Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #143207
| From | Andrew <andrew@spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.mobile.android |
| Subject | Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature |
| Date | 2024-08-16 23:39 +0000 |
| Organization | BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com) |
| Message-ID | <v9oo0d$1fbb$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <v9ls35$sf9a$1@dont-email.me> <v9mdek$145d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <v9mue8$1bgdu$1@dont-email.me> <3al*7S+Rz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> <v9oedu$1bgdv$2@dont-email.me> |
Jeff Layman wrote on Fri, 16 Aug 2024 21:56:30 +0100 : >> But I could have told you the answer anyway - GOS builds from Google's >> sources, so they don't include closed source apps like this. If you choose >> to install Google Play then that's closed source, but they carefully vet what >> gets installed. Since Aurora is the same thing as the Google Play Store is, I can't imagine that anyone who installs GrapheneOS would ever put the Google Play Store on it. What on earth would be the reason to put the Google Play Store on a non-Googled device when Aurora is a thousand times better anyway? Makes no sense. >> GrapheneOS also have an official statement which debunks the whole story: >> https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14993-debunking-fake-stock-pixel-os-vulnerability-from-an-edr-company > > It's hard to know who to believe these days... :-( I have one Occam's Razor rule that a web site that explains BOTH SIDES of the story is almost always more knowledgeable & more reputable than a web site (or article) that only explains ONE SIDE of the story. I read the link that Theo kindly supplied, which changes the picture a lot. <https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14993-debunking-fake-stock-pixel-os-vulnerability-from-an-edr-company> Anyway, I looked in Muntashirakon App Manager for "showcase.apk" and it's not on my T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy A32-5G so I'm not going to worry much.
Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-08-15 19:07 +0000
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-15 22:31 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-08-16 02:27 +0000
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Bill Powell <bill@anarchists.org> - 2024-08-16 04:39 +0200
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-16 08:17 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2024-08-16 12:09 -0700
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-16 21:46 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2024-08-16 20:47 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-16 21:56 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-08-16 23:39 +0000
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-08-17 11:13 +0100
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-08-17 11:58 +0000
Re: Washington Post says Google sold Android phones with hidden insecure feature Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-18 09:18 +0100
csiph-web