It looks like CopperheadOS has managed to upstream quite a number of mitigations! Bravo to them. This makes them the sort of OpenBSD research OS of the Android world, and everyone benefits from their work.
CopperheadOS: A hardened open-source operating system based on Android
101–105 of 105 posts
Re: CopperheadOS: A hardened open-source operating system based on Android
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's certainly at some fault here, e.g. by choosing to long-term fork Linux instead of trying to upstream their patches. But my understanding is that they couldn't "just" do something like what Windows does, they don't get to boss the OEMs around in that capacity, some of the big ones effectively have their own Android forks (Samsung) or have already forked (Amazon), and if Google starts bossing them around they'…
I would point out that OEMs are unable to even release an Android device without Google's permission if they want any of their devices to have access to the Play Store. Google has an extensive compatibility suite that devices must pass to even qualify to request permission to release, and Google regularly changes the requirements to enforce what they feel is a good platform. They also mandate over 20 preinstalled app…
Amazon doesn't do this, and ship their own store. What do you think would happen if Samsung forked Android and didn't ship the Play Store? Now app developers would just upload their apps to both stores and Google's power over Android as a whole would be entirely eroded.
So no, they definitely don't get to boss the OEMs around. Unlike Microsoft with Windows they don't get to just say "you can't ship Windows^HAndroid anymore".
They do have a bit of hold over the OEMs in the form of it being a PITA to fork, access to Google's own apps etc. So I'm not saying they have no leverage, but it's a lot less than what Microsoft has, and definitely not enough to say "my way or the highway".
Re: CopperheadOS: A hardened open-source operating system based on Android
#103Do they have a comparison table for how it fairs compared to cyanogen ? I'm interested if this is a good os if I want my personal data completely isolated away from any other app regardless of their initial permissions.
Re: CopperheadOS: A hardened open-source operating system based on Android
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm talking things as simple as Code-Pointer Integrity, common tools recoded in safer language, or app-level sandboxing with or without microkernels. People rarely use strong stuff even if it's a straight-foward download, recompile, or configuration. Hell, most wont use protected messaging when it's as easy as Signal. It's a demand-driven problem largely about convenience and access to insecure apps. Btw, solutions l…
So where does a technical end-user find a relatively secure solution for a phone/small tablet, even if they have to pay a little for it - even $500 extra? > With exception of Blackberry that tried something decent by integrating QNX with stellar results. Are you saying Blackberry 10 is significantly more secure than Android and iOS?
I'm not sure if you can get a secure solution at that rate. The more secure systems simultaneously have high development cost and almost no buyers. This means they're usually OEM licenses for custom work instead of mass market. So, trick would be a smart group of people licensing OKL4 or something then putting it and hardened Android on a specific phone.
Far as Blackberry, no Im not saying it's more secure. I'm saying using the QNX OS made it more secure, reliable, and responsive than it was. That's because of QNX's great design.
Re: CopperheadOS: A hardened open-source operating system based on Android
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would point out that OEMs are unable to even release an Android device without Google's permission if they want any of their devices to have access to the Play Store. Google has an extensive compatibility suite that devices must pass to even qualify to request permission to release, and Google regularly changes the requirements to enforce what they feel is a good platform. They also mandate over 20 preinstalled app…
Amazon doesn't do this, and ship their own store. What do you think would happen if Samsung forked Android and didn't ship the Play Store? Now app developers would just upload their apps to both stores and Google's power over Android as a whole would be entirely eroded. So no, they definitely don't get to boss the OEMs around. Unlike Microsoft with Windows they don't get to just say "you can't ship Windows^HAndroid a…
This is why Google cut a deal with Samsung to bring them more in line. (Terms are secret, as usual.) Samsung seemed like it was likely to fork before, and it's probably the only manufacturer large enough to draw app developers with it. So Google did some under the table things. Possibly actually a patent lawsuit threat, given that the deal they announced included a patent sharing arrangement.