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

GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

grapheneos.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 467 posts

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#391

Post by singpolyma3 »

strcat wrote: post #390
singpolyma3 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is attacking anyone. I feel like you're talking about someone else?

You came to this thread to promote an inaccurate narrative in support of the absolutely vile attacks on us. Meanwhile, we've never done anything to you or your project beyond promoting it as one of the available options. We stopped doing that a while ago due to attacks from yourself and other project members. We haven't responded to those attacks beyond not mentioning your project anymore and removing our many past l…

Far from attacking your project in fact I often provide support for your users there's no ill will from my side let me assure you

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#392

Post by Zak »

pstation wrote: post #337
Zak wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can if you have a Google account; Play Store has a web version.

Would they even allow you to rate an app that you have never installed?

Looks like it won't.

Naming it publicly would allow those who have a Google-blessed Android device to rate it though.

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#393

Post by morserer »

whitepoplar wrote: post #125
morserer wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goodness, friend, where were you looking? A used 256GB Pixel 8 in good condition is $320. https://swappa.com/listings/google-pixel-8?carrier=unlocked&...

One caveat--you have to be certain that you get a Pixel with an unlocked bootloader. There are a lot of Pixels (mostly sold by Verizon) that are unlocked for use with any carrier, but whose bootloaders remain locked. If you have one of these ex-Verizon phones, there is no way as of now to unlock the bootloader.

This is true, and important. Thanks for the reminder.

The list linked above (and the price tag deduced from it) is restricted to unlocked phones only for this reason.

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#394

Post by strcat »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #391
strcat wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You came to this thread to promote an inaccurate narrative in support of the absolutely vile attacks on us. Meanwhile, we've never done anything to you or your project beyond promoting it as one of the available options. We stopped doing that a while ago due to attacks from yourself and other project members. We haven't responded to those attacks beyond not mentioning your project anymore and removing our many past l…

Far from attacking your project in fact I often provide support for your users there's no ill will from my side let me assure you

You regularly attack the GrapheneOS project and our team in your chat rooms including supporting libelous claims about us, as do others who work with you.

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#395

Post by garbagewoman »

aspenmayer wrote: post #306
garbagewoman wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re breaking the TOS which is a felony according to the CFAA

Sounds like FUD to me. All of the cases I’m familiar with actually say that violating TOS isn’t against CFAA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

Familiar with the Aaron Swartz case?

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#396

Post by aspenmayer »

garbagewoman wrote: post #395
aspenmayer wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like FUD to me. All of the cases I’m familiar with actually say that violating TOS isn’t against CFAA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

Familiar with the Aaron Swartz case?

Yes, I’m familiar with the case. He was caught interfering with equipment on the MIT campus in order to additionally violate TOS of JSTOR, wasn’t he? He shouldn’t have expected to prevail in court, and I’m saddened by his decision to end his own life. That said, he did a whole lot more besides violating TOS, so I’m not sure how applicable his case is to the topic under discussion, strictly speaking.

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#397

Post by xethos »

berdario wrote: post #213
palata wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, they're not going to restart a whole product category just for grapheneos. I don't think that there is any need to restart a new category. Just make your new phones good enough for GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS has close to half a million users, I think it's worth doing some adjustments.

> I don't think that there is any need to restart a new category. Just make your new phones... For HTC, yes... But neither LG nor Blackberry are still making phones

BlackBerry hasn't been OEM for their last few phones - the KeyOne, 2LE, and 2 were all outsourced to TCL, who is still making handsets. This would also fit with BlackBerry's security image, and even pull in the OnwardMobility vapourware.

I'm every bit as skeptical as you are, and in no universe is BlackBerry the OEM in question, but I would like to live in my delusion until GrapheneOS proves me wrong - I want a keyboard, dammit!

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#398

Post by joecool1029 »

fmajid wrote: post #271
joecool1029 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s an example of the radio firmware and vendor blobs required for a pixel 9 pro XL build: https://github.com/TheMuppets/proprietary_vendor_google_komo... Nobody, including Graphene, is getting away with building their own modem firmware. The reduced blobs are on userspace and some HAL components.

Yes, even Apple with its practically infinite resources took 14 years from when it acquired Infineon's mobile chipset unit to launching its C1 modem. So much of the telcos' allegedly open protocols are actually implementation-dependent that it takes a lot of testing on actual mobile networks to validate interop.

> took 14 years

It was at most 4 years. Intel was the one that bought them 14 years ago and divested most of the IP off to Apple 6 years ago: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/07/apple-to-acquire-the-...

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#399

Post by AnthonyMouse »

sroussey wrote: post #318
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is another reason we need to strip this hardware attestation stuff out of the hardware. It either needs to use exclusively keys the user loaded into the device themselves or the keys aren't on the device whatsoever and then the "high value targets" verify the contents of the drive from a known-clean machine once they get it back from the adversarial foreign officials before putting it back into service. Or bett…

These are new machines before users get a chance to load anything. Thus the customs part.

Are they also putting malware on all the drives in every random retail store or what stops someone from just buying one when they get there?

Re: GrapheneOS is the only Android OS providing full security patches

#400

Post by flomo »

fainpul wrote: post #258
flomo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody gave you the actual answer. IBM was under an antitrust decree and had to openly license their technology for a nominal fee. (Supposedly about $5/PC.) So yes, they were in a hurry and used generic parts, but they still had tons of patents on it. When they got out from under this, they came up with Microchannel.

I guess antitrust is the keyword here. Something that is considerably weakened in today's USA.

IBM had/has a monopoly on mainframe systems. But they never were really dominant in midrange systems (e.g. VAX, UNIX), and Microsoft and Apple etc became huge companies in the PC market. So you can't really disagree with the rationale.

Obviously Google + Phone makers is a "trust", its frustrating the lawsuits aren't really going anywhere.

Post reply on HN