Slashdot Mirror
Steve "CyanogenMod" Kondik Contemplates The Death of Root On Android
c0d3g33k writes "Prompted by the addition of new security features in Android 4.3 that limit the effectiveness of elevated privileges, Steve Kondik wonders which uses really require full root. Most common activities that prompt owners to root their devices (backup/restore tools, firewall/DNS resolver management, kernel tuning), could be accomplished without exposing root, argues Kondik, by providing additional APIs and extensions to the user. This would improve security by limiting the exposure of the system to exploits. Reasonable enough, on the face of it. The title of the post, however, suggests that Kondik believes that eventually all useful activities can be designed into the system so the 'dangerous and insecure' abilities provided by root/administrator privileges aren't needed. This kind of top-down thinking seems a bit troubling because it leads to greater control of the system by the developer at the expense of the owner of the device. It's been said that the best tools are those that lend themselves to uses not anticipated by the creator. Reducing or eliminating the ability of the owner to use a device in ways that are unanticipated ultimately reduces its potential power and usefulness. Perhaps that's what is wanted to prevent an owner from using the device in ways that are inconvenient or contrary to an established business model."
The only reason why I've really needed to root is to use my Dualshock 3 controller via Bluetooth. And I think that if only for that, rooting being gone and with it the ability to use the controller in such a way, would be a real let down..
stop phone carriers / oems from slowing down updates and force loading software that can't be removed.
also force unlocked sims on all android phones.
All applicable XKCD should just be in tags at top of Slashdot stories.
The issue is that those new APIs and extensions are NEVER provided because the hardware manufacturers and software providers don't want to provide them. Providing deeper access to the software and hardware means you can do more things, including circumvent protections and such. They'd rather make it as hard as possible to do this, and rooting is harder than using a sanctioned app.
In an ideal world, we'd have all the functionality we need straight up and "rooting" wouldn't even exist as a term.
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, not that it'll become impossible to root an Android device.
Most things which required me to root my phone should be preinstalled
-backup
-firewall
-disable any service *which i do not need*
He's not talking about root going away, he's talking about reducing the need for it, in order to have much of the freedom provided by a rooted phone without the associated security risks. Whether or not root is available is a separate, and orthogonal question, and he clearly never wants to lose the ability to root, just the need.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Yeah. So the only people who will need it will be the carriers and NSA. Got it.
There's a certain well known Linux distro that starts with a disabled su command, because root prompts are evil. You can, however, use sudo, to run one command at a time.
Like, for instance, sudo bash.
You can provide a single API to let your user do what he wants. it's called admin access.
Well, good timing for Ubuntu Edge. The hardware looks great so far, and apparently it will run Android.
IT'S **MY** GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING DEVICE, ***NOT*** YOURS.
Yes, I'm yelling, and now I have to type a whole bunch of lower case stuff so the lame lameness filter lets me post this, but you get the idea.
Root will be nesessary until the carriers allow us to freely uninstall their bloatware, and other useless/quasi-hostile junk (for me, that means facebook).
I only did it once. Your anus was too loose.
So the only people who will need it will be the carriers and NSA.
Wi-Fi carriers such as cable and DSL ISPs typically don't provide a subsidized tablet. Nor do cellular carriers outside North America and maybe Japan. So what do "carriers" necessarily have to do with rooting, especially with rooting a Wi-Fi-only device?
Warning: SPAM link in parent.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
With no option to root your devices. How are you going to test both new and old Android versions on specific devices?
The thing is that the phone providers forces updates when new Android versions are available.
Owners with the same device model might be updated at different times.
Without root, you won't be able to perform a full test without having duplicate models, from different phone providers.
And you won't be able to test before its..too late.
Hopefully someone have been thinking about this.
-remove any app *which i do not want*
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
According to how I understand the summary, Google or an Android distributor would be responsible for "providing additional APIs and extensions to the user", such as adding Dual Shock 3 support to Android's existing joystick API.
also force unlocked sims on all android phones.
How would that work on a CDMA2000 network, which doesn't use a SIM in the first place?
I don't care if I don't root my phone until I can write to the hosts file.
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, not that it'll become impossible to root an Android device.
Exactly.
The reason people root phones is to get around arbitrary restrictions imposed by the carriers or the manufacturers.
Remove those restrictions, by providing APIs that allow users to do every legal thing, and virtually all reason to root disappear.
When you can remove bloatware, change carriers, bypass carrier restrictions, change the UI, and maybe even change the OS, all without requiring root, what would be the point of rooting?
