8 ms·

I'm not holding my breath but it would be amazing to have root and be able to tap to pay without constantly playing cat and mouse with google.

HugoTea 7mo ago
GrapheneOS doesn't give you root access, citing security issues it introduces. You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments...
- thot_experiment 7mo ago
  Yikes. Nevermind. The whole phone security model is one of the worst things to happen to computing, the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked.
  - b112 7mo ago
    I think is great, if there are no ramifications when skilled people unlock it. There's just too much hacking going on, malicious behaviour, to allow uneducated masses to have root on a phone. I've seen so many people just not understanding the outcome of their actions. You'd get people rooting because some shady app lied about why, and just wanted control. And we don't need more botnets. And it's why banks sometimes throw a fit. So if a recompile does the trick, and no downside, then it'd be fine.
    - thot_experiment 7mo ago
      Lots of freedoms have downsides that are outweighed by the upsides, I'm absolutely unconvinced that the line lands on the far side of allowing you to control your phone.
      - ChocolateGod 7mo ago
        You can control your phone, it's just your bank won't allow your phone to store EMV keys if it's a non-locked down environment.
  - palata 7mo ago
    > the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked. That's not it. The concept is "if you choose to install this particular OS on the device you own, then it comes with this particular security model". That's totally fine. If you own your device, you can run Linux on it and you'll have root access. "Not owning your device" means "not being able to install the OS you want on it". I want to own my device, obviously. But it does not mean that I own the developers of every OS in the world and that they should do whatever I tell them to do, for free.
    - thot_experiment 7mo ago
      I mean sure but I should be able to have DMA on some level, like I should be able to rootkit whatever software on my device, because it's on my device.
  - zenmac 7mo ago
    A non rooted device is NOT really my device, just seems like a leased device. If we want to use banking app we have to use a non-rooted/leased device. That is what is really messed up. Personally I only use bank now that has website for banking. If they don't have a web site only app, then it is a red alert for the company.
  - charcircuit 7mo ago
    Android is not UNIX, and that's a good thing. The root account was a historical mistake and not having access to it doesn't mean you don't own your device. That mindset is just trying to project how things worked with a half century old operating system with how modern operating systems work.
    - thot_experiment 7mo ago
      What a disgusting take. It's actually so depressing to see anyone say this, presumably sincerely. It's how all the modern operating systems I use work. It's what makes computers so wonderful and powerful, you can just have it do whatever you want. Turning that into "whatever google decides i should be allowed to do" is not gonna lead us to a bright future.
      - charcircuit 7mo ago
        With Turing completeness you can do whatever computation you want. If you want to go outside of Turing completeness and starting interacting with the real world or other apps that is when security models need to exist. There isn't a reason to allow a program to act however it wants. Why should we allow for programs to secretly spy on a user's mic with no visual indication. It's okay to bound what is possible with a device. This already happens in practice with other operating systems. Redhat can still be useful even if you don't have permission to write new CPU instructions (only Intel and Amd have they signing keys to add new instructions). Sure Intel may be limiting what you can do, but it still is a useful machine without it that many people successfully use and gain value from every day. Even as a smaller example root on Linux has limits on how it can interact with the kernel. It may be root, but there are still limits on what it can do without loading a kernel module to modify things. If you want a less secure operating system where things are less secure like allowing the user to be spied on you can make your own, but the average person wants to have a secure device.
        thot_experiment 7mo ago
        Yeah and security models are fine. Having root on my device isn't the same as running everything as root. e.x. I want to access my files on my device over SSH so i don't have to keep plugging my phone in, sadly turing completeness doesn't get me there when I can't give my SSH daemon access to the filesystem. These are all solved problems, we're just CHOOSING not to expose the solutions to the end user under the guise of security in order to retain control.
- gruez 7mo ago
  >You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments... GrapheneOS is already non-certified, for most apps that care, because it can't pass STRONG_INTEGRITY with play protect.
diacritical 7mo ago
Unfortunately from what I read a couple of times, including a month or so ago, GrapheneOS discourages and doesn't support rooting the phone for security reasons that seem vague to me and don't appeal to my need to actually own my phone and OS. You could still root it with some third party tools from what I know, but not having root as the default makes it less of a secure FOSS OS and more of a closed down toy. As for payment apps and other crap that refuses to run if I, the owner and administrator of my own device, don't have admin access, I would just refuse to run it. What's next - websites refusing to work if I have root on my Linux desktop?
- kevincox 7mo ago
  Yeah, this is the deal breaker for me as well. The fact that I own my device is non-negotiable. It is the reason I left the stock OS and I'm not going back. The idea that I can't access my own files if an app doesn't explicitly give me access is wild to me. I understand there are security risks of a root permission but it is important to have that fallback when you need it and the existing permissions aren't sufficient.
  - thot_experiment 7mo ago
    The "access your own files" thing is so insane! Hard to describe my feelings [negative] when I found out that all of my voice notes were in the voice recorder and the easiest way to get them out was to manually send each one to myself over discord. Google helpfully mentions that you can just "download them through google takeout" and doesn't leave any option for people who don't just give all their personal data to google.
    - MSFT_Edging 7mo ago
      I use a FOSS voice recorder app from F-Droid. It's just called "Voice Recorder" with an orange icon. It does exactly what it says, records audio from your microphone, lets you play them back. They're just files on the device. Anytime I need a "simple" utility, I check f-droid first to get the one-trick-pony app over spyware from the play store. Other utilities I use are: WorkTimer: pomodoro app DiskUsage: self explanatory Http Request Shortcuts: setup home screen app shortcuts that run http requests
microtonal 7mo ago
As far as I know, root and tap to pay are pretty much mutually exclusive, at least if you meant Google Pay? Unlocked and rooted devices do not pass remote attestation. And it's not just something you can fake when you have root, since it is anchored in hardware (the attestation certificate chain is signed by a hardware-backed key and contains the verified boot state and verified boot key).
- thot_experiment 7mo ago
  I can tap to pay with google pay on my rooted pixel while the spoof key isn't blacklisted, IIRC it uses dumped credentials extracted from other devices but I can reliably spoof Play Integrity and SafetyNet. It would be nice to not have an adversarial relationship with my things for once.
  - stavros 7mo ago
    "While the spoof key isn't blacklisted" is the critical bit. Soon, all the keys will be, as these old devices age away from being too common to blacklist.

