Remix.run Logo
Remix clone Hacker News
new | show | ask | jobsGithub
▲ scotty79 6 days ago

What about GrapheneOS?

▲zx8080 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not going to buy Pixel feeding Google further with my pennies just to use GrafeneOS.

▲fzorb 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

Well you can always buy second hand/refurbished.

▲rollcat 5 days ago | parent [-]

Viability of second-hand still drives market demand, as people have an incentive to buy devices that have resale value. The counter-argument is that otherwise this device will become e-waste. This is still a conundrum, but "don't give your money to Google" remains the active topic here, so...

▲hellojesus 5 days ago | parent [-]

True, but grapheneos only supports Pixels because of the unlocked bootloader and hardware security. If more and more people adopt Pixels solely to install Grapheneos, it may drive other hardware manufacturers to offer a device that meets Grapheneos' requirements, and then they can bank on grabbing almost all of the PixelGrapheneos market share, or at least the fraction which actively wants to avoid google (which I suspect is at least 75%).

▲immibis 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe you should buy good devices from any vendor, and the market will do what economists say it should do, and keep making those devices. (As if!)

▲preisschild 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But Google is one of the rare Android smartphones vendors that allows you to install a custom operating system, while still allowing the same security as with the default one (ie allowing bootloader re-locking with a custom key)

▲ 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲zx8080 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Is it a joke? Have you seen the list of supported devices?

https://grapheneos.org/releases

(Pixels only)

▲falcor84 6 days ago | parent [-]

Is there anything about GrapheneOS that limits it to only Pixel devices, or was it just a prioritization decision?

▲codethief 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

▲preisschild 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes. There aren't many Android smartphones that allow you to re-lock the bootloader after installing a custom operating system. Pixels are the only ones officially supporting `avb_custom_key`.

https://github.com/chenxiaolong/avbroot/issues/299

▲nunobrito 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It is sus as heck and just about everyone in cybersec was complaining about that weird decision.

Go for Calyx or any other android distro, they have zero difficulties in supporting more devices.

▲rollcat 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

GrapheneOS developers are free to set their bar wherever they like it. It's an independent, non-profit foundation, driven by community contributions. They provide a web-based, hands-free installer. They offer their work for free, and owe nothing to anyone.

Personally, I wish there was an open/libre device on the market that GrapheneOS could target.

▲fsflover 5 days ago | parent [-]

> Personally, I wish there was an open/libre device on the market that GrapheneOS could target.

You mean, Pinephone and Librem 5?

▲rollcat 5 days ago | parent [-]

Let's start with HW secure element and boot chain verification (IMHO the minimum bar that's met by e.g. a 2013 Thinkpad), then work thru the rest of GrapheneOS' checklist.

Also: Android. If I didn't need Android/iOS apps, I'd be using a Nokia 3210.

▲fsflover 5 days ago | parent [-]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45101400

> Also: Android

Waydroid can run Android apps.

▲hellojesus 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Suspicion constantly comes up in this regard, but their site (as linked by another commenter) provides their rationale.

The last cellbrite leaks show it as more secure against attacks from le than the current iphones, and that's more important to me than abandoning google hardware.

▲ghgr 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Serious question: can you point out some serious complaints? They seem to have an exhaustive justification for their reasons to only support Pixels, see https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

▲ruszki 5 days ago | parent [-]

This list always bugged me. If Pixel - for example - starts to introduce security patches slower, they will change this list... or even ignore it. If something more secure comes into the picture, they will change this list, and they will ditch supporting Pixel. If they don't, then it will be quite obvious, that they formed this list only to meet only Pixel's feature list. Also Google can obviously satisfy this list more easily, than any other company, so basically they created a moot for them.

▲hans_castorp 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Calyx development has stopped.