Thread

Android 17 is the first since 3.x to add new APIs without releasing to the AOSP

1180 points · 723 comments · theanonymousone

wps · 1789760710 · focus · HN ↗
The amount of roadblocks Google is putting up for GrapheneOS is just ridiculous. None of their decisions make any sense, from the delayed source patches upstream, to the embargos, attestation issues, etc. Google simply regrets android being open source.
1. 7734128 · 1789761296 · focus · HN ↗
  It's not a regret. Android would never have been popular in the first place if it had not been open source. If phone makers had been able to anticipate how much the demons at Google would be able to lock down the Android then they would never had used the OS back in ~2009.
  1. thevillagechief · 1789761797 · focus · HN ↗
    I don't think this is actually true. Phone makers seem happy to have the platform locked down even further. They're putting even more roadblocks, as evidenced by most of them making bootloaders unlockable.
    alightsoul · 1789764021 · focus · HN ↗
    Any discussion about this is shut down. I just read an article <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckqxvy98x578o" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckqxvy98x578o In the UK according to the BBC, politicians are pressing Samsung and apple to make stolen phones bricks. Samsung in response said that they have implemented several security features for this purpose. I think Samsung considers removing OEM unlocking a security feature according to the bootloader unlock hall of shame.
    Intel used to do the same with their anti theft technology aka Intel theft deterrent on their classmate PCs, so students had to enter unlock codes from an IT admin every 3 months or every say 200 boots to prevent the computer from being locked at the bios level preventing it from booting an OS, and there was an update which disabled that functionality permanently. And you would be warned when you had around 50 boots left to get the unlock code.
    mitxela · 1789779447 · focus · HN ↗
    Normally you have to unlock the phone before unlocking the bootloader, and that is the protection.
    alightsoul · 1789787099 · focus · HN ↗
    I would think they are guessing most people's passwords are weak or something. Like a screen pattern is weak, can be broken in just 300k attempts or maybe less because people use the same patterns and people can't be bothered to use passphrases.
    tancop · 1789837321 · focus · HN ↗
    PIN and patterns are secure because the security module enforces rate limits, you can't brute force effectively if every attempt after the first 10 takes a minute. Biometrics can be even better against brute force (more possible combinations) but they are vulnerable to cloning.
    With a 6 digit code cracking it will take close to a year on average. With your screen pattern example it's around 100 days. That's more than enough time for the owner to notice and turn on anti theft features. Maybe even for the police to find and return the phone.
    alightsoul · 1789861685 · focus · HN ↗
    I think the average person doesn't know they can use the find my phone feature on Android to lock their phone. When their phone is stolen they just get sad and call it a day and get another one. Maybe report it to police if they care in your country if they don't care, you just get a new one the day after.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.