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?
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.
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.
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 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).
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.
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.
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
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.
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 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.