It targets that because those old “insecure” SDKs allows people to use their system as something that isn’t a toy. Newer sdk versions refuse to run code that wasn’t included in the apk
Mobile platforms like android and iOS (more specifically GrapheneOS), are leagues ahead of desktop operating systems in terms of security because of these strict policies. and besides, you are treating untrusted code as untrusted code. I don’t see the flaw in that logic.
sure, they could use more apis for accessing system directories and stuff like that securely, but that’s not really in scope. this is for end users. not field deployment on an sbc for something.
Im gonna be honest i really don’t care about that. There is no sensitive data on my phone except maybe social media logins and i have a recent backup so🤷
Odd choice to use GrapheneOS if you don’t care about security
Not really. People’s threat models differ, some just want to escape Google’s spyware without also requiring your device be a portable iron mountain. Some may also just want the additional control GrapheneOS provides for restricting permissions of apps, or their unique play store handling etc.
GrapheneOS has a ton of positives besides its security IMO.
For me it’s just a little saddening that their secure focus conflicts with extending the life of mobile devices. Although really that’s something that probably won’t change unless we get a truly open source mobile platform, with firmware development out in the open.
@SomeBoyo What “long term support”? Official GrapheneOS releases for a device end when the official Android support ends because they don’t support hardware where the firmware is not updated anymore. Or did that change recently?
@SomeBoyo Yeah that’s the normal devices guarantee you also get with normal android on pixel devices. So in terms of longevity GrapheneOS doesn’t offer any advantages. There are other advantages of course.
that’s fair I suppose, I wasn’t saying not to use it, just that it is worth noting. these strict security policies are what makes mobile platforms much more secure than desktop platforms. I typically use my phone for security sensitive tasks because of this, so I tend to care a lot more about this stuff. if you have any banking info or password managers stored on the device, be careful.
I’ll admit, it is pretty unlikely anything to happen, though. always just better knowing.
termux targets an extremely out of date sdk and is therefore quite insecure.
It targets that because those old “insecure” SDKs allows people to use their system as something that isn’t a toy. Newer sdk versions refuse to run code that wasn’t included in the apk
Mobile platforms like android and iOS (more specifically GrapheneOS), are leagues ahead of desktop operating systems in terms of security because of these strict policies. and besides, you are treating untrusted code as untrusted code. I don’t see the flaw in that logic.
sure, they could use more apis for accessing system directories and stuff like that securely, but that’s not really in scope. this is for end users. not field deployment on an sbc for something.
Im gonna be honest i really don’t care about that. There is no sensitive data on my phone except maybe social media logins and i have a recent backup so🤷
Odd choice to use GrapheneOS if you don’t care about security. More power to you, though.
Not really. People’s threat models differ, some just want to escape Google’s spyware without also requiring your device be a portable iron mountain. Some may also just want the additional control GrapheneOS provides for restricting permissions of apps, or their unique play store handling etc.
GrapheneOS has a ton of positives besides its security IMO.
For me it’s just a little saddening that their secure focus conflicts with extending the life of mobile devices. Although really that’s something that probably won’t change unless we get a truly open source mobile platform, with firmware development out in the open.
Was more a privacy switch than a security switch
I trust you have your own threat model and know what’s best for you, but in my opinion privacy necessitates security.
The long term support might make it worth using, even if you don’t care about security/privacy
@SomeBoyo What “long term support”? Official GrapheneOS releases for a device end when the official Android support ends because they don’t support hardware where the firmware is not updated anymore. Or did that change recently?
I’m referring to “… and a minimum 5 year guarantee from launch for full security updates and other improvements”, from their FAQ.
@SomeBoyo Yeah that’s the normal devices guarantee you also get with normal android on pixel devices. So in terms of longevity GrapheneOS doesn’t offer any advantages. There are other advantages of course.
that’s fair I suppose, I wasn’t saying not to use it, just that it is worth noting. these strict security policies are what makes mobile platforms much more secure than desktop platforms. I typically use my phone for security sensitive tasks because of this, so I tend to care a lot more about this stuff. if you have any banking info or password managers stored on the device, be careful.
I’ll admit, it is pretty unlikely anything to happen, though. always just better knowing.
Do newer SDK work on obsolete devices running Android 9/10?
🤓