371–380 of 515 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't really protect anything though, because you can always just use an external camera to take a picture of your screen.
Its probably meant to try mitigate damage in case bad actor gets remote access to your phone or you have malware.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My government (Denmark) refusing to let me use their digital identity app because I don't want to accept Google's or Apple's TOS, and Google helping them enforce that via remote attestation services. Luckily there are alternatives in the form of code displays and NFC chips. However, next year I won't be able to watch porn unless I verify my age using a smartphone, no alternatives are planned. Or rather, I have the "f…
During covid I was not allowed to leave house. Permits were only issued to local SIMs, which I did not had! If I respected the rules, I would starve to death!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other day I wanted to send someone proof that a transaction has gone through. A screenshot would have been the obvious choice, but of course, my banking app wouldn't let me do it.
A screenshot would also be trivial to counterfeit. That being said, I am not aware of any banks that provide any actually tamper-proof, shareable transaction confirmations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google Pay requires SafetyNet verification, which means it only works with a Google-approved hard & software combination, so not with GrapheneOS for example... I hate that banks use this proprietary "standard" for NFC payments
I get where that one is coming from though - tap-to-pay is considered second-factor-authenticated, aka no PIN entry is necessary at the PoS terminal because the user already entered their PIN or presented biometric credentials to the smartphone. If a malware were able to snatch the key material that represents the credit card outright or it could (by running as root) act to the TEE like it were Google Pay's NFC contr…
Most banking apps in Germany use this API and thus work on GrapheneOS and other non-Google controlled ROMs with a locked bootloader.
PlayIntegrity is unnecessary and mostly offers vendor lock in to Google's ecosystem.
As someone willing to put up with all manner of nonsense (overpriced/underpowered hardware, clunky UI, endless troubleshooting), battery life on mobile Linux devices alone prevents me from using them in the real world. Is there a single Linux phone/tablet that can last an 8 hour day of actual use? Librem/Pinephone/Juno can't. My uConsole can't. Different category, but my MNT mini laptop lasts like 4 hours and can't b…
I increasingly only use my phone to make calls, text people, and take pictures of my kids. Any time I want to use the internet I default to my laptop.
This started as a way for me to reduce screen time and addiction with my phone, but the second order effect is that I don't feel limited by what a phone can do. Despite the fact that our phones are more powerful than ever and can easily run desktop-grade software, phone makers/mobile overlords have decided that they need to be controlled like Fisher Price toys.
My little 13" MBA lasts literally multiple days between charges with a couple hours of daily usage. A Linux laptop would work fine too.
My next phone will almost certainly be two phones. One cheap and super standard Android phone to just run banking apps and similar that insists on Google Play etc. Locked down and boring, turned off most of the time. Then a second phone for everything else (terminal with sshd, emacs, emulators, media players ... the stuff that allows a phone to be the general purpose computer it should be). Looks increasingly unlikel…
After just submitting my recent post --- I do like your suggestion. Maybe 2 phones are the way forward. Maybe a PAYG phone which stays at home on my network for particular needs like banking. Then a standard phone which is essentially a GNU/Linux distro.... mmm... Emacs on my phone sounds lovely!
My Android phone prevents me from taking screenshots if an app author doesn't want me to. My Android phone prevents me from recording phone calls at the request of my carrier, even though it's totally legal for me to do so in my jurisdiction. I'm not loving where this is all going.
It's worse. An app author can even be notified if a screenshot was taken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I dont want to clear storage - there is data I downloaded into the app and work with that I dont want to lose. But the app also accumulates some temp files there.
without access - how do you know the files are temp files?
While I share the concerns about Android, it feels silly to me to go back to Linux's (nonexistent) security model and bad mobile UI/UX. Why not try to fork AOSP or GOS (for broader device compatibility, even if it means giving up some its sexy security properties)? Note that this could include packaging Linux GUI applications as Android APKs (with some additional glue code and Wayland/DBus integration of course), so…
> Why not try to fork AOSP or GOS
Which concerns do you share? Both AOSP and GOS must follow the Google development strategy, they aren't exactly independent on Google (which is a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45208925). Nevertheless GOS on Librem 5 or Pinephone would be a nice idea, except the GOS developers are against that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45101400
> Linux's (nonexistent) security model
Linux's security model is based on trusting the software you're installing from the FLOSS repositories, and it works very well.