I think i’ve heard graphene-heads say the Pixels have some specific hardware features that make them more secure and is the reason graphene only works on them. Still i’m not gonna give google any money, i’d rather vote with my wallet and get an FP next
I don’t have a source (and am not who you replied to), but it could be that Google sells Pixels at a slight loss in an effort to get more people on the platform. Maybe not loss, in the traditional sense, but more so in that they build getting people into the Google ecosystem into the price.
For sure, and that’s where I thought they were going with it. But unless there is a source for how much it cost google to have the phone made, and how much they’re expecting to make back with users in their ecosystem, it’s just guess work.
I’d probably get a pixel for my next phone if this were the case, but I’d want to be sure.
An unlocked bootloader for a user that cares about physical security and privacy is a show-stopper. It basically gives up the keys to the kingdom, with a smile.
Not really… At least not generally. The privacy increase from switching from Android to proper Linux is, to me at least, more important than loosing a locked bootloader.
That’s just my threat model. I know that Google & Co are extracting as much info about me as humanly possible, and I have no reason to believe that I am being targeted by someone with the capability to exploit the unlocked bootloader.
Same for my PC btw - secure boot is disabled because it’s not worth the hassle. Again. In my threat model.
(But I would wager that this goes for a lot of users.)
Unlocking the bootloader makes the entire system compromised - an adversary can install malware that persists through reboots or even factory resets, since the security regarding verified boot is disabled; they can decrypt the storage and read, copy it; it is relatively easy for a system to experience privilege escalation, and run admin commands - if the user is aware of it or not.
There’s a few other things, and some of it needs an additional step or two, but most things go from ‘impossible’ to ‘trivial’. And when you’re facing an adversary (be it a rootkit in an apk, law enforcement, or government agencies) that expect you to be knowledgeable about tech, they will take advantage of the potential holes users might make along the way.
Relocking the bootloader is incredibly rare on custom roms; I know of only one that supports it (gos). Every other rom I’ve ever used, so in the 50+ range, doesn’t worry about it. So usually the only way to relock is to revert to factory.
Yeah CalyxOS just came back from a hiatus due to some internal drama, and iodéOS is a French based ROM that is based on LineageOS.
CalyxOS has made some pretty nice QoL changes in the last few years that I really appreciate (Seedvault backups, Per-app, per connection type firewalling, Work profile ootb, VPN sharing over all profiles)
iodeOS offers bootloader relocking on devices that support it, and they support devices longer than Calyx & Graphene for Eco. sustainability, but you do still run the risk of the proprietary hardware drivers having vulnerabilities. I tried it out for a bit but it wasnt for me.
Yes, you can relock it. There is quite a bit of misinformation in this thread, I’m not sure why. As you can see from this chart, bootloader locking is available with iodéOS across multiple devices (including Fairphones), not just Pixels.
This is blatant disinformation. CalyxOS requires a relockable bootloader with their AVB key to support, and they support Fairphone, Motorola, Shift and in the past have supported OnePlus and Xiomi in addition to Google.
Because its level of security has obsoleted every other mobile OS. They’re all BTFO. Graphene is so far ahead it cannot see the competition in the rear view.
Or so the marketing tells you. And let’s say it were true, does your threat model warrant its need? Are you protecting yourself against a thief gaining access to your phone once it’s stolen, or are you being hunted down by a state?
They take a proactive approach and lock down things to help protect against future exploit development. My threat model is someone stealing my phone and then having an exploit to be able to access it. Or it being dumped by a an external device. Also extra defence against priv esc virusi. Also the privacy features are much better than what I previously used (calyxos, eOS etc)
It’s not an option for me if it can’t run GrapheneOS unfortunately.
Pretty sure the Bootloader in unlockable (at least they were in the past?) and support(ed) mainline Linux kernel for an actual Linux mobile OS.
Idk, to me that sounds way better than staying on a google device.
I think i’ve heard graphene-heads say the Pixels have some specific hardware features that make them more secure and is the reason graphene only works on them. Still i’m not gonna give google any money, i’d rather vote with my wallet and get an FP next
if you want graphene but want to avoid giving google money you could always just buy a used phone on the second hand market
Arguably you’re still giving google money, by funding the next google phone for the person who previously bought a google phone :P
Though I’d imagine buying a used phone is still a better choice than buying a new one, even if it’s theoretically funding a better company.
only if that seller is moving to another pixel :-)
For me that is not an option considering how difficult battery replacement surgery is on pixels
Buying a Google phone and then removing all the Google stuff actually costs Google money.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this were the case, but is there a source for this?
