No cap fr chat

We do be bussin out here

💯💯💯💯💯

Indubitably

It has security through obscurity, for what that's worth. As in, no one's tailoring large-scale phishing efforts and the like towards a Linux phone. Also, being willing to daily drive a Linux phone probably means you have good enough opsec awareness to avoid becoming low-hanging fruit.

All bets are off if a nation-state or the likes of Palantir go after the platform or a specific user/device, but you're Probably Safe™ from most run-of-the-mill bullshit targeting phones these days. Your phone might not be secure in a technical sense, but the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

Android uses the Linux kernel but is not a GNU Linux distro if you need a distinction.

WHAT?????

According to Graphene they think it is cost cutting. Since it uses a lot of space.

If Moto doesn't fuck it up by not having multiple options at different price points (I want to be able to have a flagship that can last, but want to see people that need mid or low tier also have real options). Then I would love to have a real option for ditching Samsung after so long. I just need the camera to be on par with my S24U and to have at least 12GB of RAM to help lasting for years without the old days of just feeling so slow after two years for me. Really doesn't help that the RAM and NAND likely causing regressions while prices are the same or higher than stuff from last year.

But beyond those two personal wants, it will need for Moto to be in it for the long haul as the most important thing. Not just going back to only regular Android if this first release isn't popular with mainstream buyers. Which is what I fear happening if the folks at the top and shareholders don't see Samsung levels of sales.

You refuse to believe? So you are either willfully ignorant or consciously delusional.

Instead of crying on lemme why don't you go educate yourself...

Toe the line by presenting an argument, if you believe I'm wrong.

Otherwise you're cucked

can't keep maintaining GOS on Pixel devices

Where did you get this? It was never said that they can't maintain it. Google just isn't releasing the firmware and reverse engeneering every piece of it is a nightmare and at that point you might as well make your own brand.

collaborating with other manufacturers than just Motorola

towards more decentralized hardware that can serve their needs while also having the ability to be manufactured by multiple vendors in a white label way.

Because graphene isn't a project that developes phones? Also, Youre still relying on snapdragon and other manufacturers to make key components of your phones.

I refuse to believe that the most secure OS can't be installed on the most OSH.

Time to change your mind I guess:

First of all, OSS dosent mean runs on everything.

1. Even if someone tried to port graphene to other hardware, they would have to remove key software from the port, like memory tagging, hardened malloc, etc. Which defeats the purpose of using Graphene over any other OS.

2. OS also dosent mean secure, or even good. Just look at the insane amount of open source software wrappers and snakes.

Biggest hope would be the French government to do stuff to help out Murena

Samsung levels of sales??
Moto??

Nah, they'll just do like fairphone and let buyers decide between two OS's

Good. Software needs to go back to boring.

The increased hardware prices and pr spam make it worse.

Where did you get this?

Did you read the rest of the sentence? I said I refuse to believe they can't maintain Pixel GOS while also simultaneously doing research & development on finding a non-corporate, non-Google, non-Motorola hardware solution. Many people are saying that GOS can't do both. I refuse to believe that. GOS Foundation could set aside resources internally to figure shit out, if they wanted to. I don't see any reason they don't have the ability to do that.

Because graphene isn't a project that developes phones?

I understand that. But corporate lock out by Google and I predict also Motorola will mean that GOS will perpetually need to jump from sinking ship to sinking ship. Having control of the hardware that doesn't come from a corporation means that they can develop their most secure OS without worrying about an expiration date on the hardware. I'm not saying I want GOS to make their own chips and phones. I'm saying I want GOS to partner with at least one OSH manufacturer like Pine64, Jolla, Purism, Fairphone, F(x)tec, SHIFT, Volla, Liberux, etc. so THEY can work on the hardware while aiming to meet GOS' requirements.

Time to change your mind I guess

I'm sorry, but privacy isn't freedom. GOS isn't the most perfect solution for all of time. I'm advocating for GOS to think about their future given a world of capitalism which seeks to destroy all our freedoms in the name of profit.

Even if someone tried to port graphene to other hardware

Existing hardware isn't sufficient. THAT IS WHY I'M ADVOCATING FOR GOS TO PARTNER WITH OTHERS SO THAT EVENTUALLY THEY CAN MAKE THE SWITCH AWAY FROM GOOGLE/MOTOROLA WHILE MAINTAINING ALL FUNCTIONALITY OF GOS.

Look I'm coding with ai every day.
Can we please stop pretending it don't increase productivity 100x

Sorry that I'm not a software developer and cybersecurity and cryptography expert. I rely on the expertise of, for example, those who run the GrapheneOS Foundation.

Clearly, you know better than they do.

It sounds like you don’t understand what the pixel phones are, what graphene is and what open source is.

