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

Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

motorolanews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 930 posts

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#111

Post by cromka »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #47
phoronixrly wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to ask wasn't motorola bought and sold so many times that it ended up in Chinese hands. It ended up in Google's hands instead... Ngl, kind of underwhelming from Graphene Edit: wait, that's old news, it is part of Lenovo...

Thinkpads are also part of Lenovo and is technically Chinese. But see, which device is recommended for privacy purposes the most because of Libreboot/Coreboot and how much respected thinkpads are in the privacy minded community. Can't believe I am saying this but a chinese company can be good and an american company can be bad. Not an exact fan of china, especially their authoritarianism but I am not a fan of america…

Models recommended for Coreboot are old ones. You can't get it on newer ones or can't even edit the UEFI/ACPI tables on them because firmware is a) signed b) on SMD nvram making it pita to flash

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#112

Post by cromka »

goodpoint wrote: post #104
ggm wrote: post #29

Will the sandboxed google play permit banking apps to work using TPM and secured credentials? Is it even possible to store secure credentials properly? I would expect whatever you initialised before grapheneOS is wiped before you can run the alternate OS. Is termux possible with a root/sudo function?

No, grapheneOS fails both DEVICE_INTEGRITY and STRONG_INTEGRITY checks.

By default. It can be mitigated.

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#114

Post by poisonborz »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #75

Hopefully wireless payment do work on these, and they have face unlock working. That's really the 2 issues I have with grapheneos. I know it's supposed to be for privacy nerd, and they will tell you you shouldn't use Google pay because it's bad for privacy and so on... But it's not the majority of people, most are willing to trade some privacy for convenience.

I'd be more concerned for face unlock. You take an OS that goes to the extreme to prevent any external intrusion to your phone and you enable an option to unlock it for anyone by holding the phone to your face?

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#116

Post by CodeCompost »

BatteryMountain wrote: post #108

If anyone from Motorola reads this thread; the market is beyond ripe for a good shake up. Going full open source and pushing updates & openness, user control and freedom, you will gobble up a good chunk of market share. Make MDM easy & first class (no third parties...), and a ton of corp will roll it out too. We need you more than you think.

Wat would be the compelling argument for middle managers who only think of meeting financial targets?

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#117

Post by dgrabla »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #75

Hopefully wireless payment do work on these, and they have face unlock working. That's really the 2 issues I have with grapheneos. I know it's supposed to be for privacy nerd, and they will tell you you shouldn't use Google pay because it's bad for privacy and so on... But it's not the majority of people, most are willing to trade some privacy for convenience.

In Germany, Paypal uses NFC payments. It works on GrapheneOS

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#118

Post by xandrius »

BatteryMountain wrote: post #108

If anyone from Motorola reads this thread; the market is beyond ripe for a good shake up. Going full open source and pushing updates & openness, user control and freedom, you will gobble up a good chunk of market share. Make MDM easy & first class (no third parties...), and a ton of corp will roll it out too. We need you more than you think.

Yep, first party open source and long support. If this existed, you'll get people recommending it to their parents. Now the only thing I can honestly recommend is a UbuntuTouch phone but mostly to devs, for now.

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#119

Post by timedude »

roysting wrote: post #41
anon5739483 wrote: post #9

GrapheneOS is finally decoupling itself from Google Pixel phones. This is great news. Motorola makes great hardware too. Looking forward to see what comes out of this.

> Motorola makes great hardware too Do they? I genuinely don’t know because I don’t think I have ever seen a Motorola smartphone in the wild and their heavy involvement with the police and surveillance state has my attention piqued a bit. I’m just saying GrapheneOS partnering with possibly the biggest police state surveillance solutions provider? What’s that all about?

Before the iphone came and all the android uniformity, i used to use motorolla phones a lot and they were excellent. If the quality is still the same, with GrapheneOS they are going to have an excellent product.

Re: Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS

#120

Post by fc417fc802 »

Groxx wrote: post #91
fc417fc802 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want group messages without having to install ... Well now I'm confused. I've always received SMS as fallback when my contacts add me to RCS group messages. But apparently this doesn't always work according to people on the internet at large? Unfortunately most people still think they're "texting" and have no idea Google and Apple pulled a bait and switch. Meanwhile on my end I receive emoji react spam, each emoj…

It's supposed to work by downgrading everyone involved if any are not on RCS, because there is no other option. Which has been working fine for me at least, normal MMS issues aside (MMS delivery is often awful). RCS keeps an "is X using RCS?" list on their servers, and every attempt to message someone checks that (with a local cache)... and like >99% of those servers are Google, at this point, so it should be pretty…

> And that is how reactions are sent in SMS/MMS.

Imagine if IRC clients started adding such functionality. Certain protocols and conventions are useful precisely because of their minimalism.

Google and Apple are already running their own walled off proprietary messaging platforms. There was no need to tamper with SMS.

Post reply on HN