AOSP and Pixel Device Support

randomname

is there any reason for them to keep allowing bootloader lock with custom key for next Pixels now that pixels aren't the reference device for aosp ?

argante

randomname There isn't one and I'm afraid they'll block it.

r134a

argante Assuming they will, would that apply to p10 and upwards, or could they retroactively apply this to older pixels aswell? If the later is the case, assuming u have up to p9 already running GOS, this won't apply?

argante

r134a Assuming they will, would that apply to p10 and upwards, or could they retroactively apply this to older pixels aswell?

Yes. This isn't about the Pixel phone version, but the AOSP version. You currently have A15 installed, and this change applies to A16 and later.

Viewpoint0232

So what other devices are left then? The only one I can think of that is friendly to so-called custom ROMs is the Fairphone, but it has plenty of downsides (less security in terms of hardware features and firmware updates, larger size, worse price to specs ratio) and is also not sold worldwide (though the same is true for the Pixel).

Bimmy

Viewpoint0232 So what other devices are left then?

We might make some guesswork based on information from a former project with apparent sympathy for GOS: DivestOS. Before its discontinuation, the DivestOS developer wrote:

[...]
Bootloader relocking is restored and has been tested working on 23 devices and is available for 26 more. Verified boot is also restored on 36 of those devices

(Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20241223233559/https://divestos.org/index.html)

Some caveats:

Above info is from an archived, discontinued site. No guarantee that any reports there are accurate and still valid today.
DivestOS had a different scope, although with some overlap with GOS. (s. https://web.archive.org/web/20241230182056/https://divestos.org/pages/patch_levels#why ). What once worked -- and worked for DivestOS --might be totally inapplicable as of now and for GOS.
Even for some supported devices there were strong warnings or undocumented steps. (s. https://web.archive.org/web/20241231111703/https://divestos.org/pages/bootloader#fastbootLocking )
Many of the devices with reasonable support from DivestOS were out of manufacturers' support for one or more security relevant components.
Some devices were very outdated. (Personal note: I still find it impressive how long DivestOS provided harm-reduction for so many devices.)

Still, I find it a very valid question. What other devices and OEMs might offer a path forward, if Google does not want us any more. Where should we look? What allies could we make?

StormyDanielz

Viewpoint0232 yes the fairphone is pretty cool IMO but nowhere near in terms of hardware security standards of GOS. Just adding a Titan MX module to the stack would be great, but I'm afraid it's much more complicated to the point of it's not realistic, requiring so much ressources, it'll be better invested in your own built

Kiba

I have a Huawei Mediapad tablet and when I bought it you could unlock the bootloader.
2 months after buying it Huawei removed this possibility to do so and devices that had not been unlocked are now locked.

So it can happen.

That said, the way to unlock the bootloader is easier with Google and I don't think this feature will be removed from existing Pixels.

argante

Kiba That said, the way to unlock the bootloader is easier with Google and I don't think this feature will be removed from existing Pixels.

Regulations can force them to do so:

Backdoors by design: hardware and software makers are ordered to bake permanent law-enforcement access points into phones, laptops, cars, and IoT devices (Rec 22, 25, 26).
Criminalized resistance: services or developers who refuse to spy on their users face fines, market bans, or prison (Rec 34).
No one exempt: the rules cover every “electronic communication service”, from open-source chat servers to encrypted messengers to vehicle comms systems (Rec 17, 18, 27.ii).

So if Pixel is not blocked, it means that there is still an opportunity to bypass these regulations and Google could be punished for it.

DeletedUser299

argante So if Pixel is not blocked, it means that there is still an opportunity to bypass these regulations and Google could be punished for it.

Suppose they could, with their revenue stream, you could fine Goolag the equivalent of a small countrys GDP and they could pay, probably in cash.

imp667

grapheneosuser34508934 I just bought a pixel 9 😬

argante

DeletedUser299 Suppose they could, with their revenue stream, you could fine Goolag the equivalent of a small countrys GDP and they could pay, probably in cash.

Google softly introducing more and more locks and restrictions. There is currently no clear reason to lock the bootloader, but it could invoke these changes in the EU and do it globally, explaining that it wants to treat users the same way. I'm concerned that Google emphasizes that does not want the Pixel to be a reference device for AOSP. This is just one step away from locking the bootloader.

GrapheneUser599901

Realistically what can the users do to help gos long-term? I'm willing to donate, but is there a plan for expanding the Dev team to deal with the increased workload?

Bimmy

GrapheneUser599901

Regarding your last question: GrapheneOS published a job ad (s. https://grapheneos.org/hiring ).

spl4tt

argante Google always had a reference phone. It's really weird to see that change now

Titan_M2

Probably the only way to keep working in the long run would be to build their own smartphone.

dhhdjbd

My only hope is my goverment for does a non corrupt decision and understands that it is kind of important and only right to use open source software in the public sector, funds the development of more foss projects and maybe even goes as far as securing grapheneOs funding entirely.

(in reality probably we here about another multimillion dollar mircrosoft/ apple whatever deal )

other8026

Both topics are already being discussed here, so I renamed the thread so hopefully discussions can all happen here instead of in multiple threads.

Stewart

Maybe I don't know enough about the consequences for GOS of Google's decision to shut down AOSP but I'm thinking that maybe it's a blessing in disguise, GOS's independence from Google.
I would have done it before but I'm going to start making regular donations to the GOS team to support them in this independence.

Wadder

My hope is that the GOS team is still able to support pixel devices moving forward, although I fully support and admire their ambition to develop their own hardware.

For me the upfront cost that it would probably require from me as a user wouldn't be possible, or justifiable under my situation, this therefore would force me back to iOS as the next best thing (😔).

Google making custom ROMs harder to develop is major annoyance and shows the why the level of trust in them is so low.

All the best to the GOS team, I will standby them and promote them where I can to my circles. And I do hope a solution is found moving forward with regards to support for hardware such as pixels.

« Previous Page Next Page »