• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So who do we think? It’s not Fair phone and it sounds like it’s not oneplus. I’ll be needing a new phone within the next couple of years, if they roll it out soonish

      • the_weez@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I actually think this could be it. Nokia has always been a little adventurous with their operating systems, and I think they are eager to claw back their old reputation.

        • Lumisal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s not.

          Have a friend who works at a decently high position here in Finland and they actually are considering exiting the smartphone market all together because the margins are too small and they make easy more money on other things, like 5G equipment. They kind of want to move past being associated with phones basically.

    • kata1yst@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I mean those are the first two I’d suspect too. Maybe Sony or Pico? They’re both pretty dev friendly.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I can’t wait to hear more. Please just make a phone that I’ll want to buy. My phone is 4 years old and there’s just nothing I want to replace it with yet.

    It has become less and less of an issue over time though. Not only have I gotten used to using my phone FAR less with positive health results, but I have set myself up to have access to my Linux PC during the “chill with the family on the couch” times in the evening when one might zone out on their phone for a bit. That’s what I’m using right now!

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      A HW manufacturer (aka OEM) will share specs and interfaces with the GrapheneOS team, who will develop an official port for the hardware, with support and everything. The OEM will allow bootloader unlocking and maybe even ship some of these phones with Graphene preinstalled, depending on what their contract with Google allows. To this day, only Pixels have officially received GrapheneOS releases because Google has documented their hardware interfaces in AOSP. Now, AOSP is no longer developed with the Pixel as a target but a virtual device, putting the future of GrapheneOS on Pixels into question (the team refuses to use reverse-engineered hardware interfaces, which may result in bugs).

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    But if google goes on with locking out the app store with the developer verification bs, how would would this play into that? If Aurora won’t install the app or the app won’t run, then we’ve accomplished little in that area. I’m really hoping I’m missing something.

    • kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Custom ROMs should be able to disable the checks. My bigger concern is what it does to the open app ecosystem as a whole.

      • cmhe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        TBH I would actually expect GrapheneOS not to disable these checks. GrapheneOS devs pride themselves to have the best implementation of the official Android security model, and enforcing signature checks is likely part of that…

        They might add additional certificates I guess, to allow their own apps, and maybe a selected few others.

        • Fiery@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Except this ‘signing’ is more of a control feature than a security feature. Just because Google markets it as a security feature doesn’t mean it is.

          • cmhe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Well… The Android security model, as it is implemented in stock android and GOS, is about top down control, the full trust is given to the system vendors, not the end users. No rooting for instance. From this perspective not allowing installation of apps that cannot be blocked by the system vendor, fits well with that model.

            TBH, I am not a fan of that security model. And this is my critique of GOS. It doesn’t allow the user full access to their device, so that they can check and control what each application is storing or sending to third-party servers. Instead it is on full security and allows apps to store and transfer information to which the user has no access to.

            But the system vendor/developers would have that access, because they control the whole base system.

            The focus of the Android security model and in turn of GOS is on security, at the cost of privacy or freedom.

        • Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          This is incorrect. The sideloading checks are implemented in Play Protect, which needs elevated privileges to function. On GrapheneOS, Google Play services run with normal privileges, just like any other user-installed app. This means, there are no Play Protect checks in GrapheneOS, and there will never be. It would only be possible on ROMs, such as LineageOS with Gapps, where Play services are installed as system apps, running with higher privileges than all other apps.

          • cmhe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            30 days ago

            Well, good to know.

            I was thinking more about the way of Android security models, and that it would make sense for GOS to restrict available storefronts to stay consistent with their way to implement them. But good to know that it will not automatically happen just by updating the google services.

            And I would also think that people would likely complain if they where to implement it in a different way.

  • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Qualcomm isn’t exactly the best vendor to choose either. They’re US-based, closely-aligned with the US government as a military contractor, and the baseband/processor are heavily integrated on many chipsets, even sharing memory. That means a compromised carrier network could twiddle bits that the operating system sees, if they so wanted. Among many other issues.

    There’s something about a Samsung Exynos designed to spec by Google that is actually more desirable even with the lack of compute performance. More fingers in the pot, less chance of some sneakiness working its way in.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    There aren’t too many OEMs that sell worldwide. So that would be one of Samsung, Sony, Moto, OnePlus.

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh man, please. My current Motorola could use replacing, official Graphene support would be fantastic

        • picnic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          How come? I’d bet they’d be the most easiest “oem” to get started with.

          All western ones will be on the mercy of google licencing, so I’d guess no one wants to burn bridges.

          • kalapala@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m quite sure no one would consider Chinese company as safe option for privacy and clearly security focused phone.

            Also as Sony already has the Sailfish support the company is likely going to be Sony.