I don’t have a source (and am not who you replied to), but it could be that Google sells Pixels at a slight loss in an effort to get more people on the platform. Maybe not loss, in the traditional sense, but more so in that they build getting people into the Google ecosystem into the price.
For sure, and that’s where I thought they were going with it. But unless there is a source for how much it cost google to have the phone made, and how much they’re expecting to make back with users in their ecosystem, it’s just guess work.
I’d probably get a pixel for my next phone if this were the case, but I’d want to be sure.
An unlocked bootloader for a user that cares about physical security and privacy is a show-stopper. It basically gives up the keys to the kingdom, with a smile.
The ability to run true Linux is nice though.
E: word
Not really… At least not generally. The privacy increase from switching from Android to proper Linux is, to me at least, more important than loosing a locked bootloader.
That’s just my threat model. I know that Google & Co are extracting as much info about me as humanly possible, and I have no reason to believe that I am being targeted by someone with the capability to exploit the unlocked bootloader.
Same for my PC btw - secure boot is disabled because it’s not worth the hassle. Again. In my threat model.
(But I would wager that this goes for a lot of users.)
Could you explain further please?
What is so bad about the unlocked bootloader? Can’t you relock it?
Unlocking the bootloader makes the entire system compromised - an adversary can install malware that persists through reboots or even factory resets, since the security regarding verified boot is disabled; they can decrypt the storage and read, copy it; it is relatively easy for a system to experience privilege escalation, and run admin commands - if the user is aware of it or not.
There’s a few other things, and some of it needs an additional step or two, but most things go from ‘impossible’ to ‘trivial’. And when you’re facing an adversary (be it a rootkit in an apk, law enforcement, or government agencies) that expect you to be knowledgeable about tech, they will take advantage of the potential holes users might make along the way.
Relocking the bootloader is incredibly rare on custom roms; I know of only one that supports it (gos). Every other rom I’ve ever used, so in the 50+ range, doesn’t worry about it. So usually the only way to relock is to revert to factory.
LineageOS via avbroot, CalyxOS and iodéOS all support bootloader relocking.
Even /e/os supports relocking.
Rocking it rn.
Is calyx still a thing? I used to use it years ago. iode is a new one to me :o
Yeah CalyxOS just came back from a hiatus due to some internal drama, and iodéOS is a French based ROM that is based on LineageOS.
CalyxOS has made some pretty nice QoL changes in the last few years that I really appreciate (Seedvault backups, Per-app, per connection type firewalling, Work profile ootb, VPN sharing over all profiles)
iodeOS offers bootloader relocking on devices that support it, and they support devices longer than Calyx & Graphene for Eco. sustainability, but you do still run the risk of the proprietary hardware drivers having vulnerabilities. I tried it out for a bit but it wasnt for me.
Thank you!
No problem :)
Yes, you can relock it. There is quite a bit of misinformation in this thread, I’m not sure why. As you can see from this chart, bootloader locking is available with iodéOS across multiple devices (including Fairphones), not just Pixels.
Yes, you can relock the bootloader, though only with official builds
https://doc.e.foundation/os/learn/bootloader-relocking#relocking
The trouble is the bootloader is often not relockable with a custom avb key
The only OEM with official support for relocking the boot loader with a custom avb key is Google sadly
This is blatant disinformation. CalyxOS requires a relockable bootloader with their AVB key to support, and they support Fairphone, Motorola, Shift and in the past have supported OnePlus and Xiomi in addition to Google.
https://calyxos.org/docs/guide/device-support/
The reason Graphene is only on Pixels is due to the Titan security chip on Pixels being so vital to the GrapheneOS security profile.
Why do you need to run GrapheneOS?
Because its level of security has obsoleted every other mobile OS. They’re all BTFO. Graphene is so far ahead it cannot see the competition in the rear view.
Or so the marketing tells you. And let’s say it were true, does your threat model warrant its need? Are you protecting yourself against a thief gaining access to your phone once it’s stolen, or are you being hunted down by a state?
They take a proactive approach and lock down things to help protect against future exploit development. My threat model is someone stealing my phone and then having an exploit to be able to access it. Or it being dumped by a an external device. Also extra defence against priv esc virusi. Also the privacy features are much better than what I previously used (calyxos, eOS etc)