5 ms·

> What do OnePlus gain from this? Can someone explain me what are the advantages of OnePlus doing all this? They don't want the hardware to be under your contr

by drnick1 9mo ago

> What do OnePlus gain from this? Can someone explain me what are the advantages of OnePlus doing all this? They don't want the hardware to be under your control. In the mind of tech executives, selling hardware does not make enough money, the user must stay captive to the stock OS where "software as a service" can be sold, and data about the user can be extracted.

palata 9mo ago
> In the mind of tech executives To be fair, they are right: the vast majority of users don't give a damn. Unfortunately I do.
- ddtaylor 9mo ago
  Sure if you want to compete against Google or Samsung. Maybe that is the plan that one plus has. My understanding was that they were going after a different Market of phone users that might want a little bit more otherwise why not just go with one of the other people that will screw you just as hard for less.
jeroenhd 9mo ago
A bit overdramatic, isn't it? Custom ROMs designed for the new firmware revisions still work fine. Only older ROMs with potentially vulnerable bootloader code cause bricking risks. Give ROM developers a few weeks and you can boot your favourite custom ROMs again.
- ddtaylor 9mo ago
  Not really dramatic IMO. Basically mirrors everything we have seen in other industries like gaming consoles, etc. that have destroyed ownership over time in favor of "service models" instead.
  - wolvoleo 9mo ago
    And now governments are starting to take advantage of that loss of control by demanding surveillance tech like chatcontrol and other backdoors.
zb3 9mo ago
Note that Google also forces this indirectly via their "certification" - if the device doesn't have unremovable AVB (requires qualcomm secure boot fuse to be blown) then it's not even allowed to say the device runs Android.. if you see "Android™" then it means secure boot is set up and you don't have the keys, you can't set up your own, so you don't really own the SoC you paid for..
- subscribed 9mo ago
  I don't think it's accurate. Specifically GrapheneOS on Pixels signs their releases with their own keys. And with the rollback protection without blowing out any fuses.
  - zb3 9mo ago
    I was talking about different keys and different fuses. I know about "avb_custom_key" (provisioned by GrapheneOS), but all this AVB is handled by abl/trustzone and I can't modify those because those need to be signed with keys that I don't own. I know that all these restrictions might make sense for the average user who wants a secure phone.. but I want an insecure-but-fully-hackable one.

by drnick1 9mo ago

palata 9mo ago

> In the mind of tech executives To be fair, they are right: the vast majority of users don't give a damn. Unfortunately I do.

ddtaylor 9mo ago
Sure if you want to compete against Google or Samsung. Maybe that is the plan that one plus has. My understanding was that they were going after a different Market of phone users that might want a little bit more otherwise why not just go with one of the other people that will screw you just as hard for less.

jeroenhd 9mo ago

A bit overdramatic, isn't it? Custom ROMs designed for the new firmware revisions still work fine. Only older ROMs with potentially vulnerable bootloader code cause bricking risks. Give ROM developers a few weeks and you can boot your favourite custom ROMs again.

ddtaylor 9mo ago
Not really dramatic IMO. Basically mirrors everything we have seen in other industries like gaming consoles, etc. that have destroyed ownership over time in favor of "service models" instead.
- wolvoleo 9mo ago
  And now governments are starting to take advantage of that loss of control by demanding surveillance tech like chatcontrol and other backdoors.

zb3 9mo ago

Note that Google also forces this indirectly via their "certification" - if the device doesn't have unremovable AVB (requires qualcomm secure boot fuse to be blown) then it's not even allowed to say the device runs Android.. if you see "Android™" then it means secure boot is set up and you don't have the keys, you can't set up your own, so you don't really own the SoC you paid for..

subscribed 9mo ago
I don't think it's accurate. Specifically GrapheneOS on Pixels signs their releases with their own keys. And with the rollback protection without blowing out any fuses.
- zb3 9mo ago
  I was talking about different keys and different fuses. I know about "avb_custom_key" (provisioned by GrapheneOS), but all this AVB is handled by abl/trustzone and I can't modify those because those need to be signed with keys that I don't own. I know that all these restrictions might make sense for the average user who wants a secure phone.. but I want an insecure-but-fully-hackable one.