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

GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 258 posts

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#211

Post by grapheneos »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #192
grapheneos wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An incredibly incomplete port without many of the core security features and decent updates is not GrapheneOS. It isn't possible to bring GrapheneOS to Fairphone devices. > It's not as though we're talking about a device with hardware specs locked behind an NDA and drivers that only support outdated kernel versions. Fairphone 5 and earlier have an end-of-life Linux kernel. Fairphone 6 is approaching the same fate. No…

Yes, I realize that the official stance is that it isn't grapheneos without the security features. That doesn't change the fact that someone who won't have the security features either way (and presumably doesn't care because otherwise he would switch to a different piece of hardware) might want the option of using a build of grapheneos that isn't officially condoned by the maintainers. (That's kind of the whole poin…

> might want the option of using a build of grapheneos

An OS without the core features and updates of GrapheneOS clearly isn't GrapheneOS. It's not permitted to refer to it as such.

> That's kind of the whole point of FOSS, right?

No, the point of FOSS is that you can take all of our code and use it for other purposes. Calling an incomplete port to another device GrapheneOS is misleading users. It isn't GrapheneOS and must have a unique name.

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#213

Post by grapheneos »

IseardMi wrote: post #210
drnick1 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest the specs of the Fairphone are middling and the device is rather expensive for what you get. The Pixels are a much better value, especially with a series. If you want something truly high end, wait for the Motorola with official GOS support.

Isn't the whole idea behind Fairphone that they are more expensive because the parts are responsibly sourced? That they pay a fair price for labour and materials? And that the phones are highly repairable? Why would that mean it could compete with a Pixel which generally has none of those goals?

There's nearly no information available on the working conditions, pay or environmental impact of Fairphones. T2Mobile is the company designing and making Fairphones since the Fairphone 4 and little information is available on them. Fairphone provides a long list of companies involved in the supply chain without more details than their location and website.

Pixels have long term availability of official parts for repairs and also official repairs.

Unlike Fairphones, Pixels have very good updates over the long term. Fairphones do not provide anything close to decent updates and it greatly degrades over the lifetime of the device. Fairphone 5 and earlier have an end-of-life kernel without security support. The devices start out lagging months behind on partial security backports and a year or more behind on full security updates which gets worse over time.

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#214

Post by riedel »

IlIlI wrote: post #104
riedel wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons I haven't switched to Graphene is this kind of drama. I wish there was more middle ground. I don't think the post is in any way constructive and will lead to fairphone to consider adding a secure element.

I don't see their post as 'drama' or nonconstructive at all. It's simply a list of well-founded criticisms of Fairphone's extremely lax position on security that is incompatible with Graphene's. If being critiqued for it doesn't lead to them considering adding a secure element, that's a problem on Fairphone's side imo.

The core criticism to the vendor is the missing security element. This is a fair point.

However, calling out on e/OS in the same post, seems to me very counter-productive. We need more OS vendors and less infighting. Calling all custom ROMs insecure and claiming to be the only one is IMHO 'drama'. Particular there are contributions of me microG that are helpful if you want to de-Google ones phone. Graphene has a different approach: fair. People will use GrapheneOS if they share their goals.

Fairphone is about sustainability and a bit about not supporting major tech like Google. I don't think this hurts. In an ideal world we could have both. But sustainability seems to be a non-goal of GrapheneOS.

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#215

Post by illiac786 »

andrepd wrote: post #64
jasonvorhe wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everytime I see Fairphone mentioned whenever there's news about GrapheneOS I'm confused as to why people keep on conflating both when they obviously have very different goals.

I think it's obvious that the target audience has a huge overlap...

I wouldn’t say obvious, no. It’s what I observe, yes. But I have some doubt about my observations scaling up to a valid statistics. Lots of folks out there are not techies yet do care about the environment. I can’t see them caring much about grapheneOS, but maybe I’m wrong.

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#216

Post by bl4kers »

t0bia_s wrote: post #83
jasonvorhe wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everytime I see Fairphone mentioned whenever there's news about GrapheneOS I'm confused as to why people keep on conflating both when they obviously have very different goals.

Every time Fairphone release new device I check width size. Still waiting for small device.

I believe Fairphone relies on popular off-the-shelf parts. If that stays consistent, the Fairphone will never be small. Save for a change in business model (e.g. pay more for smaller phone)

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#217

Post by riedel »

preisschild wrote: post #116
riedel wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons I haven't switched to Graphene is this kind of drama. I wish there was more middle ground. I don't think the post is in any way constructive and will lead to fairphone to consider adding a secure element.

Imo i think actually naming the problems is a lot more productive than walking around them

To them Murena seems to be the biggest problem.

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#218

Post by bramhaag »

riedel wrote: post #214
IlIlI wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see their post as 'drama' or nonconstructive at all. It's simply a list of well-founded criticisms of Fairphone's extremely lax position on security that is incompatible with Graphene's. If being critiqued for it doesn't lead to them considering adding a secure element, that's a problem on Fairphone's side imo.

The core criticism to the vendor is the missing security element. This is a fair point. However, calling out on e/OS in the same post, seems to me very counter-productive. We need more OS vendors and less infighting. Calling all custom ROMs insecure and claiming to be the only one is IMHO 'drama'. Particular there are contributions of me microG that are helpful if you want to de-Google ones phone. Graphene has a diff…

I think in this context it's fair to call out /e/.

In some ways /e/ and GOS are trying to achieve different things (/e/ is not hardened and does not claim to be), but /e/ is severely lacking security wise compared to AOSP.

This [0] is, in my opinion, a fair review that mentions many of the issues. That Fairphone is ok with these is telling about their position on privacy and security.

[0] https://www.kuketz-blog.de/e-datenschutzfreundlich-bedeutet-...

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#219

Post by jasonvorhe »

gib444 wrote: post #70
jasonvorhe wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using software from an alpha channel. People sometimes.

Alpha lowers the expected level of polish and stability - it doesn't make every regression equally acceptable. It is a reasonable criticism even when released to the alpha channel. Further, I believe it's reasonable for users' expectations to be influenced by what the project itself communicates about the development process. > People sometimes. I have experienced many (relatively minor but some annoying) bugs in Gra…

Conflicts with the common definitions of alpha versions I'm familiar with but definitions differ, of course.

Glad you're not among the gOS haters though!

Re: GrapheneOS' rewritten Messages app is released

#220

Post by sebastiennight »

sicktriple wrote: post #32
OneDeuxTriSeiGo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. RCS is still quite hard to actually implement. There's an open issue for it but the effort is mildly herculean. AFAIUI though GOS does intend on providing an RCS impl eventually even if it takes years to do.

I'm really hoping they're doing this to pave the way for an RCS implementation. If it can be done, GOS is in the best position to make it happen, and without RCS, chatting with normies is both extremely inconvenient (large group chats straight up do not work) and categorically insecure. If I could convince all my friends and family to use Signal I would, but they just think I'm on about some weird Edward Snowden shit…

I'll give you the strategy that works for me.

Do NOT talk about privacy, E2EE, or any of that. To regular people, "privacy" has negative value, so even if they wanted something, your talk of private communication and not being scanned by data brokers and governments will make them want it less.

So what to do then?

I present Signal as a novelty and focus on one single feature: "hey, video calls work much better than WhatsApp! Try it out!"

Bam, instant download.

Post reply on HN