487
The days of custom Android ROMs are numbered, and Google is to blame (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/android@lemdro.id
132 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (18 children)
[deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Yeah, I though of those two & it's just a thing that would get/will get developed if we get to daily drive Linux phones, imho.

    Its not like it didn't take Android years to get those two aspects covered.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    Didn't know/remember about KitKat verified boot, but the sandboxing thing was prob just to kernel & perhaps some system files, def not user or hardware such as cameras. Including between apps & phone contacts, etc.

    And I totally agree about lack of Linux phones (as hardware), the phone market with its size & megacorp subsidies to preinstall spybloatware is a giant hurdle.

    And the real reason for closed sauce drivers (as a practice, not as if they should open-sauce old hardware now - that's a security risk for unsuspecting folk & iot ... but we could def transition the practice).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    There's no "mobile Linux". Linux supports Secure Boot just fine, and if a distro wants to sandbox applications that too is done by just configuring Linux to do so (after all, that's what Android does).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Why? That has nothing to do with the topic we're discussing. You can configure Linux as Android does it, or choose not to.

    (Secure Boot is what enables "Verified boot" - which is just Android's name for a common sense secure boot loader implementation which is the norm in well protected IoT systems etc)

    /ex Sony Mobile dev, nowadays IoT hw/fw ethical hacker

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Android boots in layers that are encrypted with different keys. The first key in the TPM enlocks the base OS up to the lock screen. From there a pin is entered and the rest of the system is decrypted.

    If a compromise happened in the OS the phone would just fail to boot since the integrity of the system is validated by the TPM.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yes, that's how a normal bootchain works in every system ever - like the IoT device running Linux I'm right now working with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Linux does not suck on phones regarding security. Linux is what brings the security mechanisms faulty ascribed to as being "Android's". See previous posters claiming it was all "extensive modifications" by Android and not just Linux security mechanisms.

    Feel free to get a Fairphone 4, sign your Ubuntu Touch image with keys supported by the chipset and off you go. The fact that no one is selling you that has no relevance whatsoever to whether "Linux" supports it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Linux doesn't have the same permission controls. SElinux profiles would need to be manually configured for each app which would take a lot of time.

    Mobile linux also doesn't support measured boot which is what is used to protect the system in the case of theft. Before I consider mobile Linux it would be nice if there was a detailed security review of the entire system.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I think this will sort itself out quicker if you show me what "mobile linux" is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ubuntu Touch, Postmarket OS and others

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    The mobile linux tends to leave root access enabled plus it doesn't sandbox apps in the same way as Android. If you visit a web page that manages to exploit your web browser all bets are off since lateral movement is trivial inside the OS.

    Android on the other hand has strong sandboxing and permission control which means that a compromise in one place shouldn't be able to jump to other places. Android also restricts filesystem access so even if an app is compromised it is difficult to maintain persistence.

    Phones has lots of sensors and are great for tracking people. I would rather that my phones OS be extremely secure so that I'm not the victim of spyware.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent