4 ms·
Why are we acting like isolating software is impossible on Linux? It isnt even difficult, there are about a dozen different models to choose from.
by tfrancisl 2mo ago
Why are we acting like isolating software is impossible on Linux? It isnt even difficult, there are about a dozen different models to choose from.
- Gander5739 2mo agoIt's not impossible, no, but it's not the default, and the different models tend to have various different issues.
- broadside1296 2mo agoI think the disagreement mainly lies between whether one should be able to use their devices as they wish, like a desktop/laptop, or whether all devices should be restricted so as to have a good baseline level of security. As far as I understand, the Linux phone enthusiast's POV is that we should start seeing the phone as another general purpose computer that can be set as per one's needs and can be suitably hardened as and when the need arises. I wonder what environment the GrapheneOS devs use for development and other general computing needs, and if such an environment could be emulated on a phone (that is assuming, of course, that their development environment is way more hardened than current desktop Linux).
- Gander5739 2mo agoI suppose they could be using something like Qubes OS. I myself use a rooted phone, which does admittedly have security drawbacks but is useful in various ways.
- qlte 2mo agoAOSP security model relies on an extremely restrictive SELinux config out-of-the-box (that importantly also doesn't impede normal phone/app usage), with the kernel hardened about as much as any cutting edge Linux distro could offer from upstream, plus features that haven't been upstreamed yet (and again, completely transparently to the user).
- drnick1 2mo ago[flagged]
- grapheneos 2mo agoSoftware for poorly isolating software on a desktop without a viable approach to containing arbitrary desktop software with a case-by-case consent model for access is not comparable to a mandatory app sandbox with yearly backwards incompatible privacy/security improvements. The whole app ecosystem has to support it and adapt to gradually improving privacy and security. Desktop applications are not written to work that way and do not have to adopt technologies people come up with catch up to Android versions from 15 years ago. Traditional desktop Linux distributions have atrocious privacy and security. The security record is very poor. The security record does speak for itself in that it has been a disaster. iOS and AOSP have massively improved upon the legacy Unix security model. A traditional desktop OS cannot properly protect users from applications, remote attacks or physical attacks such as extracting data from an After First Unlock state device. It's not only the software that's very lacking but also the hardware and firmware for the Windows and desktop Linux ecosystem. macOS has a made a lot of progress for the hardware, firmware, hardware-based security within the OS and a gradual move towards a mandatory app sandbox and other protections which have not happened in the Windows or desktop Linux world. AOSP has an increasingly usable desktop mode and supports running traditional desktop Linux within hardware accelerated virtual machines. It's not fully ready as a desktop replacement yet but it's getting there. Android will be shipped on many laptops in the future as a replacement for ChromeOS. The desktop mode is going to be the main way it functions on those so it's going to get much better. GrapheneOS has all of this functionality. Many people are trying out the latest Android 17 desktop mode on GrapheneOS and were already using the earlier experimental mode. Major improvements to that are coming. Many people are quite happy with this even if you don't want it.
- drnick1 2mo ago[flagged]
- 2mo ago