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I agree, Motorola is owned by Lenovo. They have found middling success with the return of their Razr line and with phones in the lower to mid tier range. But they really want something super flagship. Something like the Think Phone would have probably sold really well with a Graphene option.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Device hardware, firmware, and software are integrated to protect your most sensitive data from mobile threats. With Moto KeySafe, PINs, passwords, and cryptographic keys are isolated from other device data for an added layer of high-level security.

          Yeah this sounds like what Graphene insists on.

          • deafboy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            That sounds like a fancy speak for a Trusted Platform Module. Isn’t some kind of TPM mandatory to obtain a google certification for a new device?

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The only way a graphene is phone gets major adaptation is if you could use pay with it.

          • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I think people overestimate that feature. Where I live you still have to hand your card to the teller most of the time and nobody is handing their phone over for tap to pay.

            • Jakaan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I think you underestimate it. Where I live, 39% of card transactions used a mobile wallet last year.

            • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              hmm how bout round the world?

              Like Germans prefer cash but tons go all digital—yuge in China for example, Apple Pay’s big stateside (USA)…

              Curious your region btw to expand my knowledge on this

              • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                I live in the US and I also just got back from a 10 day trip that had me in 6 different airports around the US and saw basically nobody using their phones to pay. I saw a bunch of people using the translate app, the camera, FaceTime, Apple wallet for boarding passes, but no tap to pay.

                I think it’s because the places that use it also have their own apps, like Starbucks. You can order and pay in the app and if you are likely to setup Apple Pay you are probably fine going all the way with the app too. The same is true of Walmart and other major retailers who also specifically don’t take Apple or Google pay because they want you to use their app.

                • shinratdr@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  It’s heavily used everywhere else in the world, the US is well-known to lag behind on payment technology. It’s like travelling back in time when you go there.

                  I pay with my phone literally everywhere in Canada, haven’t opened my wallet in months. I was in the US last year and they didn’t have mobile payment terminals at restaurants so you always had to pay for sit down service at a counter, always wanted me to sign for tap, kept calling it Apple Pay instead of tap or contactless, had places that would only swipe a physical card which isn’t even allowed in other countries anymore, it’s crazy.

                  Walmart takes tap in Canada, they were one of the last holdouts. The “individual app for each service” thing is very American, even American companies abroad don’t do it because they’ll lose business. It’s the same thing with cash transfers. There are 100 different private ways to send money in the US. PayPal, CashApp, Facebook Pay, Apple Pay, Venmo, etc.

                  None of those exist in Canada because we just have Interac e-transfers. Hard to compete with free & automatic support by every bank account in the country. Other countries have similar systems. The US has Zelle but as far as I know that was implemented way later and doesn’t have the mindshare.

                • ilovepiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  So random that the USA is lagging behind in this regard, travelled Europe - everyone using phone pay, and in Australia my home country, it’s pretty much the only way people pay nowadays.

            • johan@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I pay with a normal card but I’d say the majority of people around me pay with their phone.

              Also, I need to use my bank app to pay for things online. I scan a QR code and confirm the payment with a pin or fingerprint. Correct me if I’m wrong but I think many bank apps also don’t work properly with graphene.

              Edit: maybe I’m getting confused, I thought bank apps normally needed google play services and that because of that they don’t work on grapheneOS, but I don’t know if that’s correct

          • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Not really. The kind of people this ROM caters to are exactly the kind of people who don’t use Google Pay to begin with.

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ooh yeah let’s get a 6" 2025 take on the OG Motorola Droid with the slide out keyboard, to make it more linux-phone-y.

        • Brown5500@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I have had several versions of the Moto G family and they’re pretty easy to repair. Usually under $30 for a screen. Trickiest part is glueing the back panel back on.

    • IBoris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I hope Sony simply because I want a headphone jack and an MicroSD card reader. Their phones are already pretty bloat free and their custom apps, usually focused on the camera system, would mesh very well with GrapheneOS. Would be a great way for them to become relevant again.

      • viking@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Samsung is also a synonym for useless bloat, locked boatloaders, intrusive ads, and every other hostile feature ever. They are the last one to open up their phones.

  • courval@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Disappointed to learn about Fairphone lagging behind in terms of security… I really wanted to get one. But still good news I guess.

    • DupaCycki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not really a ‘Fairphone issue’ and more a general ‘smartphone issue’. The vast majority of OEMs don’t invest into security and just use random parts with mostly stock Android. Sometimes they actually make it worse by replacing AOSP apps with their less secure ones. Which sadly will become more common with Google abandoning AOSP.

      Fairphone simply isn’t focused on security. Should that change? Are Fairphone users interested in improved security?

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m not saying the information about Fairphone is wrong, but you shouldn’t assume it’s all as bad as they made it out to be. You’re reading a marketing pitch from one group that works with one vendor saying why another vendor isn’t that good.