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

LineageOS 22

lineageos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: LineageOS 22

#151

Post by [deleted] »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #114
lordofgibbons wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, running GrapheneOS, this has been a big headache for me. And it's incredibly stupid too. The app won't work natively due to a lack of attestation, so I have to fire up the browser and user the service.... Exactly how is that more anti-abuse than just using an app without attestation? It's security theater and has no basis in reality.

Can you scan a check from your web browser? Maybe I'm wrong, but probably not; frankly, it's a logistical miracle we can do this from our phones and the banks tolerate it, but I can see why they would still want to minimize all risk involved. The second reason though I can think a bank would want attestation is as an anti-piracy measure. With a website, you have HTTPS verifying the identity of the domain. With an app…

[deleted]

Re: LineageOS 22

#152

Post by realusername »

gf000 wrote: post #111
realusername wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could also contribute to the Linux kernel like normal companies instead of shipping half broken binary blobs.

Most of them buy parts from other companies, that often license the source only for inclusion. This is a very myopic view of the industry.

I'm also saying the industry is broken, I'm well aware that the whole industry isn't really good enough on the software side.

Re: LineageOS 22

#153

Post by realusername »

IshKebab wrote: post #63
realusername wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could also contribute to the Linux kernel like normal companies instead of shipping half broken binary blobs.

That's a really backwards way of thinking about software distribution. It's like Debian's idea that every piece of software in existence should be packaged for Debian (and Suse, Red Hat, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.). I don't package any of the software I write for Debian because I don't want to have to jump through their hoops. I don't blame device manufacturers for wanting to avoid jumping through Linux's hoops. Especially…

There's a big difference between Apple's review process which I would qualify as unnecessary and unfair and Linux's review process which is necessary to produce high quality software.

But it's true that they could at least start by publishing the source code, even if they don't contribute directly.

As for the ABI, I also agree, this would just make the situation worse.

Re: LineageOS 22

#154

Post by t_mahmood »

9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #6

Note that it can take several days or weeks for all the supported devices to get initial public builds made. You can track all the pending build jobs here: https://buildkite.com/lineageos/android/builds?branch=lineag...

Oneplus 7T build already up! And damn, it feels really snappy! There seems to be some good optimization on Android 15?

Re: LineageOS 22

#155

Post by hedora »

pimterry wrote: post #99

Love to see the ongoing progress here, but I'm really starting to worry that the growth of attestation on Android will make using custom ROMs like LineageOS impossible in future. Is there any way we can fight this? Feels like there must be some EU/US consumer rights or digital market legislation somewhere that could be used to more directly object to organizations like banks saying "your phone works just fine but we…

If I weren’t so cynical, I’d expect the ongoing antitrust case to target this sort of stuff.

Re: LineageOS 22

#156

Post by IshKebab »

realusername wrote: post #153
IshKebab wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a really backwards way of thinking about software distribution. It's like Debian's idea that every piece of software in existence should be packaged for Debian (and Suse, Red Hat, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.). I don't package any of the software I write for Debian because I don't want to have to jump through their hoops. I don't blame device manufacturers for wanting to avoid jumping through Linux's hoops. Especially…

There's a big difference between Apple's review process which I would qualify as unnecessary and unfair and Linux's review process which is necessary to produce high quality software. But it's true that they could at least start by publishing the source code, even if they don't contribute directly. As for the ABI, I also agree, this would just make the situation worse.

> Linux's review process which is necessary to produce high quality software.

Why? I don't see how that follows. It might be likely to produce better software simply by having experienced kernel devs review the code, but it's definitely not necessary.

Re: LineageOS 22

#157

Post by oarfish »

okanat wrote: post #83
nanna wrote: post #73

How's LineageOS with WhatsApp, Signal and random banking apps these days? Or let me put it another way: anyone running LineageOS but struggled to run any essential apps? (I don't care about games or whatever, I mean the apps you need to get around in life).

Whatsapp and Signal are fine. Random banking apps suck because their myopic and incompetent policies around custom OSes. Especially here in Germany where banks and even tech company management see internet as a magic, totally untrustworthy new curiosity. Combined with the overall extreme risk-averse society, basically none of the bank apps from big banks work with custom OSes. All require various levels of "hacking".…

Counterpoint: ING, Trade Republic and the Comdirect app all work with current lineageos, even with the phone rooted.

Amusingly, my health insurance app (Tk) does not.

Re: LineageOS 22

#158

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #100
pimterry wrote: post #99

Love to see the ongoing progress here, but I'm really starting to worry that the growth of attestation on Android will make using custom ROMs like LineageOS impossible in future. Is there any way we can fight this? Feels like there must be some EU/US consumer rights or digital market legislation somewhere that could be used to more directly object to organizations like banks saying "your phone works just fine but we…

Yeah, running GrapheneOS, this has been a big headache for me. And it's incredibly stupid too. The app won't work natively due to a lack of attestation, so I have to fire up the browser and user the service.... Exactly how is that more anti-abuse than just using an app without attestation? It's security theater and has no basis in reality.

GrapheneOS seems to be advocating for hardware attestation to solve this issue, taking advantage of its boot-loader re-locking capabilities but its vehemently being opposed by Lineage OS community due to privacy concerns and that boot-loader re-locking is not an option in LOS.

[1] https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu...

Re: LineageOS 22

#159

Post by okanat »

oarfish wrote: post #157
okanat wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatsapp and Signal are fine. Random banking apps suck because their myopic and incompetent policies around custom OSes. Especially here in Germany where banks and even tech company management see internet as a magic, totally untrustworthy new curiosity. Combined with the overall extreme risk-averse society, basically none of the bank apps from big banks work with custom OSes. All require various levels of "hacking".…

Counterpoint: ING, Trade Republic and the Comdirect app all work with current lineageos, even with the phone rooted. Amusingly, my health insurance app (Tk) does not.

Weirdly Commerzbank Banking App rejects logins approved by a rooted phone so I cannot login with my LOS phone. Comdirect is literally the same company but a purely online product. It is so stupid. I also use INGDirekt and it works.

In this comment I mentioned N26 and Scalable Capital also works with a custom ROM: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42560775

Post reply on HN