this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
81 points (96.6% liked)
Privacy
32159 readers
557 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Tell you what: I agree with you on this. If one is truly paranoid and takes physical security into account, a rooted stock OS is a far better option in terms of restricting access to system files (not saying the CIA/MOSSAD can't do it, but your random reddit-informed script kiddie definitely can't). Indeed, rooting your stock OS, firewalling everything and deleting telemetry might be a decent idea (there are ways to install security patches on rooted mobiles, not to worry).
Edit: on the matter of CalyxOS, I wouldn't go as far as to fault them on it. Grapehene has taken a resolution to either block/use their own almanac servers. This requires a fair bit of work. Oh, and what domain do Google chips use for almanacs anyway?
Yes, but if you want sell a secure OS to people it should be really secure and not have big blind spots hidden from the users like this one.
One could argue about funding/interest when there are other things to fix. Essentially, when someone develops FOSS, people don't get to order them around on what to do. I'm very pleased with what Calyx and Graphene have achieved till date and support them wholeheartedly (speaking of which, I should get back to donating, money is a bit tight though). But yes, perhaps a disclaimer for the paranoid people on Calyx's website could be a decent idea.
It isn't about being paranoid. It's about knowing where you're stepping, not everyone has time / can do proper research and I'm sure there are people running Calyx / others that aren't aware of that boot security issue and if they were they wouldn't be using it.
Look those projects are great as you said and I'm very grateful they exist but people should know what they're "buying into" when it comes to security and privacy.
I think the industry/market generally realises that Graphene is the most secure Android OS there is. I'm interested in trying to understand how they implemented locking the bootloader and why other ROMs aren't picking this up yet. Maybe it's just a lot of work.
I think people who go on to flash Calyx definitely know the advantages of locking one's bootloader and that using Calyx doesn't let you do that. I think ROMs such as these also explicitly mention that the bootloader cannot be locked once said ROM is installed. I understand if someone doesn't have the time but if they had enough time to understand how to flash a ROM on their mobile one would think they'd be interested in such details too (well, if they aren't, then they likely don't care).
From what I know it isn't only about "a lot of work" its about phone vendors having to support that in the first place.
From what I see in this post and others doesn't seem like it. Seems like a lot of people are unaware of this issue.
Bootloader is relocked after flashing Calyx on an FP4. Are you saying that isn't actually the case?
That's only possible on a small subset of devices and I actually remember that even for the FP4 they said in some devices it doesn't work due to some bug and may lead to a bricked phone.
Ok. My understanding is that Calyx only supports devices that allows relocking, which essentially means Pixels, FP4 and some Shift-device (according to their documentation). So I become a bit confused when it is claimed that it cannot be done at all in Calyx, and that this is some big truth that its users (me included) are not privvy to.
https://calyxos.org/docs/guide/device-support/
It can be installed in other phones besides those that can be relocked. I guess you're referring to actual "official support". Anyway the "rant" (https://lemmy.world/comment/4965517) was more about other ROMs, not specifically Calyx as they are indeed one of the better options.