There will still be those who will root simply because they can. These are the same kids that always ran their Linux machines at root because they were so 133t.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
The first thing I noticed when upgrading to 4.3 was that my ad-blocker that works by altering the hosts file no longer works.
So Google is blocking one sort of APK, namely use of the hosts file as a crude DNS blacklist. Does this means we're soon going to lose another sort of APK, namely loading applications from unknown sources? Or am I clanging again?
there's an extremely common mistake made which needs to be pointed out: the clue is in the phrase "This kind of top-down thinking". the fundamental assumption is that there is a concept of "more privilege is required than before" to achieve privileged tasks. people imagine that security is hierarchical - that the further towards "the top" you get, the more access you are permitted. this is simply NOT TRUE. the classic example is "root", which is a drastic binary oversimplification which is simply very convenient.
so, people invent new security systems, but they invent them without actual proper thought towards design, and they invent them thinking that this "top down" hierarchical approach is the only way. thus, new APIs have to be invented.
there is another way: it's called SE/Linux (and there's a variant called SE/Android). SE/Linux follows the FLASK model, which basically says that based on the current context, the current application, that a new executable is given a COMPLETELY new security context, where the new privileges have to be explicitly given. the most important implication of this model is: it absolutely does not matter how "powerful" you were in the previous context - the one that fires up the new executable; the new one is literally a completely and utterly separate security context.
to give an example: take a 5 Star General, and send him to a security base. when he gets there, standard security procedure: they take away his passport and all his credentials, and they give him a security pass (a new context). that security pass has a pre-prepared set of restricted corridors and rooms that the 5 Star General can go to. he can go to the conference room, and the bathroom. if he tries to leave without returning the security pass, he has no passport, and no papers.
this incredibly powerful security model - FLASK basically fits on top of an OS *without* interfering with it. it's particularly fascinating because it can watch which programs exec() other programs, and it can watch what APIs those programs use.... *without* needing to actually modify those programs.
basically what i'm saying is that the problem that cyanogen is trying to solve already has a way in which it can be solved, if the SE/Android team haven't already solved it. and that's because, under SE/Linux and SE/Android, you can operate both the normal "root access" system *in parallel* with SE/Linux. all you need to do is create a FLASK security context which restricts access to only those applications that *should* be accessing the restricted APIs. you don't need to modify the applications, nor do anything special to the underlying OS.
be gone spammer.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Root will be nesessary until the carriers allow us to freely uninstall their bloatware, and other useless/quasi-hostile junk (for me, that means facebook).
Good news! You haven't needed root to do that for a Long Time now. You can just click the "Disable" button in the app's details page, or drag it to the trash can from the apps drawer, and it's disabled. Sure, it's taking up a few MB of space on your system image, but, "oh well." At least, this is certainly true on any Android 4.x device I've owned.
I don't care if I don't root my phone until I can write to the hosts file.
Exactly! the first half-dozen entries in my 600k hosts file are the various Facebook addresses.
Is Steve Kondik saying he wants to remove those features or remove the need for elevated privileges of those features? I read his article as the latter and that means an increase to the ability of the owner to use a device in ways that are unanticipated.
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, not that it'll become impossible to root an Android device.
Yes, this. You shouldn't root your device "just because you can", which seems to be the mentality some people have. It greatly increases your attack surface for security vulnerabilities. I'm certain that the ability to root will stick around "forever", but for most people having a well thought out API which allows separation of privileges is going to lead to better results.
..will be when the end user can take *full* control of their own hardware without it.
Till then, FUCK THEIR NON_EXISTENT UPDATES and THEIR rules.
Manufacturers leave the gap where root is required, not the users.
Enough said.
Am I the only one irritated by this? It should be Steve "Cyanogen" Kondik, CyanogenMod is the ROM. FFS
I've never had a backup issue because there are apps for that
Some existing "apps for that" require root to backup or restore because they try to back up private data that belongs to another application.
and everything is in the cloud anyway
If you have more than a couple GB of data to back up, cloud backup becomes an expensive recurring fee compared to backing up to local physical media.
If Google plays fair with Android, who in their right mind would even worry about 'rooting' it. But this 'lock down' s**t that restricts what the user can do with their own device has to go.
Microsoft's fame and fortune resulted from Microsoft ending the 'lock down' situation that was universal with 'big tin' computing solutions from earlier times. Of course Microsoft didn't invent this freedom- but Microsoft surely proved it to be a sustainable and very profitable business model - giving the world a universal computing platform that met the needs of users and developers of all types.
