3 ms·
That's hardening against the user being able to do things, not against corporate or government threat models. Software can only do a little bit on megacorp smar
by superkuh 5y ago
That's hardening against the user being able to do things, not against corporate or government threat models. Software can only do a little bit on megacorp smartphone hardware even if it tries to help the user instead of locking them out.
- xvector 5y ago> Software can only do a little bit on megacorp smartphone hardware That isn't true at all. Do you have a source for your implication that the Pixel's trusted boot chain is compromised, or that remote attestation of software+hardware is backdoored?
- megous 5y agoSo who controls the keys?
- superkuh 5y agoGoogle has attempted to make sure the Pixel's hardware baseband modem is properly isolated from user space. But you can't trust it completely because the Pixel's baseband computer does have access to userspace RAM in terms of physical ability in the hardware. The GraphemeOS FAQ explains it here: https://grapheneos.org/faq#baseband-isolation https://grapheneos.org/faq#baseband-isolation But the pinephone baseband literally does not have the physical/hardware capability. You don't have to trust software from Google or Qualcomm or Pine. https://www.pine64.org/2020/01/24/setting-the-record-straight-pinephone-misconceptions/ https://www.pine64.org/2020/01/24/setting-the-record-straigh... Your request for proof that Pixel's trusted boot chain is compromised or other things is irrelevant both because of the above, and because it's all controlled by the very company you have to worry about. The fox has the keys to the henhouse. It owns the henhouse.