←back to thread

Leaker reveals which Pixels are vulnerable to Cellebrite phone hacking

(arstechnica.com)
446 points akyuu | 1 comments | 30 Oct 25 23:12 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
derbOac ◴[30 Oct 25 23:39 UTC] No.45766747[source]▶
They couldn't answer the question most on my mind: "We’ve reached out to Google to inquire about why a custom ROM created by volunteers is more resistant to industrial phone hacking than the official Pixel OS. We’ll update this article if Google has anything to say."
replies(10): >>45766778 #>>45777056 #>>45778032 #>>45778056 #>>45779079 #>>45779102 #>>45779404 #>>45780503 #>>45781099 #>>45783125 #
tranq_cassowary ◴[01 Nov 25 03:40 UTC] No.45779079[source]▶
GrapheneOS isn't made by volunteers. They have a team of around 10 paid developers. They are a nonprofit foundation that receives donations and uses those to pay developers, infrastructure etc.

Ars Technica has update its article to rectify that mistake. It doesn't mention that anymore.

replies(2): >>45779993 #>>45780476 #
isodev ◴[01 Nov 25 08:07 UTC] No.45779993[source]▶
It’s still a valid question. We have this huge corporation that’s doing so many things, constantly lobbying for policy, obscene revenue all while people are exploiting the apk out of their OS.

In fact, looking at the news this week, the same question applies to Microsoft and Apple as well. Are they too big and distracted to care about security?

replies(6): >>45780770 #>>45780944 #>>45780965 #>>45781040 #>>45781433 #>>45782747 #
1. chasil ◴[01 Nov 25 13:20 UTC] No.45781433{4}[source]▶
Google has many, many government contracts.

I believe that they would face enormous scrutiny in multiple contexts if they adopted Graphene as the next version of Android.

Google also wants Play and GMS to have complete control of the device for their own selfish reasons. I do not see them willingly sandboxing their own control.

So I can think of a few reasons.