If Google cannot break its habit of supporting 'lock down' on some devices, it should fork Android into 1984-Android, and OPEN-Android, so dirty hardware manufactures can opt for a locked down platform, and every other manufacturer can act like all those companies that built/build PCs that run Windows. The truth is that Google HAS effectively created these two versions of Android- it just won't publicly admit this fact for political reasons.
PS the open source community idiots do not help at all. Whining about so-called 'binary blobs', which are the 'drivers' we so happily install on Windows PCs, is completely counter-productive. Android does not have, and will never have 'open source' hardware, so why should we care when the manufacturers of hardware GPU or Audio blocks connect their proprietary driver software to their proprietary hardware? Do you not know just how crap open-source drivers prove to be, when a manufacturer provides enough technical info to allow such to be created?
Google stands at the edge of a precipice. A proper free open Android can easily become the world's replacement for XP/Windows 7 on general PC devices (this time using ARM, of course). But if Google stumbles (as it has with almost all of its initiatives that are not its search engine and related services) it will attempt to crudely monetise Android, and by doing so fall down the usual pit of total failure. The dreadful Google Glass and Chromecast are both warnings about Google's current wrong-headed thinking. Google is NOT offering services that simple run on Android. Google is perverting Android into the most crippled locked-down form simply to create devices to function ONLY to run its services. And by doing so, Google states it has absolute control over the nature of any app written for those services.
Just look how Google said "no adult uses for Google Glass". That's like a f**king camera company selling you a camera, and then telling you you better not use it to photograph people naked. But again, if Google really wants to do this, it can still fork Android, as I said earlier, and offer 1984-Android and OPEN-Android side-by-side to the hardware people, allowing it to have its cake and eat it too.
At least on Windows, it's fairly easy to remove all the preloaded programs. On my last phone (sidekick 4G) had so much preloaded junk and so little ram, it was constantly getting stuck for 10-15 seconds while loading / unloading swap files after exiting apps. I rooted it, got rid of about 10 useless apps and it solved all the phones problems. If they somehow lock down the android phones and remove root access, they need to also require all preloaded apps be removable.
How in the hell is that uninstalling it? You can remove a startup entry in Windows to stop mcafee or other bloatware on an OEM machine to stop it running too. But would you like to keep it sitting around, not only taking up space but leaving the binary there for potential later execution? I think not
You can build a representative sample from a used Nexus One, Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus, and Nexus 4 for fairly cheap. Or you can take advantage of the device diversity of your team of beta testers who brought their own devices.
For me, the killer feature for rooting early on was wifi tethering.. in my G1 it was necessary to root for a lot of functionality... my N4, I haven't felt the need to root at all, and it includes tethering (though I tether to my laptop via bluetooth, the same rules apply)
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
What bugs me, is the likes of Twitter and Pandora asking for every privilege under the sun. I'm sticking with a prior version of twitter for that reason.. it will suck when I have to change out phones again. I don't use most games for the same reasons... it's wrong on so many levels. I wish I could remove privileges from installed apps, like you can with facebook "apps" (setting their posts to only visible to you, etc)... at least then you could work around the crap/spyware.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
It's kind of a moot point. If the system is that badly "infected", you should probably replace the rom anyway.
On my aging Gingerbread phone, I used root to delete the OEM bloatware- Facebook, Amazon, NFL Mobile, etc. A few months later, an OTA update rolled out, and it threw a shit fit because the pre-installed crap was missing. Fortunately I had backups. Now I use Titanium Backup's "freeze" feature to disable (and prevent execution of) apps while still keeping them installed/updated.
One of these days, I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
Check out XPrivacy. Of course, it requires the Xposed Framework to be installed. Which requires root.
Or, of course, the Privacy Guard on the new CyanogenMod 10.1 builds, but which requires CyanogenMod.
Or OpenPDroid, but that requires patching your rom.
It greatly increases your attack surface for security vulnerabilities.
As far as I understand, 'rooting your Android phone' generally allows elevation to root privileges, access to which is handled by an SU-application. That means that if you never allow anything to have root privileges, you face no increased risk at all.
I don't think its a Google problem, its the carriers.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Good news! You haven't needed root to do that for a Long Time now. You can just click the "Disable" button in the app's details page, or drag it to the trash can from the apps drawer, and it's disabled.
