is on their radar due to complaints they often become willing to implement using the Android hardware attestation API to permit GrapheneOS and other alternatives meeting their requirements. It's not a full solution since it won't allow people's self-signed builds or forks of GrapheneOS but it's progress and it enables the apps to easily permit more operating systems in the same way. They can just add more to their list. We would prefer the Play Integrity API being banned by regulators but this is good enough for now.

> since GOS is missing vitally important features compared to other Android ROMs let alone "normal" Linux systems

GrapheneOS has similar functionality to mainstream Android smartphones. We highly prioritize providing missing functionality not available through apps.

GrapheneOS is an operating system, not read-only memory firmware. There's a boot ROM which loads the main boot firmware from the SSD, verifies it and transfers control to it which then does the same with the OS. GrapheneOS is simply a regular OS installed on an SSD. Verified boot protects it from modification but it's not in read-only storage or anything like that. We don't misuse the term ROM to refer to it and prefer if others avoid it too.

> how long has GOS been without full backup functionality now?

GrapheneOS has much better backup support than the stock Pixel OS and most Google Mobile Services Android devices.

GrapheneOS has a built-in encrypted backup system. It backs up the same data as Google's device-to-device transfer for moving between Android devices. Every app targeting Android 12 or later gets backed up since allowBackup="false" was redefined to only disable cloud backups. Every Play Store app has been required to target Android 12 or later since under a year after the release of Android 12. The issue of apps opting out of backups has been in the past for years.

Backing up more of the system settings and other system data is planned and requires gradually expanding what gets converted into a portable format transferable between devices and OS versions.

> What other secure options are those?

It's up to these companies to define their security requirements. GrapheneOS is far more secure than anything permitted by the Play Integrity API device or strong integrity levels. It supports hardware-based attestation and we publish a signed JSON object providing our verified boot key fingerprints for use with it. They can easily use that and permit GrapheneOS. Other operating systems preserving the Android security model can do the same. Once they allow GrapheneOS, it's easy for them to allow more in the same way. It would be nicer if they stopped using the Play Integrity API and left OS security up to users but most of these apps are not open to doing that. A small portion of apps adopting the Play Integrity API didn't understand what it does and are willing to stop.

Post reply on HN