One of the reasons I build my own LineageOS builds is because of terrible one-party consent recording laws (in places like California) there’s no geographic way in Android to check it on a state-by-state way. It just goes off country code and disables it for the US since quite a few states it’s illegal to do. For my state it isn’t illegal so I modified my builds to allow it.
There are other things like this too in Android disabled on per-country. Japan has a camera shutter noise that cannot be disabled but this was a request by their carriers, apparently not a law, big discussion under this review: https://review.lineageos.org/c/LineageOS/android_frameworks_...
Does GrapheneOS fix that problem as well? Because at some point sending everything at the max alert level is going to get people killed. The max alert level should be reserved only for immediately threats to your life in the nearby area, because otherwise you train people to ignore the alerts.
I have to wonder how this will impact their partnership with Motorola. Presumably, Motorola will have more difficulty if they're found not to be complying with relevant law...
I hope GrapheneOS isn't completely banking on their partnership succeeding. If Motorola devices ever became the only devices that GrapheneOS works on, and it's being done with Motorola's blessing, then it could be more easily legislated out of existence.
I wholeheartedly support GrapheneOS but, because of that, I very much hope they don't box themselves into a corner that's then easy to 'wall off'.
Having said that, the hardware being restricted to Pixel devices was always a tenuous proposition based on Google's design choices. If Pixels remain supported whilst adding Motorola, that's only a good thing.
Not sure why you are being downvoted, as this is a very valid conclusion for you to arrive at, individually.
To those downvoting, please note that this person did not say that nobody should switch, only that the information provided was a clear indication that it is not the right fit for them.
I, for one, greatly appreciated the detailed pro/con list in the post, as many of these would be genuine annoyances to me, and would have probably taken several months to encounter all of them.
Of course :^) I'm close to jumping ship to GrapheneOS, but as a Swedish resident I really need our digital id services, digital mailbox, and banking apps. I have seen their page on app support, but I am slightly afraid its not up to date / will break any time. I guess the solution is to use one banking android phone and one GrapheneOS for everyday use.
I believe GrapheneOS would only be an issue if the Swedish gov decides on using the Google Play Integrity API instead of Android's hardware attestation API (and requiring their apps to whitelist GrapheneOS's keys). So their stance doesn't really change much in terms of how banking apps currently work with GrapheneOS.
He's referring mostly to BankID which is a very secure MFA solution designed for banking purposes(all banks in Sweden accept the same mfa app) the inbox app is probably kivra, which is a email inbox which uses BankID for authentication, and is used for invoices and other "official business" mails.
There's also swish, which is instant payments to both friends and businesses. Swish also uses BankID.
BankID is also used to sign documents, file taxes, etc.etc.
Swedish society is largely built around this one official MFA solution, and having a phone where you cannot run it is a real hassle
I can only speak for my bank (Nordea), but they do offer a separate 2FA device you can order if you "can't use" your smartphone for whatever reason. As a solution it sucks, but technically you're not forced to use a mobile phone to login. I'd be surprised if other banks didn't offer similar fallbacks.
It's not an issue, we're just spoiled. It's such an amazing convenience that anything else seems like a huge and unnecessary hassle.
There is actually more a second MFA provider that is accepted almost everywhere, including the tax authority. I forget it's name and I've never tried it, so I can't say too much, but presumably it provides similar functionality as BankID
I appreciate the principled stand, but on the other hand the CA law only requires users to self-identify when setting up accounts (and then the OS will expose age to apps), that seems fairly toothless (though wrongheaded) compared to TX and UT wanting to scan photo IDs[1]
To be clear, the Texas law only applies to mobile app stores, not the operating system, and there is no requirement to scan photo ID, just the vague,” commercially reasonable method of verification.”
Except for the fact that my age is now a piece of information that any tracking pixel or web malware can access at all times to de-anonymize me, even in incognito mode. But maybe that can be solved by collapsing all ages above 18 to just 18. Not sure if that violates the wording of the law though.
That is the wording of the California law, IIRC. The age brackets are under 13, 13-16, 16-18, and over 18. It also requires the OS to provide only the minimum information necessary to comply with the law, and only when necessary to comply with the law.
I hope you are allowed to operate in Canada Freely. If I am right, there is already something called Bill C-22, which is again a censorship and state level surveillance act under the guise of Child protection. Sooner or later Canada introduce this rule too.
Carney also recently signaled that he was open to a "debate" on a child social media ban. Such a ban would likely be enforced by age verification.
You should preemptively be messaging the Liberal cabinet ministers. And make sure to explicitly demand that anything that could force age verification or age assurance on Canadians is rejected:
> Marc Miller (Heritage Minister, the minister responsible for the upcoming online harms legislation that might implement such a ban): Marc.Miller@parl.gc.ca
> Sean Fraser (Justice Minister): sean.fraser@parl.gc.ca
> Mark Carney (Prime Minister): mark.carney@parl.gc.ca
> Mélanie Joly (Minister of Industry): melanie.joly@parl.gc.ca
It may also be worth messaging:
> Gary Anandasangaree (Minister of Public Safety): gary.anand@parl.gc.ca
> Rechie Valdez (Minister of Women and Gender Equality): rechie.valdez@parl.gc.ca
so what is going to happen? Will California issue slave catcher warrants for those who violate laws? will Free Stater sheriffs dispatch citizens on long haul flights to meet their fate in the Golden State?
There are other things like this too in Android disabled on per-country. Japan has a camera shutter noise that cannot be disabled but this was a request by their carriers, apparently not a law, big discussion under this review: https://review.lineageos.org/c/LineageOS/android_frameworks_...
I hope GrapheneOS isn't completely banking on their partnership succeeding. If Motorola devices ever became the only devices that GrapheneOS works on, and it's being done with Motorola's blessing, then it could be more easily legislated out of existence.
Having said that, the hardware being restricted to Pixel devices was always a tenuous proposition based on Google's design choices. If Pixels remain supported whilst adding Motorola, that's only a good thing.
To those downvoting, please note that this person did not say that nobody should switch, only that the information provided was a clear indication that it is not the right fit for them.
I, for one, greatly appreciated the detailed pro/con list in the post, as many of these would be genuine annoyances to me, and would have probably taken several months to encounter all of them.
Not using grapheneos though because pixels are expensive in my country.
There's also swish, which is instant payments to both friends and businesses. Swish also uses BankID.
BankID is also used to sign documents, file taxes, etc.etc.
Swedish society is largely built around this one official MFA solution, and having a phone where you cannot run it is a real hassle
There is actually more a second MFA provider that is accepted almost everywhere, including the tax authority. I forget it's name and I've never tried it, so I can't say too much, but presumably it provides similar functionality as BankID
1: https://www.tomshardware.com/software/operating-systems/cali...
Keep an eye on michaelgeist.ca. If there are petitions to sign to oppose it, you'll probably find out there.
You should preemptively be messaging the Liberal cabinet ministers. And make sure to explicitly demand that anything that could force age verification or age assurance on Canadians is rejected:
> Marc Miller (Heritage Minister, the minister responsible for the upcoming online harms legislation that might implement such a ban): Marc.Miller@parl.gc.ca
> Sean Fraser (Justice Minister): sean.fraser@parl.gc.ca
> Mark Carney (Prime Minister): mark.carney@parl.gc.ca
> Mélanie Joly (Minister of Industry): melanie.joly@parl.gc.ca
It may also be worth messaging:
> Gary Anandasangaree (Minister of Public Safety): gary.anand@parl.gc.ca
> Rechie Valdez (Minister of Women and Gender Equality): rechie.valdez@parl.gc.ca