Bad news! You can only disable apps that your carrier has decided that they want to allow you to disable.
> It's kind of a moot point. If the system is that badly "infected", you should probably replace the rom anyway.
Exactly. Which is why we still need root functionality. Phone ROMs are not likely to get less of bloatware, spyware, etc.
Yes, but then you haven't *really* rooted it, have you? Once you do, though, and have ANYTHING running as root that wouldn't otherwise be; that's where the increased risk comes from.
Yeah...well I'd rather have root access all the same, despite his assurances and Google's. I feel more comfortable having power over my PC, not the other way around.
what hardware? there is NO HARDWARE - thats why its on igg and not kickstarter (rules prevent vaporware)
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Root will be nesessary until the carriers allow us to freely uninstall their bloatware, and other useless/quasi-hostile junk (for me, that means facebook).
Or you could try supporting the concept of non-carrier devices by purchasing Nexus devices at "full price".
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, not that it'll become impossible to root an Android device.
It sounds like Android is busy reinventing the wheel. "Root", in ye-olde-user-account-whose-powers-are-above-all-others-and-limitless, is something that (at least optionally), UNIXlikes have been picking away at (precisely because it is a big, gaping, unbelievably-non-granular, security problem) for years. You've got your conceptually simple mechanisms like OpenBSD security levels (once you elevate, suitably marked files are immutable, period, until the system is brought down) and your fairly-seriously-hairy; but powerful, mechanisms like SELinux and TrustedBSD.
I certainly wouldn't trust any plan where some other, no doubt benevolent, entity would take up rootly duties so that I needn't worry my little head about them; but the capabilities of a classic Linux root are really a pretty awkward fit with Android's own set of access controls and security concerns.
You don't need root to image a new ROM. You need an UNLOCKED BOOTLOADER. Two completely different things.
Don't "buy" your phone subsidized through your carrier? I just bought two Nexus 4's right from Google and switched carriers. No contract _and_ got a 10% discount on my bill each month by bringing my own device.
To be clear I live in Canada, and just switched to Telus.
I have linux installed on my Asus Fonepad side by side with Android, allowing me to turn my phone/tablet into a nifty little netbook (using a bluetooth keybord). I like having a full LaTeX installation available, if I want to do some writing. It isn't clear to me that I could do this without root (especially if I want to run services on privileged ports). If I can't do this with Android 4.3, I will have to rethink upgrading to it, when it becomes available.
Best wishes,
Bob
Android 4.3 and Permission Manager. Problem solved.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appaholics.applauncher
Disabled does not mean forgotten. I had heaps of apps disabled on my phone. Yet once or twice a week I would get a Google Play notification to update [insert disabled and unused app].
I would be happy if they were just taking up space on my phone but as it is they annoyed me every other day.
That seems to be the #1 item on his list of "things that need APIs before root is unnecessary.
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, not that it'll become impossible to root an Android device.
Well, it sounds like he's saying a bit of both...
"Prompted by the addition of new security features in Android 4.3 that limit the effectiveness of elevated privileges..."
Obviously it doesn't sound like root is dead right now, but it does seem Google is taking measures that could lead one to think they might lock it down more completely in the future.
If nobody and NOTHING ever calls sudo, yeah.
Don't assume that all calls to sudo are you doing it on purpose. The risk is that malware could use sudo.
By way of comparison, Windows is somewhat similarly "secure unless you allow something to have elevated privileges". Compare that with a write-once DVD live system, where there is no such thing as altering the system.
Good news! You haven't needed root to do that for a Long Time now. You can just click the "Disable" button in the app's details page, or drag it to the trash can from the apps drawer, and it's disabled. Sure, it's taking up a few MB of space on your system image, but, "oh well."
Good news, I just took a dump on your doorstep! Don't worry though, you can just throw your doormat over it. It will still stink, but "oh well"
Why do we give a toss what this half assed muppet has to say? He hasnt done anything of note in a couple of years now, CM dont write their own code, they get all the developers on forks to do it for them then intergrate it into their own ROM.
Or you could try supporting the concept of non-carrier devices by purchasing Nexus devices at "full price".
Good luck doing that in the United States if you happen to live where T-Mobile has poor coverage. CDMA2000 carriers in the United States don't use CSIM.
" all useful activities can be designed into the system so the 'dangerous and insecure' abilities [...] aren't needed."
The last time I heard that they created a committee that gave us Ada 83.
