3 ms·
If they were doing that one thing, they would not have posted this. It's fine not to market to consumers, but this raises additional concerns about the founder'
by fwipsy 6mo ago
If they were doing that one thing, they would not have posted this. It's fine not to market to consumers, but this raises additional concerns about the founder's judgement. Someone else claimed that they deleted update signing keys for copperhead devices. That's seriously concerning if true; possibly bad enough to switch away from grapheneOS.
- joyous_limes 6mo ago[dead]
- microtonal 6mo agoHe deleted the signing keys because it looked like the other owner of Copperhead OS wanted to make the signing keys available to government agencies and/or criminal organizations. He deleted the signing keys to protect their users against malicious updates, which is the right thing to do and should increase trust in him and the project. It's worth actually reading the linked post. Relevant segment: In 2018, matters between Micay and Donaldson came to a head over Donaldson’s desire to pursue business deals with criminal organizations, and his attempts to compromise the security of CopperheadOS, including by proposing license enforcement and remote updating systems that would allow third-parties to have access to users’ phones. As part of this process, Donaldson began to demand that Micay provide Donaldson with the “signing keys” - i.e. the credentials required to verify the authenticity of releases of CopperheadOS. Donaldson advised that, in order to secure certain new business, potential customers required access to the Keys. The keys had been in continuous use by Micay, in his personal capacity, since before the incorporation of Copperhead. However, more importantly, any party with the keys could mark malicious software as “authentic”, and thereby infiltrate devices using CopperheadOS. Micay was unwilling to participate in that kind of security breach. Since Donaldson had control over certain infrastructure for the open source project, he would be able to incorporate (or hire others to incorporate) the privacy-damaging features described above for all future releases of CopperheadOS. Micay therefore deleted the keys permanently and severed ties with Copperhead and Donaldson.
- fwipsy 6mo agoAh, thanks for setting me straight. That's reassuring. I think I would still have more respect and trust for GrapheneOS if they either didn't respond, or struck a more neutral tone; but that's more subjective.
- joemazerino 6mo agoIs it that Donaldson wanted to pursue deals with criminals or he wanted to backdoor an OS for a defense contractor or that he was a government spy? From the article it seems like none. Claims need receipts or they are blind assertions. Me? I was a CopperheadOS user from the 2021 rebuild era before GrapheneOS existed in its state. All I've seen from GrapheneOS and Micay are claims without evidence and over-moderation of points they don't agree with.
- HybridStatAnim8 6mo agoGrapheneOS has never concealed this information, it has been publicly accessible on the GrapheneOS website for years, as an article describing the projects history. https://grapheneos.org/history/ https://grapheneos.org/history/ Deleting signing keys under threat of a hostile takeover is the responsible thing to do.