If you change the bootloader to some other software, how could the software company be expected to provide support for something they may have no knowledge of?

like xiaomi did, in the past at least. if you can reinstall the official software, you can receive service under warranty

My point here is that I don’t think it’s reasonable to legally require a software company to

phone manufacturers are hardware companies first and foremost

It’s fair for them to flash the original software as part of any diagnostic or service process

only fair if it does not come with any data loss. so basically not actually fair

why would you do that?

Signal in contrast has the option to hide your phone number and only expose a username to the public.

don’t worry, the app of all participants knows all the numbers, they just dont show them on the UI. a patched app will show them just as well

https://community.signalusers.org/t/beta-feedback-for-the-upcoming-android-7-0-release/59024/51

the feature got implemented in this commit: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/commit/bb30535afb79c8570fc7aa75b56d03892be6b70f

surveillance cameras out in the forest? what a time to be alive! say bye bye to privacy even out in the nature, because everything must be watched

maybe the most raw form of corporate media

well not sure if fixable

there is no way to verify the downloaded package before installation.

also I generally deem both webusb, and chrome’s broader filesystem access apis dangerous, partly because a vulnerability in the website permission checking code with this permission is much worse than with e.g. the camera.
but the more realirealistic problem is that its just too easy to grant a random website so deep permissions to your device, either by accident, by habit or because the user does not understand what is happening. just a click or two and you have just granted a ransom website full access to your drive. with webusb, they can even write a bootable anything to your pendrive.

my concern here is not that you cannot make sure that the graphene website will only do what it needs to, but that the feature exists at all, because of all the other websites. I sincerely bless mozilla for not implementing these.

oh google pay, I see. but that’s not NFC’s fault, it’s useful for other things too.

speaking about it, I’m not sure google pay will work. but I never used it, so I don’t know for sure, but there’s this suspicion after what banks do

I don’t think that’s the reason. It is part of it, but the main reason you’ll never be a billionaire is that you would need to take from people.

that’s the spirit

LOS has privacy issues though, if I remember correctly. like, default DNS server is 8.8.8.8of google, assisted gps contacts a global server of I think qualcomm to speed up getting a GPS fix, and others I don’t remember now

If someone finds your phone can’t they just tear it apart and read the storage with external tools?

that’s not the problem that BL locking solves. this is solved by storage encryption. BL locking solves 2 other problems:

• helps keeping stolen phone from being wiped, though maybe it’s not 100%
• makes it much harder to plant malware on your phone while it’s not with you

afaik it should. but why do you think NFC defeats privacy? it is quite short range, isn’t it? having google services is much worse

that’s not a feature of the ROM. that’s a tool provided by ROM maintainers. that being said, it almost certainly supports it, as in in someone makes a website that does that, it will be possible.

now, don’t get me started on how bad of an idea it is to use webusb

C++26: The Rust Book

they started it, but it’s not been their project for a long time

they started it, but it’s not been their project for a long time

it’s not like they are the only providers. There’s plenty of other choice

you might be interested to know that UA blocking is not enough: https://feddit.bg/post/13575

the main thing is in the comments