HugoTea 7mo ago

GrapheneOS doesn't give you root access, citing security issues it introduces. You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments...

thot_experiment 7mo ago
Yikes. Nevermind. The whole phone security model is one of the worst things to happen to computing, the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked.
- b112 7mo ago
  I think is great, if there are no ramifications when skilled people unlock it. There's just too much hacking going on, malicious behaviour, to allow uneducated masses to have root on a phone. I've seen so many people just not understanding the outcome of their actions. You'd get people rooting because some shady app lied about why, and just wanted control. And we don't need more botnets. And it's why banks sometimes throw a fit. So if a recompile does the trick, and no downside, then it'd be fine.
  - thot_experiment 7mo ago
    Lots of freedoms have downsides that are outweighed by the upsides, I'm absolutely unconvinced that the line lands on the far side of allowing you to control your phone.
    - ChocolateGod 7mo ago
      You can control your phone, it's just your bank won't allow your phone to store EMV keys if it's a non-locked down environment.
- palata 7mo ago
  > the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked. That's not it. The concept is "if you choose to install this particular OS on the device you own, then it comes with this particular security model". That's totally fine. If you own your device, you can run Linux on it and you'll have root access. "Not owning your device" means "not being able to install the OS you want on it". I want to own my device, obviously. But it does not mean that I own the developers of every OS in the world and that they should do whatever I tell them to do, for free.
  - thot_experiment 7mo ago
    I mean sure but I should be able to have DMA on some level, like I should be able to rootkit whatever software on my device, because it's on my device.
- zenmac 7mo ago
  A non rooted device is NOT really my device, just seems like a leased device. If we want to use banking app we have to use a non-rooted/leased device. That is what is really messed up. Personally I only use bank now that has website for banking. If they don't have a web site only app, then it is a red alert for the company.
- charcircuit 7mo ago
  Android is not UNIX, and that's a good thing. The root account was a historical mistake and not having access to it doesn't mean you don't own your device. That mindset is just trying to project how things worked with a half century old operating system with how modern operating systems work.
  - thot_experiment 7mo ago
    What a disgusting take. It's actually so depressing to see anyone say this, presumably sincerely. It's how all the modern operating systems I use work. It's what makes computers so wonderful and powerful, you can just have it do whatever you want. Turning that into "whatever google decides i should be allowed to do" is not gonna lead us to a bright future.
    - charcircuit 7mo ago
      With Turing completeness you can do whatever computation you want. If you want to go outside of Turing completeness and starting interacting with the real world or other apps that is when security models need to exist. There isn't a reason to allow a program to act however it wants. Why should we allow for programs to secretly spy on a user's mic with no visual indication. It's okay to bound what is possible with a device. This already happens in practice with other operating systems. Redhat can still be useful even if you don't have permission to write new CPU instructions (only Intel and Amd have they signing keys to add new instructions). Sure Intel may be limiting what you can do, but it still is a useful machine without it that many people successfully use and gain value from every day. Even as a smaller example root on Linux has limits on how it can interact with the kernel. It may be root, but there are still limits on what it can do without loading a kernel module to modify things. If you want a less secure operating system where things are less secure like allowing the user to be spied on you can make your own, but the average person wants to have a secure device.
      - thot_experiment 7mo ago
        Yeah and security models are fine. Having root on my device isn't the same as running everything as root. e.x. I want to access my files on my device over SSH so i don't have to keep plugging my phone in, sadly turing completeness doesn't get me there when I can't give my SSH daemon access to the filesystem. These are all solved problems, we're just CHOOSING not to expose the solutions to the end user under the guise of security in order to retain control.
gruez 7mo ago
>You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments... GrapheneOS is already non-certified, for most apps that care, because it can't pass STRONG_INTEGRITY with play protect.

