Yeah, my Pyra will be my new phone due to privacy. . .


Djoga'Ro

moonstruck
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
1,365
I can't find anything about a separat Sailfish Secure OS. Has it just been merged into mainline SOS? Or has it been dropped at some point in time?
How much trust does one have to invest in Jolla to call SOS secure in terms of privacy? It's not all open source, IIRC, is it?

Speaking Android custom ROMs, is Project Treble a godsent or rather a wolf in sheep' clothing? I mean it sounds like easing up the process of producing custom ROMs and developers would only have to compile one release to cater to all devices - did I get that right so far? But isn't it also a way of pulling the actual hardware away from the developers' attention? Though, I have no idea how much the developers implemented hardware access themself to date - hence my question.

Anyone here convincable of porting postmarketOS to the Moto G5? :)
 
Last edited:

rygD

Nihilistic Mystic
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
7,453
Location
Everywhere
I can't find anything about a separat Sailfish Secure OS. Has it just been merged into mainline SOS? Or has it been dropped at some point in time?
When I came across it i was checking out related articles on Wikipedia. I don't know if it was merged into mainline, but I would think that to be a good idea and don't see any downside (although I don't know the target audience of Sailfish). I think there was also a chart that mentioned it somewhere on some article or linked page, however I lack time to look for that right now. As I understood it, the "secure" version was initially made for a smartphone with specific requirements, so maybe it is maintained by those people, or it died. You got my curiosity up, so maybe I will check it out some time.

My stupid question is why don't those behind mobile OSs try to make the most secure, hardened version of their OS that they can? Wouldn't Google still be able to steal collect sensitive personal info stuff to make the best user experience possible without making every user a gigantic target? Sure, I suppose part of the responsibility lies with the user, and you can't always be sure that those behind that thing you absolutely want on your phone don't have unknown devious intentions, especially if you are unwilling to go with the Apple model. I know that is somewhat contradictory. I figure those smarter than me could make it happen.

My reasoning is that most people have a lot of stuff on their smartphone that they don't want everyone to see, and they may not be thinking about that when they grant permission to the pretty themed text thingy access to their files, which they intend to use to send pics and such to others. They also don't expect it to listen to all their conversations and pick up on things that could be harmful to them if it got out (financial info, for example). If my family is any indication, most people with these devices always have them on them, and use them to do many things that are of a sensitive nature. These should be running an OS that is far more secure than that on their computer (yeah, that is laughable in itself). I don't want to get into specific details, or make guesses about things I don't know, but the things I do know about, know how to do, or have done, are pretty frightening when coupled with the knowledge of the things people use them for. Some of these things can be implemented by default without the user noticing much difference (encrypt everything stored on the device), and other things require small changes that are similar to the inconveniences they are used to dealing with as software changes anyway. Once they get used to doing things a certain way the user complaints will go away. Ultimately Android is a commercial product (I am not going to argue about licensing and shit, you know what I mean), so the default setup intended for smartphones and tablets should be protecting the user. It sucks that I say that, because really this is the type of thing that in other aspects of life I would tend to say the opposite. But, really, users are stupid. They don't know they are stupid. Rather than setting them up to be victims by those other than Google, they should have to go out of their way to do really stupid stuff (ya know, within reason... It is their own fault if they reply all, or drunk dial, or send naked pics to mom instead of Tom).

I don't even know what I am going on about...yeah, I want to use my Pyra as a smartphone, too. It seems like the perfect smartphone for me. With a wired headset, that is. I wish I could send myself one back in the early 90s.
 

Grench

Forum Addict!
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
6,466
Sorry I didn't mean to turn this into a rant. I just meant to agree wholeheartedly to the OP and explain my extreme distaste for the pieces of money-hungry privacy-invading untrustworthy shit that are Android OS and iOS.
Please - rant on. We're all in this together. You forgot a few more bits though.

Having a device that I truly own and can update as long as I want to. No carrier induced obsolescence.

