Furilabs Linux Phone

Very tempting. What is the deal with play store integrity, i.e. is wallet (and some banking apps) supported?

Afraid not. These things usually require hardware attestation to ensure you're running the exact software Google wants you to run. Now, if someone figured out a way to bypass it, that would probably work for a bit. But it's a cat and mouse game.

It says "F-Droid, Aurora Store, and other sources'" so I'm guessing there's no Play store and probably no GMS and other increasingly mandatory proprietary dependencies. Open source Android is in rough shape as a result of Google's tightening the ratchet.

Edit: In a different comment one of the devs clarified that it does have microG, so quite a few apps will actually work.[1]

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41840021

Why does this question always come up? There's zero technical reasons you can't electronically pay with all-open software stack e.g. Ethereum on GNU/Linux, it's pure matter of trust.

With currently available payment standards, it's like asking for a live credit card with someone else's private key and an open debug port, all at the same time. Things don't work that way.

What kind of reply is this? None of the people I want to give money will take Ethereum.

Then what makes you think the same people will let you insert a bomb-looking thing with wires sticking out into a credit card terminal?

It's not just what Google wants you to run, it's what Google promises to some of its customers through a face it has on one of numerous facets(facing banks in this case) as what they let users do with phones, and a humanware chain of trust that allows the server and the phone to be viewed as sort-of secure computing environment.

From an idealist standpoint, it shouldn't be done that way by taking away rights from users, but trivializing it as how specifically Google wants you to do it isn't accurate either.

Who said anything about sticking anything into credit card terminals? And I'm not seeing any wires sticking out of the phone. I'd say it doesn't particularly look like a bomb either, but given recent events, that probably doesn't say much.

You'll be asking the same thing by trying to pay through a totally custom phone. As I'm repeating here, the blocker is lack of trust from banks, not technical reasons. THEY have to trust YOU, and then banking apps will work. Otherwise any tricks to get past security check to manipulate your bank accounts will be just short-lived hacks.

If the King of England walked into the Bank of England and wrote a hand-written bond for GBP1k with a bic pen on back of copier paper, they'll take it. Electronic platforms has nothing to do with that. That's why it's stupid to keep asking if banking apps would work.

> Why does this question always come up?

Because that's the only question that matters. I have just a few apps installed, some of them are easily replaced, like TOTP apps, others are impossible to replace and without them I might as well get a feature phone.

I'm down to one app that I really do need, MobilePay, but it's a payment app, heavily controlled by the banks. That is not going to be installable on CalyxOS or anything without either Apples AppStore or the Google Play Store.

Phones doesn't matter, they are mostly the same, the operating systems are interesting, but without a widely supported app store, it does not matter, the phone will be useless for the majority of people. More and more people are using their phone as their only computing device, they need to have access to banking apps, mobile payment solution and government application, none of those are not going to exist on some random Linux phone.

Then the question should be "which bank is backing this ROM", not "is app A for bank B work on this ROM".

The answer to the latter is and will continue to be an instant negative for quite a while, and it's pointless question to make other than as a really indirect nudging for big bank(lol).

Use the web browser and a debit/credit card.

Can we get a Linux smartphone that works before worrying about nonessential use cases? One the powers-that-be will never support until step zero is shipped at volume.

>If the King of England walked into the Bank of England and wrote a hand-written bond for GBP1k with a bic pen on back of copier paper, they'll take it.

what has gone wrong in your brain that you think that?

You're new to HN, right? We don't behave like this here.

I'm referring to the pugnacious tone, but the certainty in the absence of evidence is also a bit gauche.

So you know, chazza banks with coutts. I reckon he could draw much much more, over the phone or in person, and wouldn't be put on hold or asked security questions. If you also happen to be the head of state of several nations and have your face on the coin of the realm, and your experience is contrary, then please do rebut my assertion.