this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59672 readers
3098 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

TL;DR

  • Efforts like Graphene OS face increasing pressure from apps that refuse to run on non-standard Android.
  • The custom ROM project characterizes Google’s approach to device attestation as incomplete and flawed.
  • Graphene OS is prepared to take legal action if Google won’t let it pass Play Integrity checks.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FutileRecipe@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I've got old apps that won't work any more.

I'm actually for this. The bar to entry for the Play Store is too low with too many low quality and unmaintained apps. I'm all for booting insecure and super old apps. They cheapen the ecosystem.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Well that's all very well, but I've got a bathroom speaker I can no longer access.

So how about instead of Daddy Google deciding what's best for everyone, they let things run and give you a warning?

Hell, I've even got games I've paid for that are now gone. Honestly, fuck them for even thinking that's acceptable.

[–] Gingernate@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why can't you connect to the speaker with Bluetooth?

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It doesn't allow direct connection. You have to dick about with a stupid app to put it in "speaker mode" first.

[–] LinusSexTips@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Gives me Sonos vibes.

I won a Sonos speaker years ago, thing needed (from memory) an app to switch to AUX mode. The speaker sounded great but I didn't want to install an app just to use the thing.

In a grand spectacle my ex's cat kicked a potplant off a windowsill into our fish tank. That shorted a power board, we didn't have breakers (ceramic / wire fuses) which ended up killing the speaker.

Honestly as nice of a speaker it was, good riddance.

[–] Gingernate@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago

Damn that sucks!!!! I wish there was a way to sandbox older apps. I've ran into the same issue with old apps before.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The problem is allowing the APIs it uses to exist at all in the OS is a huge security hole.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So it's my choice to run them?

If I can download an APK, I should be able to run it in a "compatibility mode" and have the OS do it's best to run it.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It can't.

A compatibility mode would involve meaningful cost, massively compromise security, and not have a chance in hell of working.

[–] gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They could just spin up a container of some sort. It's still fundamentally Linux, so it should be possible to run Android inside an lxc container the same way you can run a desktop Linux distro in docker (which is based on the lxc functionality in the Linux kernel)

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The point is that you have to emulate a fuckton of low level access to even have a chance of anything working. Either you replace the actual hardware access with junk data, making none of the apps work, or you break the whole permissions structure, and your security is completely gone.

All of those APIs were deprecated because it's impossible to provide them in any way that resembles security.

[–] gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I mean, as long as it's in a pretty robust sandbox and it's either firewalled or has no network access (if possible for the app in question), I would think security implications are minimal. Like, even if the version of Android inside the container is compromised, the app could only take over its own container, which is non-privileged and doesn't have access to anything you didn't explicitly give it (in terms of user data).

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago

But almost every app is going to crash because they're built on needing the information those APIs return.

His example of not being able to control some wireless speaker? Supporting that app is going to be a mess, best case.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Same, it's why I never buy a game or app nowadays, they will just stop working when the new OS version comes around, devs already got their money so they don't have any incentive to care, and contrary to PC I can't do shit about it myself on my phone, there's no "androidbox" to run old apps inside my phone.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

So how about instead of Daddy Google deciding what's best for everyone, they let things run and give you a warning?

That is not what's happening. It takes tons of work to maintain backward compatibility but you're framing it as though it doesn't and they're just being a holes on purpose.