When will arrogant newbies finally learn the lessons of the past?! It is simply impossible to pre-design all useful activities into whatever you're developing.
Use it as a thought experiment to see if maybe there's an enhancement worth adding to your thingy, but never ever drink the kool-aid of belief.
Any distribution can remove root if they want to.
SELinux makes it easier to manage when you do. It does take getting used to.
Telus... I hope your billing will be more fair than mine. After signing up for 85$ monthly plan, it quickly jumped to around 300$ a month...
Tomorrow is another day...
Yep..and the only one that will be hurt are sleazebags such as Barnes and Noble, who locked down a perfectly good android device(s). By so doing ripped off maybe a few million people who believed their ads. People like that deserve to fail.
Perhaps get a Jolla instead?
http://www.jolla.com/
Yeah, I've already pre-ordered mine...
Every release, the folks at Google decide that some other capability needs to be restricted, and some useful utility breaks. In 4.2, you don't seem to be able to enable airplane mode from third party widgets anymore, for example. Google really needs to introduce a class of trusted privileged applications that can do stuff like that. If Google doesn't do anything about this, I'm going to switch to something else because it is getting really frustrating and annoying.
You people are gleefully participating in the relinquishing of control of your own property.
Yes/No.
It's a classic argument. Next one will be "nobody uses root so lets make sure its never possible to root the device"... and bang, that's the point.
Expect thats the current defacto way to get full device access. The APIs that "replace" what "root is used for" give you only very specific access, not full access like root currently does.
Move along, nothing to see here. https://plus.google.com/100275307499530023476/posts/aYgumDrwA1d
If it was not for you replying to his post, I would not have seen it. Comment is no substitution for moderation.
Tomorrow is another day...
You 2 should go out on a date.
Yeah using linux on your machine makes zero sense!
Having the freedom to use any os on the hardware you own makes zero sense!
Nice thinking there.
It's not just carrier bloatware. The Galaxy S4 comes with some Samsung junk that can't be disabled either, for example.
we want more root access, not less. and we want to make it easier to obtain. we want to completely restore all account management functionality to Android, so it's just like Linux outside of the box. we always want the ability for people to manage their phones and have full system access. we also want to make it as PC like as possible, none of that sandbox and apps only shit. we want scripts, automation, compile software, and ability to run what we want on our phones.
Pretend you used unix from the start and the web comes along decades later and you have your stuff set up all nice and lo and behold all seventeen web pages work and nearly 700 people a year look them and next thing you know your buddy wants his bread clip collection to have it's own home page and your girlfriend's friends wants to put an anthology of lesbian vegan poetty online so you go fuckit and cut and paste their stuff up then that want to update it themselves so you show them vi wish them the best of luck and get back to fixing sendmail.
Fast forward years later and 300 people are using your stuff and you've written enough tools so you never have to talk to them again they can be busy little beavers updating merrily and rarely call. When they so you slip into root, fiddle with something and they're done.
Now, when you have root on a web server it's very different from having one user account on a machine and the later is really how you want to do this. It's convenient as hell to be logged in as root all the time, everything works. But it's really not a good idea. So in the past decade everybody I know has tried to do that. And it seems to work. With enough stuff in place you really don't need root in normal operation. In fact I'd go so far as to say other than catastrophic failure or radically new hardware there is never any reason to use root that can't be accomplished by the proper tool. I'm 99% sure this is true. Maybe 99.9.
So, I don't see why the android/root issue is any different from what happened with unix as we went from logging into a VT-100 as root to now where it's been years since I've had to.
So I think his point is very valid. Doesn't mean this doesn't bother me though; if I pay for it I get to decide what fucking code it will run and thank you very much, I'm not buying a service here.
I think in the end companies that make more sensible hardware will do better than ones that pull stupid stunts like this. One has to wonder where the real motivation behind it originates.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Why would you buy a phone from carrier anyway?
Silly Americans.
At least he's thinking. You apparently have decided to forego the process.
As far as I see it on android, you don't need root to do much, but you will need it for the things the OS developer didn't think you needed.
First time I rooted was because I wanted to set the clock using NTP. Something the devs didn't think of.
The more of those needs are covered in the normal Android app scheme, the less need for root there will be. For instance, add the possibility of an app to restore and backup the entire OS and you wouldn't need root for that. (But how do you separate that from just accessing the file system at will?)
Add the possibility of an app to remove/disable any other app, and you wouldn't need root for that. Etc.
But there'll be things you didn't think of. Always.
