GrapheneOS fixes Android VPN leak Google refused to patch

(cyberinsider.com)

111 points | by Georgelemental 3 hours ago

6 comments

  • hedora 17 minutes ago
    > Google maintained its position, authorizing public disclosure on April 29.

    I'm surprised they honored the embargo at that point, and delayed the fix until May. Why not just release immediately?

  • nottorp 1 hour ago
    > Because system_server operates with elevated networking privileges and is exempt from VPN routing restrictions

    So a VPN isn't a VPN on Android? Regardless of this bug. Do other locked down operating systems act the same?

    • ncr100 12 minutes ago
      Terminology like "private" and "trust" differ in meaning from computer land to human convention.

      It's a concern to me, because humans often extend their trust to computer trust based upon misunderstanding of the identically spelled words and lack of recognition of differing context.

    • Paradigm2020 58 minutes ago
      Ios does the same, only way around it is if you have an ?enterprise? licence (250+ devices)

      Mullvad and others reported on that one ages ago

    • unethical_ban 58 minutes ago
      MacOS has had instances where their own apps could bypass always-on VPN. I'm not sure if there have been exploits or gaps where traffic could go to arbitrary destinations directly.
      • spr-alex 28 minutes ago
        this is not an ocassional bug this is still the system design today. privacy gateways upstream of big tech are the way to go on this because privacy isn't their profit center
    • mmooss 43 minutes ago
      How hard would it be to fix the system_server (and any other) bypass?
  • zb3 41 minutes ago
    Stock Android is spyware and adware, back in the day we called such software malicious and removed it, now it's the default.
  • unethical_ban 1 hour ago
    I know there are bad business reasons, but how can someone classify a VPN leak as "not a security issue" and keep their pride?
    • helterskelter 3 minutes ago
      They're paid not to.
    • boje 1 hour ago
      That assumes there is pride they have to bother to keep.
      • k4rli 1 hour ago
        Interestingly GrapheneOS being so good brings more money to Google as only Pixel phones are supported.
        • snapplebobapple 1 hour ago
          First motorola grapheneos phone i am buying to get fully off the google pain train. Grapheneos tides me over until a real linux smart phone shows up or i die of old age. Now if home assistant could get thread network join*ng working without an android phone with a google account i could ve fully ris of those eh holes.
          • DANmode 2 minutes ago
            > real linux smart phone shows up

            What’s most glaringly missing, for you specifically, from the plethora of options available?

            It seems like plenty of options are getting 7/10 things right.

          • iamtedd 44 minutes ago
            > Now if home assistant could get thread network join*ng working without an android phone with a google account

            There is already a way to do this. It's fiddly, but not by much. Once set up it's a much better experience, though.

            https://www.matteralpha.com/how-to/how-to-use-home-assistant...

          • surgical_fire 50 minutes ago
            I am patiently waiting for that one. I have been willing to move to GrapheneOS for a while, but I don't feel like buying Google hardware.
        • DANmode 3 minutes ago
          I’ve seen this repeated here, but:

          Google's Pixel hardware division likely operates at a loss - or breaks even.

          and even if every active HN user bought $100-$400 used Pixels from Swappa, meaningless money to them.

        • mcraiha 1 hour ago
          There should be at least one Motorola phone before end of the year that has GrapheneOS support.
        • winter_blue 54 minutes ago
          Sadly, Verizon Pixel phones, even after carrier unlocking, seem to be forever blocked from using GrapheneOS.
          • neilv 27 minutes ago
            Carrier-sold Pixels generally don't have "OEM-unlockable" bootloaders.

            Your best bet for now is to buy a new Pixel direct from Google, or a used one from eBay that the seller advertises as already having GrapheneOS on it (or otherwise guarantees that the bootloader is unlockable). These ones are worth a lot more than the ones that can only run Google/carrier Android.

            https://grapheneos.org/install/web#prerequisites

            I own two GrapheneOS Pixel 7 units, which should get any Google blob security updates (which GrapeheneOS incorporates) through October 2027, and GrapheneOS may still support it with source updates after that. So in a year or so, I might get the GrapheneOS Motorola if it's available, or a later Pixel. (I never buy these new, since I don't want to carry a several hundred dollar phone when a 2 gen old one is still great, thanks to GrapheneOS.)

            https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/4457705

          • y-c-o-m-b 15 minutes ago
            I finally left Verizon after nearly 20 years. I had it with their enshittification, couldn't stand it anymore. I switched to US Mobile and on the Darkstar (AT&T) network. I have no regrets. I caught it on a black friday deal, so I'm paying basically $20/mo for top tier service. You wouldn't have caught me dead with an AT&T service or MVNO years ago because I'd seen so many bad experiences second-hand, but these days it's been a breeze knock on wood

            I also did the math and determined buying a new unlocked phone outright on this plan was far cheaper than paying Verizon monthly for one.

        • oceansky 1 hour ago
          So far. Other companies surely will make their devices compatible if the market share increases for it
        • zb3 38 minutes ago
          I don't see a problem with supporting their legitimate hardware or cloud business models. But of course I see a problem supporting their illegitimate adware and spyware business models.
          • Cider9986 15 minutes ago
            I agree, especially when you are buying for the used market.
    • bflesch 30 minutes ago
      At some point digital security turns into physical security, and there are national security interests that have fine-tuned their detection logic on these kinds of "buggy" behavior.

      If you patch it, you'd need to find another way to de-anonymize those users.

      • hedora 20 minutes ago
        So, somewhere, some government or organization might want to blow the user into kibble, and that's an important use case?

        I feel like this should be toward the top of the terms of service for the phone, even above the mandatory arbitration clause.

    • like_any_other 19 minutes ago
      How can someone consider unwanted disclosure of personal information a security issue, and work at Google?
    • rexpop 36 minutes ago
      Corporations have no pride. They are soulless, psychopathic accountability sinks.

      What planet are you from?

  • idovmamane 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
    It wasn't patched by Google because it's a backdoor. For various reasons, modern mainline Android is substantially hazardous to use.