Live data from Hacker News

A big win for Android interoperability

openhomefoundation.org

91–100 of 194 posts

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#91
post #36

Does this apply to Apple to have something separate to Siri in iOS?

No, the procedure was specifically against Google Android and the decision document (https://ec.europa.eu/competition/digital_markets_act/cases/2...) is titled "CASE DMA.100220| Alphabet - OS - Google Android - Art. 6(7) - SP - AI". It doesn't mention the existence of other market parties than Alphabet/Google/Android, from what I saw in a quick read-through

It sounds reasonable to apply the same logic to all vendors with similar market power, though. Perhaps this opens the door for an accelerated procedure against Apple as well

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#92
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s convenient?

I agree, it's very convenient to have a phone full of corporate malware. But I thought the point of GrapheneOS was to escape that. My corporate malware only runs on my secure card processor which sits in a pocket glued to my phone.

The very moment it becomes possible to create a Google Pay alternative, there will be at least a dozen choices, some of them fully open source and privacy conserving.

The only reason why we don’t have them is Google / Apple duopoly.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#93
post #58
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What prevents this? I always assumed they could.

Bootloaders are locked and most of them are unlockable.

Ironically, Google's own Pixel line is the only reliable source of phones I know of that's both unlockable and relockable with your own keys. The latter is an important feature that even the "hacker friendly" brands like early OnePlus skipped out on.

Hopefully the hardware vendor GrapheneOS is working with can add a second product line to the list.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#94

This is all smoke and mirrors. The core issue is not "Google not allowing a feature", it's that small businesses cannot buy phones, install a patched version of Android without a restriction and sell them to make money. Until this problem is solved, everything else is palliative.

The thing is: Google is one of the few Android phone vendors that makes doing so possible at all. Samsung, Nokia, Xiaomi, Oppo, and all the others lock their bootloaders and provide no way to relock them with your own key once you've managed to break them. Google is one of the few (if not only) vendor that actually designs their hardware to permit this. That's how GrapheneOS has blossomed.

When it comes to running patched operating systems, Google's phones are pretty much the only ones that provide a decent option for running secure and user-controlled firmware. It's every other vendor, from Apple to Xiaomi, that's preventing people from doing so.

That said, there are a few companies out there that will happily put your brand and your firmware on their hardware. That's how the Trump Phone was made, the biggest example of this practice in the west. Other utility brands have been releasing cheap crap branded phones for years (like the Gigaset smartphone). You'll need money upfront and a decent minimum order quantity, but getting phones with firmware you control straight from the factory is still an option.

Obviously the Google Play features being available only to Google are a problem, and it's good that the EU is forcing Google to cut the crap, but Google's restrictions aren't the reason companies aren't running custom ROMs. It's pretty much everyone but Google that's at fault for that, from vendors restricting user freedom to app developers restricting their apps to Google Play certified devices only.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#95
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/10/trump-... DMCA and other anti-circumvention regulations.

That was a good read. But I still thought anyone can take graphene os and put it in a phone and sell it? Maybe there is specific licensing restrictions in the android license that stop this.

It's a two-step issue. Manufacturers lock the bootloader and don't provide a method through them to unlock it, therefore making bypassing that "digital lock" in violation of the DMCA.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#96
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the upcoming Motorola phones will change this by themselves. As far as I understand, Motorola will not directly sell GrapheneOS phones. They will make phones that fulfill the hardware requirements and work with the GrapheneOS team to make the firmware available, etc. It will still be up to the user to install GrapheneOS. That has benefits - you do not have to trust Motorola not to ship stuff that you wo…

> Getting the EU to ban Play Integrity Unlikely to happen, it's just not how they operate. Instead they will create a government registry where any legal entity can register their integrity attestation keys, with oversight by a bureaucracy in a process that takes 6 months and €100,000. Apps will be required to use the registry but still allowed to block attestations they don't like, and any attestation key that leaks…

any legal entity can register their integrity attestation keys, with oversight by a bureaucracy in a process that takes 6 months and €100,000

That wouldn't be great, but at the same time an improvement over the current situation.

attestation key that leaks into open circulation (such as FOSS) will be blacklisted in the registry because it no longer attests anything

Which makes sense if remote attestation is what you want.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#97
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This ruling seems to be targeted at AI specifically. It is a great ruling, because it allows proper competition of other assistants with Google's (and Bixby). However, IMO the bigger evil is all the anti-competitive stuff that make it impossible for competitors to Android/iOS to enter the market, including European products like SailfishOS, such as remote attestation and the things that flow from it (e.g. no…

Phone-tap-to-pay is not a real blocker. In fact I think it should be illegal for all vendors. Just use your physical plastic card. Stick it on the back of your phone if you like.

Phone tap to pay is really handy and provides more security than physical plastic cards. It should just not be used by Apple/Google to block out competitors.

(Yes, I know banking apps can have their own tap-to-pay implementation on Android, but they all standardized on Google Pay because it's less work for them.)

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#98
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has both infinite money for the rich and strong wealth inequality - both carrot and stick. I don't think it's a good way to live though. China also has unlimited money and top-down economic control that can direct good things to be made. Europe has neither. It has people with stable lives they don't want to mess up, and it has limited money, most of which is claimed by its existing billionaires through its bur…

You know that this is cope of Incompetent of European Homegrown software industry right ??? China literally backwater in 1970s, now they have some of the biggest software tech itw there is no excuse

I literally just told you why.

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#99
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Getting the EU to ban Play Integrity Unlikely to happen, it's just not how they operate. Instead they will create a government registry where any legal entity can register their integrity attestation keys, with oversight by a bureaucracy in a process that takes 6 months and €100,000. Apps will be required to use the registry but still allowed to block attestations they don't like, and any attestation key that leaks…

any legal entity can register their integrity attestation keys, with oversight by a bureaucracy in a process that takes 6 months and €100,000 That wouldn't be great, but at the same time an improvement over the current situation. attestation key that leaks into open circulation (such as FOSS) will be blacklisted in the registry because it no longer attests anything Which makes sense if remote attestation is what you…

Yes. It makes sense for well-regulated remote attestation. But is that what we actually want or do we want to destroy the concept altogether?

Re: A big win for Android interoperability

#100
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phone-tap-to-pay is not a real blocker. In fact I think it should be illegal for all vendors. Just use your physical plastic card. Stick it on the back of your phone if you like.

Phone tap to pay is really handy and provides more security than physical plastic cards. It should just not be used by Apple/Google to block out competitors. (Yes, I know banking apps can have their own tap-to-pay implementation on Android, but they all standardized on Google Pay because it's less work for them.)

How so?
Post reply on HN