Which brings me to the point where I think that the security of android is stupid in the first place. Too many apps ask for too much -
but this I take it is because the security system isn't fine-grained enough. Maybe this is fixed in later Android versions, but
- access to read/write my sd-card? Seriously, limit this to one top directory on my SD card, I don't want every app to have access to my photos or my GPS traces or...
- GPS location? That would be nice if it was limited to when I want the app to know it. Webpages, games, etc, usually don't need to know this.
- etc, etc
But start to look at if it's possible to say "no" to some of the privileges the apps ask for, individually, instead of the whole app. I heard there's some variants of CM that does this already?
You have no idea what you are talking about, do you?
That root exists is an example of a poorly designed system. Something the Unix guys got rid of entirely when they wrote plan9.
mod parent up... it would be really handy to be able to view a virtually hosted intranet page on my phone
the problem stems from newer routers not supporting loopback
The current Android model does not address the first of these, but it does address the next two. None of these applications installs shared libraries (Android applications can't install shared libraries that are visible to other apps) and they can only be launched either explicitly by the user or by a Binder event with a URL that they have registered to handle. Disabling them removes both of these mechanisms for launching them, and so removes the security implications (by the time a malicious application has enough privilege to reenable them enough to launch them, it effectively has full control of the device and so won't need them for privilege escalation) and removes them from the UI.
The space issue is far less than it used to be. My HTC Desire only has about 100MB of free on-board flash for apps and so is quite constrained. I'd love to free up some space by deleting crapware like the Facebook and Twitter apps and Google Maps, but I can't, even though doing so would increase my available storage by 20-50% (most apps can install most of their contents to the SD card, but you still need 2-8MB per app on the internal flash). My newer tablet, however, has 64GB of space, and so even deleting the whole Android install would only free up a few percent of the total storage space.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
If you expose every single thing that requires root to non-root users, then there is no distinction between root and non-root and so root is unnecessary. Very few people, for example, feel the need to enable root on OS X, but since normal users in the administrator group can sudo with their password there is no need because they can do anything that a root user can.
If, however, you expose some subset of what root can do to normal users, then you are always going to find some users who need to do some of the things that you haven't thought of. In my case, for example, I want to stick a Debian chroot on my Android device for development. This requires the chroot system call, which is only permitted for root users for reasonably good security reasons (it makes various categories of confused deputy attacks easier). I'm sure that other people will find other interesting things to do that require root.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
It's not just the carrier - a Motorola (Defy+) bought from Amazon UK still comes with plenty of crapware:
* zinio (buy magazines to read on a tiny screen - really?)
* 7 digital music store
* tunewiki/motorola music player - a new, slower UI with every update (seemingly every week)
You could easily count motoblur on that list as well, and with a non-rooted old android (like all the other waterproof phones), you can't disable them entirely, block them from updating or move much of their bloat onto SD card (obviously, because then I could delete that).
So for now, rooting is still needed. Unfortunately with up-to-date firmware, it's also rather tedious and risky on this handset.
I've had some sucess with installing Go Launcher, using that to uninstall bloat, then uninstalling Go Launcher.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
The site doesn't actually say what a Jolla *is*. Some sort of compact tablet?
I think he was referring to kids who run their linux machine as root as oppose to badmouthing linux in some way. We've all done it at some point and learned the pitfalls in the process. N.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
If these proposed not-root APIs work as well as all the other APIs in Android, you'll still need root to work around them. Android is permanent beta and seems amazingly able to paint itself into a corner.
These are the same kids that always ran their Linux machines at root because they were so 133t.
You don't run a linux machine "at" root. You run it "as" root. With that said, you don't. Nobody does. Not necessarily because they know it's unwise, but because they wouldn't get very far before hitting a show-stopper. Try it if you don't believe me.
I always wonder how come Samsung apps have thousands of good reviews on the Play store. They're almost all "13,500 5*" and "12,500 1*" reviews. I'm guessing astroturfing works.
Most of my reviews say something like "this app is useless to me. Let us uninstall this app, then we'll see how popular it really is". I really can't imagine what sort of marketing retard thinks that leaving an app on my phone is somehow going to magically make me want to use it. Samsung's chat/music player/video player are all crap in my opinion, so I've downloaded alternatives that I used instead. How's annoying me with updates to this stuff I don't use and can't uninstall going to make me suddenly think "hey, this looks good, let me uninstall that app I've been using and use this instead!".
