• gravitas@lem.ugh.im
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Its not up to grapheneos devs which devices support bootloader relocking with different keys, literally only pixels allow this and without it you cant properly secure the phone.

    • unhrpetby@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      …without it you cant properly secure the phone.

      My understanding is that a locked bootloader helps protect against evil maid attacks and bootloader-level malware persistence. I find this a security risk that I would absolutely take for Google independence. “Properly secure” is subjective.

      GrapheneOS do decide what phones they support. It is exactly their choice to support only Google Pixels, rather than taking a security hit for hardware independence (whether you agree with the decision or not).

      • Dave@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        GrapeneOS have a specific goal related to security. You can install one of the others, like LineageOS, if you are happy with the tradeoff.

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours ago

          and the tradeoff includes dozens more permissions related features that don’t rely on hardware security features

      • yaroto98@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Exactly, seems like this should be up to the consumer. The devs can say: pixels have best security, here’s a 2nd and 3rd option, here’s their pros and cons.

        Because as much as I approve of privacy measures and security, my phone doesn’t have any lock screen. No pin, no biometrics, nothing.

        I work from home, I don’t really travel, I have 4 children. Physical security is annoying. I want grapheneos for data security. I don’t have people trying to steal my phone, I do have people constantly stealing my data.

        And without a non-pixel option (fuck google), I’m likely to go for to a competitor because, while their data security might not be as good as graphene, it is better than what I currently have.

        • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I think the bigger issue is that supporting more devices can add a ton of extra work to the dev team, which is small. That could sacrifice the integrity of the whole project.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        21 hours ago

        No other phone supports the relocking bootloader and that is there requirement. There is no other phone they can support. You might not like their requirements but they are pretty clear about it.

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          which is not true, as fairphones also support relocking. Besides, graphene has dozens of other very useful features that don’t rely on hardware security features or the ability to relock. and I guarantee you, if another android rom adopted their unique features, they would be loudly complaining that they are stealing code (from an open source project…)