TIL of RestlessOS, fork of GrapheneOS - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
discuss.grapheneos.org
GrapheneOS discussion forum

I Installed a Graphene-Based OS on Non-Pixel Phones… Here’s the Catch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RjGjqBAAgQ

"I was watching youtube(Invidious) and notied RestlessOS . Have you heard of this and are there people actually tried this on non-pixel phone?

“RestlessOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices. It is not endorsed by, sponsored by, or in any way connected to the GrapheneOS project or its developers.”

https://github.com/cawilliamson/treble_restlessos

I’m very hesitant to give money to Google pixel so I’m going to experiment on this one."

  • tapdattl@lemmy.world
    0·
    7 days ago

    Looks like they put in a ton of effort to make this compatible with generic devices, but I have to ask, with all the features removed, why choose this over any other ROM?

    Features removed

    hardened_malloc — causes boot loops on devices with 39-bit virtual address space. replaced with AOSP Scudo.

    Auditor — requires hardware attestation which > doesn’t work on GSI

    mtectrl / misctrl — Pixel-specific memory tagging control; breaks vendor TEE drivers

    USB protection — the low-level USB port controls rely on Pixel-specific hardware and are non-functional on other devices

    native debugging protection — not ported; breaks compatibility with root solutions and vendor debugging tools

    Features disabled by default

    These can be re-enabled in TrebleApp → Hardening or Settings → Exploit protection.

    MTE/TBI for vendor processes — memory tagging breaks some vendor drivers

    hardened thread stacks — non-standard memory layout breaks some vendor drivers

    secure (exec-based) app spawning — breaks root solutions (Magisk / KernelSU)

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      6 days ago

      Features removed

      USB protection — the low-level USB port controls rely on Pixel-specific hardware and are non-functional on other devices

      they don’t need to outright remove that. I know that at least some fairphone models are capable of that, because another ROM makes use of it. it seems it was more important to have a much broader compatibility quickly, without testing what features do really need to be removed for what devices. there are probably other removed features too where tbis applies

      but this is not all that graphene gives, I believe this does not make it worthless. they have other unique features too like sandboxed google play and the possibility to manage sensor access for apps separately, and more.

    • slacktoid@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      6 days ago

      Still better than nothing? And more privacy centric options out there are better as it gives people a way to figure out how it can fit into their life vs the all private where nothing works and you need to know tech to get around or nothing private but at least things work, world people are in.

      • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        6 days ago

        Why are a multitude of poor options better than a few good options?

        There’s this weird mix of free market capitalism and FOSS philosophy that says more and shallower forks = better ecosystem.

        Not commenting on this OS specifically, but just questioning your blase assertions that more options is better. Maybe it would be have been better to invest more time into an existing project.

        • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
          0·
          5 days ago

          There are a few issues with there being… a single ideal privacy option line of devices (the Pixels):

          • the pixel isn’t available for sale in all regions
          • there are only so much Pixels out there… Meaning less options to choose from and potentially higher prices
          • people using them stand out… So much so some agencies treat Pixel users like criminals even if they don’t have Graphene on it
          • Google may choose to end the Pixel line, drastically limit production or remove some feature Graphene relies upon any time they feel like

          Having more vendor choice drastically lowers these negatives. And I can’t really think of any negatives for the other side than increased dev time and operating costs.

          Having the privacy features trickle down to other devices is great since some already landed in AOSP.

          However, the trickle down is slow (and often a myth). And some protection is better than no protection.

          Why are a multitude of poor options better than a few good options?

          Is anything other than a Pixel a poor option?

          They may be suboptimal but… Some hardening is definitely better than no hardening any day of the week.

          What actively blocking “okay” or even “good” options when “the perfect” one exists should be plainly obvious.

          Privacy-consciousness will never spread. Which also has negative effects on the privacy-conscious. Namely point 3 of my little list.

          • trilobite@lemmy.ml
            0·
            5 days ago

            Wasn’t GOS working with other company to have a second brand that could use GOS? These dudes are nkt stupid and i think they too realuse that relying only on pixels is risky business. I read somewhere that, its not about GOS, the phone or whatever but its about what you need to have so that you can call it a secure phone. The GOS folks have done their homework and concluded that only pixels have what is needed. Whay intreagues me is that the biggest surveilance machine out there built the most secure hardware. Why did they do it?

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          6 days ago

          Why are a multitude of poor options better than a few good options?

          because you see it wrong. it is not poor just because it is not shiny polished perfect. it is still an improvement over the factory rom, and if the maintainer is trustworthy then it’s an improvement over lineage os too.

          • Kilgore Trout@feddit.itEnglish
            0·
            5 days ago

            How is one unknown maintainer of a project that adds nothing to the one it forked from, better than many well-known LineageOS maintainers?

        • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          0·
          6 days ago

          Why are a multitude of poor options better than a few good options?

          People make do with what they have.

          It would be ideal if everyone had access to the “best” options, so a single approach makes sense, but we don’t live in an ideal world.

    • monovergent@lemmy.ml
      0·
      6 days ago

      Minimalism. Compared to AOSP, Google components and pings removed. Compared to other privacy GSI ROMs, no weird, quirky, or flashy functions or themes the author decided to bake in.