Now that android Auto is added, what is the next best feature to port?

RRZishe

someone1223 I don't think anyone thought that you are pretending to be a dev, he probably just wanted to make sure that no one mistakes you for one.

other8026

someone1223 Like I said, I just wanted to make it clear.

If you want to talk privately, I have a number of ways to contact me in my bio.

[deleted]

someone1223 we managed to make even android auto work

I misunderstood.

dc32f0cfe84def651e0e

mmmm Also: widevine fingerprinting mitigation.

jefdgbd

I think easy data transfer from the stock os would be really useful for people new to custom roms.

someone1223

jefdgbd I don't think that is possible, as unlocking bootloader clears all data in phone.

RRZishe

someone1223 I think he means from a different physical phone, like via network or something.

DeletedUser28

mmmm

Yes, and specifically for Play Services. Most of my apps works fine, including notifications, without Play Services. Some lack the notifications if Play Services are not installed. The only option is to have a second profile with those naughty apps + Play Services. If it were possible to limit communication with (and detection of) Play Services to these few apps that would be even better.

[deleted]

There was a high demand for Android Auto among GrapheneOS users.

However, when it comes to adding new features, I think they only consider adding new features if they provide significant privacy/ security improvements for the operating system.

On a personal note, I am eager to see the App Communication scopes in GrapheneOS.

RRZishe

[deleted] same here

jroddev

mmmm

Block Inter-App: This! I have some profiles that exist because I don't want the apps in them talking to other apps I have installed. If I could install an app that thinks its in isolation I could probably install in a more common profile and reduce my total number of profiles. Some kind of Intent blocking perhaps?
Prevent Background: The other reason I have these apps in a separate profile is that I want to guarantee they aren't running when not in the foreground (block services/daemon). Though I installed something the other day and got a "Let app always run in the background?" popup (deny), so maybe this is already implemented? I haven't seen it with any other apps but it would be good if someone could confirm.
More permission toggles. When I look at an app on Aurora Store it shows some apps with having 60+ permissions, some of which are ridiculous. They don't all appear in the permissions page. Maybe that's because the app hasn't requested them yet?
PWA sandboxing and always private browsing. The problem I have is that if I use private browsing then I need to re-login every time I launch the PWA. So I have disabled the 'always private' option and just launch incognito tabs whenever I am browsing direct in Vanadium. This has the problem that if I click on a link in another app then it is launch in a non-incognito tab.
The other problem with PWAs is that they are not sandboxed from each other. If I have 2 PWAs their cookies are in the same cookie jar.
If I'm in a Discord PWA and I click on a LinkedIn link it will direct me to a logged in LinkedIn page with credentials from my separate PWA.

Just a few thoughts

Trena

jroddev PWA sandboxing

That seems strange that this is not already a feature. I was under the impression that tabs were sandboxed from each other, one would assume that pwa’s would be as well.

DeletedUser28

jroddev The other problem with PWAs is that they are not sandboxed from each other. If I have 2 PWAs their cookies are in the same cookie jar.
If I'm in a Discord PWA and I click on a LinkedIn link it will direct me to a logged in LinkedIn page with credentials from my separate PWA.

I think this might work in Firefox. They separate third-party cookies.

treequell

jroddev PWA sandboxing and always private browsing. The problem I have is that if I use private browsing then I need to re-login every time I launch the PWA. So I have disabled the 'always private' option and just launch incognito tabs whenever I am browsing direct in Vanadium. This has the problem that if I click on a link in another app then it is launch in a non-incognito tab.
The other problem with PWAs is that they are not sandboxed from each other. If I have 2 PWAs their cookies are in the same cookie jar.
If I'm in a Discord PWA and I click on a LinkedIn link it will direct me to a logged in LinkedIn page with credentials from my separate PWA.

You misunderstand how sandboxing and cookies work in Vanadium and even in Android more generally. PWAs are sandboxed in the same way as any other website in Vanadium. You can disable third party cookies in Vanadium settings.

All that is happening here is that the webpage in Discord is redirecting you to LinkedIn because you clicked a link that opens a link in LinkedIn, the same as opening a link on a website.

Discord can't read the cookies for LinkedIn, and LinkedIn can't read the cookies for Discord, that's not how things work.

Relaks

A useful feature for "normies" I expect will be adblocking in Vanadium.

On another note, I think what is currently most threatening to an increase in user base is the current situation where more and more apps are blocking alternate OSs through Play Integrity API. I worry thst this will make some apps that certain users consider to be essential for their daily usage, effectively useless on GrapheneOS. Not sure what the project can actually do about this, but perhaps it's possible to develop a spoofing method to pass Play Integrity API's basic device integrity checks.

other8026

Relaks Not sure what the project can actually do about this, but perhaps it's possible to develop a spoofing method to pass Play Integrity API's basic device integrity checks.

As far as I know they haven't made a decision on this, but it's looking pretty unlikely. Seems Google is changing things on their end to make spoofing very difficult. Eventually, they'll likely make changes to make it (if I understand correctly) impossible.

Right now, our best bet would be to convince app developers to make changes to their apps

DeletedUser28

Relaks

Could this be solved if GOS ever came preinstalled on a device? (Maybe in a few years time.) Not with Google Play preinstalled, mind you, just with GOS as the Vendor ROM and therefore passing all checks.

someone1223

other8026 Right now, our best bet would be to convince app developers to make changes to their apps

for this, whenever we come across an app that doesn't work, we need to make serious noise. probably tweet from official account even.

Relaks

other8026 I found this information given by Micay: https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/1986#issuecomment-1862602531

de0u

DeletedUser28 Could this be solved if GOS ever came preinstalled on a device? (Maybe in a few years time.) Not with Google Play preinstalled, mind you, just with GOS as the Vendor ROM and therefore passing all checks.

The Google code checks whether the running system was signed by Google or one of Google's official partners (Samsung, etc.). It does not check whether the running system is preinstalled. The only way to pass Google's check for an authorized OS is for them to add you to their list.

App authors are free to accept additional OS stacks, but they would need to decide to do that.

Nuttso

The most important feature imo graphene should focus on is to be able to export bookmarks out of vanadium. I can't understand how such a basic feature is not implemented years ago

boldsuck

Nuttso

be able to export bookmarks out of vanadium

I haven't tried it yet because I share everything through KDEconnect.
Maybe Nextcloud Bookmarks can help.