It looks like that problem is solved in Android 4.3
Everything users need to do could be achieved by adding the necessary APIs. But because they aren't there, we need to root the phones.
Does Privacy Guard work like PDroid/OpenPDroid, in that it will/can spoof tracking data so that badly behaved apps don't FC?
If so, good on them for the reversal. CM has left a bad taste in my mouth since they sided with scummy devs over user privacy back when they said they would "never" add it, back in the CM7 days.
Me to. And if I forcibly remove bloatware (using rooted tools), Samsung starts to refuse to update the phone software.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
I'm pretty sure that every App can be disabled using the uninstall updates/disable method, but not all apps can be uninstalled.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
consider the point of ripping one's own DVDs to a DRM-free, neutral format to play back on their phone. Legal, but unsanctioned.
Legal in what country? Mr. Kondik, Google, and Slashdot operate in the United States, and tools for private-use DVD ripping don't appear to be clearly legal there (Universal v. Reimerdes).
There can be only one! (thunder clashes at the might of the all powerful root)
>. the prompt shows which application
When people open a root app and they get the same prompt they always get, they don't re-read it every time. They also don't get suspicious when the first click on "Ok" doesn't seem to work - the "same" prompt is still there.
> I'd be surprised if su applications don't [control the video memory]
Welcome to surprised.
That's pretty awesome... waiting for my N4 to get the OTA update to 4.3, my N7 already has it. :-)
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
How in the world can you spell? Clearly you absolutely refuse to learn anything from anyone.
Some of your thoughts are reasonable guesses. Thing is, you don't have to stick to those guesses when you're presented with facts by people who have actually done it.
Want to see an for yourself that it's possible for apps to ACCIDENTALLY overlay the prompt? Download open roads voyager, set it to overlay buttons, and open a root app.
There was a post about GNU Replicant, an Android port, here a few days ago. Remember that GNU free software does not have any DRM or restrictions in functionality. The project looks pretty good so far, I'm excited to see if they keep up development on it.
"ARM, the platform that has no root!"
All I really lack in Android is sshfs, ssh -X, and a decent X server (like the ones the X teminals provided decades ago) to be present and all work well together.
Nothing that isn't usually available for free in any normal Linux system. All that would be needed is for Google not to take them out.
Oh yes, a decent Linux-supported file system on large external sd cards wouldn't hurt.
-- hendrik
--Konrad, All Tomorrow's Parties
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
You missed the point--he's saying that root access might one day no longer be necessary, ...
Actually, people have been claiming since the early days of unix (back in the 1970s) that root never has been "necessary". I've read a number of discussions triggered by such claims. They all reduce to the same conclusion: Yes, in a well-run computing environment, in which all vendors and users understood all the security issues and agreed on their solutions -- and implemented them all correctly -- the root id wouldn't be necessary. But we never have been anywhere near close to such an ideal. And until then, root is needed to cleanly fix the permission messes that our current practices so often produce.
I've been, uh, "discussing" an example of this on a web server where I'm the maintainer of one of the web sites. The site is actually replicated on my home machine and on another remote machine. I make changes on my home machine, then rsync the three machines when a change is working to my satisfaction. On the two remote machines, rsync has always produced a lot of bogus permission errors (while correctly copying the files). The reason is that some of the files are created by the web server, and are thus owned by the web server's id, not by mine. The code can enable world read/write permissions for everything, so the rsyncs all work. But due to the mismatch in ownership, rsync complains that it can't fix the permissions.
This is a problem for one important reason: Whenever the software gives such floods of bogus error messages, they bury the actual error messages, and teaches the users to ignore error messages (since all of them that you see are so bogus ;-). This isn't an ideal situation, if you want people to correctly spot problems and fix them.
It turns out that I can "fix" many of these problems if I spot them early enough. None of my login ids can fix them, since the logins don't match between the 3 machines and I don't have admin access to the others. But on my own machine, I can often use "sudo" to adjust permissions so that rsync won't produce so many bogus error messages. But I haven't stumbled across a way to fix them all.
I have occasionally persuaded (nicely ;-) an admin on one of the other machines to use a similar sudo to give me control of my own files, but they usually consider this a bother, and don't do it. I need to stay on good working terms with them, so I don't push it.
Anyway, I'd agree that root isn't, stricktly speaking, "necessary" right now. But it's often the least time-wasting solutions to all the annoying permission problems that typical machine setups produce. On a well-done server machine, owners of a web site would have group "www" permission, and could fix most such problems, but I don't think I've ever worked on a server that's run that way (except the servers that I run myself ;-). And so on.