diacritical 7mo ago

Unfortunately from what I read a couple of times, including a month or so ago, GrapheneOS discourages and doesn't support rooting the phone for security reasons that seem vague to me and don't appeal to my need to actually own my phone and OS. You could still root it with some third party tools from what I know, but not having root as the default makes it less of a secure FOSS OS and more of a closed down toy. As for payment apps and other crap that refuses to run if I, the owner and administrator of my own device, don't have admin access, I would just refuse to run it. What's next - websites refusing to work if I have root on my Linux desktop?

kevincox 7mo ago
Yeah, this is the deal breaker for me as well. The fact that I own my device is non-negotiable. It is the reason I left the stock OS and I'm not going back. The idea that I can't access my own files if an app doesn't explicitly give me access is wild to me. I understand there are security risks of a root permission but it is important to have that fallback when you need it and the existing permissions aren't sufficient.
- thot_experiment 7mo ago
  The "access your own files" thing is so insane! Hard to describe my feelings [negative] when I found out that all of my voice notes were in the voice recorder and the easiest way to get them out was to manually send each one to myself over discord. Google helpfully mentions that you can just "download them through google takeout" and doesn't leave any option for people who don't just give all their personal data to google.
  - MSFT_Edging 7mo ago
    I use a FOSS voice recorder app from F-Droid. It's just called "Voice Recorder" with an orange icon. It does exactly what it says, records audio from your microphone, lets you play them back. They're just files on the device. Anytime I need a "simple" utility, I check f-droid first to get the one-trick-pony app over spyware from the play store. Other utilities I use are: WorkTimer: pomodoro app DiskUsage: self explanatory Http Request Shortcuts: setup home screen app shortcuts that run http requests

microtonal 7mo ago

As far as I know, root and tap to pay are pretty much mutually exclusive, at least if you meant Google Pay? Unlocked and rooted devices do not pass remote attestation. And it's not just something you can fake when you have root, since it is anchored in hardware (the attestation certificate chain is signed by a hardware-backed key and contains the verified boot state and verified boot key).

thot_experiment 7mo ago
I can tap to pay with google pay on my rooted pixel while the spoof key isn't blacklisted, IIRC it uses dumped credentials extracted from other devices but I can reliably spoof Play Integrity and SafetyNet. It would be nice to not have an adversarial relationship with my things for once.
- stavros 7mo ago
  "While the spoof key isn't blacklisted" is the critical bit. Soon, all the keys will be, as these old devices age away from being too common to blacklist.