Slashdot Mirror
Android Nougat Won't Boot If Your Phone's Software Is Corrupt Or Has Malware (androidauthority.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report on Android Authority: In a bid to increase the security of the Android operating system, Google has introduced a new check for malware as part of the boot process in all Android devices. Until Marshmallow, Android devices ran the check as part of the boot process and in Marshmallow, the phone would warn you that it was compromised but would continue to let the phone boot up. In Nougat however, Google is taking this security check to the next level. On the Android Developer's blog, the company explains that Android Nougat strictly enforces that boot check, giving you far more than a warning. The good news is that if your phone is infected with types of malware, it will refuse to boot or will boot in a limited capacity mode (presumably akin to safe mode). The bad news however, is that some non-malicious corruption of data could also mean that your phone will refuse to boot up. Considering that corrupted data may not always be malicious -- even a single-byte error could cause your phone to refuse to boot up -- Android Nougat brings additional code to guard against corruption.
Has anyone at Google thought about the deaths that this might cause? If I need to dial 911 because I just severed my foot, I don't care about my phone having malware. I need to dial.
As a primary communications device, instability in a cell-phone operating system is not a mere nuisance and frustration but can cost people dearly if not available for contacting Emergency Services when needed. A fail safe mode that instructs people to restore to a clean image or have the device checked out is what Apple's IOS has been doing all along and In my belief it is a big part of why Apple's IOS is perceived to be a more stable OS then Android
Well, actually, in quite a few cases, you CAN replace stock Android with custom firmware regardless of whether or not the manufacturer wants to allow it. As a practical matter, though, those devices usually end up with dysfunctional custom ROMs that can't run newer versions of Android (because Linux intentionally sucks at dealing with binary kernel modules... a policy that mostly worked as intended to keep Linux open on x86 and AMD64 architectures, but has been a complete consumer DISASTER within the Android realm).
The sad irony is, Windows Mobile 6 (back in 2007) was almost as "open" (in the sense of being able to extend it in ways neither envisioned nor blessed by Microsoft or the phone's manufacturer) as Android is in 2016. Obviously, you couldn't build Windows Mobile 6 from scratch... but fuck, you can't even independently build a copy of the NEXUS GODDAMN 6P's ROM from source. You can build your own AOSP-derived approximation of it, of course... but you'll never be able to independently build your own ROM image that's ultimately identical to Huawei's (and use its source as the starting point for later modifications & improvements).
Ten years ago, Windows Mobile users at XDA-developers.com ripped files from newer phones and used the .dll files to upgrade older phones to newer versions of Windows Mobile. Today, with Android phones, we're STILL stuck doing more or less the same thing. AOSP has been seriously eroded away by Google over the past few years compared to its golden age (the Galaxy S3... probably the most thoroughly reflashed and extended phone in Android history). Sure, you can build a ROM "for Android" -- but 95% of the things most people regard AS fundamental characteristics of Android (Google Play, Google Maps, and everything that depends upon them to run) are as closed and binary now as Windows Mobile EVER was.
IMHO, the single biggest fuckup Microsoft made with Windows (Phone) was insisting upon locking it down. It didn't win them a single iPhone customer, and antagonized millions of disillusioned Android owners who are only still with Android because it's the least-evil option we have left. Had Windows (Phone) been at least as open (both as an operating system, and for running "unapproved" software) as Windows Mobile 6 was, I'd argue that several million people who currently have Android phones would have jumped ship and tried Windows (especially if Microsoft quietly made sure there was a fully-working distro comparable to Cyanogenmod that could be flashed to it if the user changed his mind, making the phone's purchase a nearly risk-free experiment). Instead, Microsoft managed to create a phone OS that combined the worst limitations of both competitors & nothing to mitigate them.