Despite having purchased my phone (not leased), an AT&T Galaxy Note 3, I am not able to acquire my own OS updates. This means that despite the hardware in the phone being perfectly serviceable for any modern application, it is forever stuck at Android 5.0 as the carrier has decided to no longer provide updates - and will not unlock the bootloader to allow me to update it myself. As time marches by the static OS is becoming less and less secure. Frankly, carriers should be legally required to unlock the bootloaders of any phone they sell from the date they are no longer willing to supply OS and security updates.
 

rygD

Nihilistic Mystic
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
7,453
Location
Everywhere
I totally agree. Actually, they shouldn't be able to restrict what I do with a device I purchase ever, not just after they end official support.
 

FBnil

Waiting to Champion the Pyra to the World...
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
3,218
Location
Yurp
carriers should be legally required to unlock
Can't you go somewhere else (another city/country) where you get another carrier which DOES allow updating?
 

Djoga'Ro

moonstruck
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
1,365
As I understood it, the "secure" version was initially made for a smartphone with specific requirements, so maybe it is maintained by those people, or it died.
I think it was also made palatable with something in the lines of: Governments and larger organisations could adopt it themselfs for the devices they use.

My stupid question is why don't those behind mobile OSs try to make the most secure, hardened version of their OS that they can?
I'd think they do try. Not wanting any beasts take bites out of their dairy cows for one. And not losing attraction for being the ones with the dangerous devices for two.


@Grench No, you've just got to stop using that broken device and buy a functional new one...


Can't you go somewhere else (another city/country) where you get another carrier which DOES allow updating?
I guess, it's more about AT&T being the OS's vendor, i.e. the only valid update provider, not providing updates anymore and sitting on the key, needed to unlock the device. ?
 
Last edited:

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
12,294
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
Frankly, carriers should be legally required to unlock the bootloaders of any phone they sell from the date they are no longer willing to supply OS and security updates.
Did you buy the phone from your carrier? As a European used to buying his own phone from here there and everywhere, then sticking in SIM from a carrier, I wouldn't expect any help from my carrier unless the SIM card itself broke. I think it's the manufacturers who provide updates, so your recourse is either to them, or more likely to the shop that sold you the device.

Trouble is even in europe, shops are largely able to wash their hands of supporting you after 24 months. You could arguably take them to court, but you'd need money. I'm just glad there are shops like ED's dragonbox who'll support your device as long as they're affordably able to.
 

Grench

Forum Addict!
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
6,466
Did you buy the phone from your carrier?
Yes. Here in the US, phones are fairly carrier specific. Yes, you can get a carrier unlocked phone, but then you receive no updates at all. All software updates get tied to the carrier specific version of a phone.

How updates get handled -- Google updates Android, Samsung updates the phone-specific info and adds bloat and passes it only to the carrier who then adds their specific info and adds bloat then pushes updates on the carrier's own schedule. It takes forever and the manufacturer and the carrier have absolutely 0 incentive to supply updates past their own device warranty coverage.

My 5 year old phone's hardware suits me better than anything currently being produced and I've yet to find anything it won't run. Swapable battery, microSDXC slot with a 200GB card in it, etc... I can't even find anything with a user swapable battery anymore - which is baked in obsolescence too.
 

benoitb

Very Active Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
635
Age
35
Location
Finland
The simple fact that you use the word carrier for your mobile network operators is telling.

I don't know about today's situation but when I looked a few years ago I think the majors operators used different frequencies and technologies that meant a single phone could rarely be used efficiently on different operators anyway.
 

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
12,294
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
Ah, you can buy phones like that from carriers here, though it's far more usual to rent it on contract from them. Personally, for my past half dozen phones I've bought the hardware from various electronics suppliers, and just rented a SIM from various carriers. Then you're not running an OS with the carrier's bloat on it, and you can use the manufacturer's updates.

Edit: @beniotb carriers do use different frequencies, but that was mostly a problem with 1G and early 2G phones. Later 2G phones could handle most of not all of the frequencies in use in a particular territory, and since about 3G it's not something you need to care about as long as you only expect your phone to work in Europe.
 

Djoga'Ro

moonstruck
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
1,365
I can't even find anything with a user swapable battery anymore
I did. That's one reason I got myself the Moto G5, plus there are some custom ROMs to be found at XDA. (G5 Plus has a fixed battery though, and I think both G5S, too.)

When it comes to frequency coverage, the over the top hyped Oneplus 5T has only one technical variant. ;)
 
Top