The pixel phones used to be a reference implementation for an Android handset. A while ago Google decided to try to actually compete in the market and that meant designing hardware people would actually pick over a Samsung or whatever based on the numbers. So they put a chip in the new phone that doesn’t do emte because it makes everything slower.

Graphenes goal is to be the most secure phone os. That means they’re not competing against other Android based software packages, but against ios. It’s a tough row to hoe because whereas apple can develop hardware support for emte and software support across all first party apps and even offer it to developers in a very well documented framework then announce it in a big flashy press conference with the kicker that you can buy the system next month, graphene has to make it a granular switch system that will cause hangs, slowdown and crashes on even the aosp system apps.

Open source hardware doesn’t mean securable hardware. It’s easy to make open source platforms that are fundamentally insecure with no possible software path to remediation.

Now if you want to install some parts of graphene on unsupported devices there’s a fork out there, but it’s pretty stupid to do that since you’re giving up all the security of graphene and gaining all the roadblocks it puts in the way of doing insecure things with apps.

E: spelling

I don’t understand

It sounds like you don’t understand - TrollAccount69

Username accurate.

Somebody's got to make the phones. You're not going to find a bunch of modders who can manufacture millions of devices, so there's gonna be corporate involvement somewhere along the line. Now that Google is no longer sharing the Pixel firmware, GrapheneOS is working directly with a manufacturer that will.

You do known it's not some big organization right? Have you donated millions to the project to help this along?

I'm not really a programmer so I couldn't really help in that capacity. I could donate but I also should donate to all of the other FOSS software that I use. What would be the best use of my money?

Do the most evil or something like that

That’s some good clippin.

Or everybody who isn’t Google will have to collaborate on a hard fork of AOSP.

Along with the Google Play dependencies and Android SDK that everything is tied to. Or we could use an OS that already exists and doesn't have any of that bullshit called "Linux".

Maintaining an entire OS doesn't sound like a sustainable amount of effort. Linux already has an ecosystem surrounding it that's not about to get crushed by a single corporation. The biggest issue is hardware support and security takes a lot more effort which goes against their main goal. Hopefully the rise of ARM laptops will help with the first point.

Better to donate to none so you don't hurt any feelings..

Thanks for being no help!

Can OSH be secured hardware? Is there a fundamental contradiction there?

I suppose if schematics for chips are available to the public, then it would be easy enough for a trained bad actor to follow those schematics and identify hardware vulnerabilities that they could attack.

Does this mean that the product GOS Foundation provides necessarily has to be closed source? Open source and privacy can never coexist?

It is possible for open source hardware to be securable hardware. Of course, someone has to design it, manufacture it and distribute it and eventually it will be unsecurable because new vulnerabilities and capabilities are developed every day, so that someone will have to design, manufacture and distribute a successor and the old hardware will have to be deprecated.

All that costs money and the people who care about security are a super small group so graphene chooses hardware that is “accidentally” securable. The reference implementation pixel phones are a great example. Google doesn’t care about security or graphene. But they built a phone intended to do the hard work of putting all the possible parts together so that other manufacturers could look and see how they could do an Android phone with some feature (or even some better feature) without having to spend a bunch of cash doing it from scratch. It just so happens that Google included relockable (this is different and more important for security than unlockable) bootloaders, a processor with memory tagging support and a big pile of documentation in case you want to use those features.

Then Google indicated that it was gonna stop doing everyone else’s work for them. There are a bunch of reasons for this and I’m not gonna go into them but I will summarize some analysis: you should make it a priority to move away from Android devices eventually depending on your citizenship and stop relying on the securability of a computer system of any type. Doing everyone’s work for them was why the pixel phones were such a good target for graphene, they had the features and the documentation. Now that Google isn’t making reference implementations anymore, they don’t intend to have every feature (notably security features) or give out docs.

So the graphene people switched to Motorola. The new Motorola phone that’s expected to run graphene wasn’t designed for it, it just so happens to have the features and the company agreed to give them the documentation required. It’s “accidentally” securable.

That’s how graphene works. There isn’t an alternative for them. They don’t have the money, capital or expertise to design and release a phone specifically for security and there isn’t a market for that product they could endeavor to sell to and get a loan against the promise of.

I want to make sure we’re on the same page: graphene is open source. There are open source projects that prioritize security. Security and privacy are different things.

Thanks. I wanted to focus on the part you missed for some reason.

I didn’t miss it, I was trying to use it as a rhetorical tool to help the commenter recognize that material conditions keep the things they seem to think are how it ought to be from happening.

“You think it’s one way but it’s the other.” To steal a phrase from a show. I wanted to use that as a hook to keep the readers interest through what is a pretty dry topic.

E: grammar

called postmarketOS