I have an Android phone that at random times gives me what look like permission errors. I've investigated, but so far haven't found a solution other than rooting the gadget. I haven't actually done that, so once again, the machine's "security" setup is teaching me to ignore error messages, since they're usually sinkholes of time that I can't do anything about.
(I've never kept anything important on my phone for more than an hour or so, and treat it all as "transient" stuff that can disappear any second. I've occasionally worked on some apps, but tend to minimize testing on the phone itself due to the confusion of all the permission problems. Maybe this'll change some day. Or maybe I'll just stick with developing "apps" that run inside the browser, and continue with the mess that that "OS" is. ;-)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Here in Saskatchewan, the best Promotional Plan is $60/mo for unlimited nationwide calling, unlimited text, 5GB of monthly data, caller ID, voice mail, etc.
My comment was in response to this comment.
Would that be just disabling a root login, or the ability to do sudo? In Linux land you get root if your system is in recovery mode, but there is no root with a login shell. Is this the same in Android?
Unfortunately, in America, GETTING your bootloader unlocked almost always requires root. At least, if you want a phone that has a microSD slot, can take extended batteries, and isn't last year's hardware in a new package. Google seems determined to arbitrarily bork and cripple all their new hardware in the holy name of all that is Cloud, which leaves us in the real-world position of having to deal with bootloaders that are at least protected by the equivalent of a skeleton key hidden under a doormat that says "Monsters are under here".
It's sad, but I'm starting to feel about as non-enthusiastic about new releases of Android as I've been about new releases of Windows for the past few years... like every new release is two steps forward, and seven steps diagonally backwards towards left or right. If the new version of Google Maps is any indication of the direction Google plans to take Android, I might be living on some fork of CM10.x for a really, REALLY long time.
Don't forget the ability to use flash drives via USB OTG to make up for the often-intentional omission of a microSD slot. It's like it's not bad enough that they have to gimp the phone and take away the one part likely to survive anything short of hellfire and brimstone (a microSD card is one of the few things LEFT that someone with some wire, an Arduino, and a soldering iron can try doing his own guerrilla data-recovery on if the card itself gets crushed or mangled. Just *try* mounting a crushed, waterlogged, and destroyed Android phone that can't boot as a USB flashdrive to copy your data off of it. With a microSD card, you might actually succeed, even if you have to do it one bit at a time via SPI and reconstruct the filesystem offline.
providing APIs and extensions to the user for whatever the wireless provider thinks the user needs
I own a Netgear AP and rent a modem from Comcast. So who is my Nexus 7 tablet's wireless provider?
Funny you should mention that: my microSD card in my S4 just had a catastrophic file system corruption (after months of files mysteriously vanishing infrequently while in my old HTC).
By any chance, did you buy it on eBay? Or from anybody besides a store like Best Buy or OfficeMax? If you did, there's a VERY good chance that it actually has half the capacity it claims to have, does transparent data compression to conceal it, lies about its free space, and simply overwrites the oldest sectors with newer data if you end up totally filling it up. My dad learned the hard way that allegedly-Sandisk flash cards from China with prices that are "too good to be true" probably are, and almost lost a quarter of his vacation photos as a result. This is VERY common with cards that don't have tightly-controlled supply chains
No. It was a 32GB card that I've had for a little over 2 years, it's been at near-full capacity for most of that time, and it's only started to have issues over the past 6 months.
Well they say on the funding page "We've been through a long creative process, from early concepts and sketches to 3D wireframes and a variety of test handsets. It's all led us to the beautiful Ubuntu Edge prototype that you see throughout this page." So you think they're lying?
The site doesn't actually say what a Jolla *is*. Some sort of compact tablet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolla_%28mobile_phone%29
Ah, sorry - was thinking all of /. had heard of it ;)
Jolla is basically the break-away group from Nokia, who took the N9/N900 software with them and created a new company and new phones.
(overly simplicated)
Probably not going to be a big hit, or displace any of the big mobile OSes, but it is an interesting piece of kit, and ticks a lot of geek-boxes.
that phone they demo UI on is a 2 year old hardware - one of ubuntu people on YT replied about it and then promptly deleted my comment about that UI dropping frames :)
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Indeed it was, I was adding the comment that avoiding the carrier doesn't always get rid of the bloat, though it sounds like it helped you.
Nope. There are many apps on my phone for which the "disable" option is greyed out.