For extra privacy, you can sign into the Play Store with a Google Account that isn't tied to anything else.
Somewhere in the FAQ GOS advertises that Play Services can be used without signing in, but they also recommend the official Play Store (which requires signing in) and explicitly don't recommend Aurora (which doesn't).
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see how you can functionally use Play Services signed-out when in order to obtain those apps in the first place, you need to sign into a Google Account for Google Play.
That's personally what I used Aurora for, plus as an easy way to export APK files.
You still need to supply Play Services:
GrapheneOS uses Sandboxed Google Play. LineageOS requires flashing a package like MindTheGapps. There is also microG, an open-source reimplementation of Play Services APIs.
At the risk of being a privacy absolutist / fatalist: Google’s entire business model is surveillance. They follow you around and track your habits so you can be influenced. Given that, a Google account is always tied to something else.
But my goal is to avoid a stranger gaining access to my google services if they manage to unlock a lost device or steal my TV/streaming box that has no lock at all.
I wish Google supported a permission system per device. For example on most of my android devices all I really want is to be logged into Youtube and the play store. I most certainly do not want those devices to have access to my contacts, emails, calendar, keep, drive, payment, etc. (I don't personally use all of those things, but you might and that's what a random thief would gain access to.)
Yes, the advertising targeting is incredibly invasive, but let's not pretend they aren't providing world class Search, Email, Docs, Maps, Video (YT), etc in exchange.
For instance, I use GrapheneOS because it provides better security and privacy out of the box than LineageOS, but I'm also not so paranoid that I'm going to just blindly listen to advice against using F-Droid. What I want out of my Android instance is good security defaults with no bloatware, not to stop the NSA from looking at my travel photos and what HN articles I once looked at. It's okay if my OS is great but not perfect.
So yes, I am a GrapheneOS user who is [modestly] hurt by this. Signing in with a dummy account is just another one of those things that will end up being futile in years to come when Google requires iris scans, DNA samples, and anal probes in order to get a new account. Personally, I'd prefer installing whatever software I want on whatever devices I [pretend like] I own, without telemetry or jumping through hoops.
And yeah the iris scans sound like a scare but only 2 years ago there was a constant line of zombies here in the shopping mall giving their eye scans to altman.
The masses really don't care about privacy if you give them a worthless trinket.
Isn't that pretty much impossible? You need a phone number for verification, which effectively ties it to that phone number.
> Isn't that pretty much impossible? You need a phone number for verification, which effectively ties it to that phone number.
I just want to follow-up on this because some people claim this is not correct because they have managed to create accounts without phone numbers.
Indeed, I think to this day, under special circumstances (like e.g. on reasonably recent Android devices) you might be able to setup a Google account without phone number.
The trick is, that in the general case, you can not keep this account online indefinitely.
I once worked out a trick to get it going and I was feeling safe because I had setup 2FA and backup codes (see https://masysma.net/37/google_how_to_create_an_account_witho...).
First thing to note: This way of account creation does not seem to work anymore.
Second thing to note: After once logging in from a different country, trying to login again REQUIRES me to provide a phone number after successfully giving username/password/2FA code. No way to use the recovery code instead...
Also, given that this account was never before connected to a phone of any kind, by definition, the addition of a phone number cannot provide additional security confirmation (it's data that simply wasn't present before and any "personal" phone number could potentially do -- of course I haven't tried, because that's the point of not linking a phone number).
I think this way it is finally proven that they only do this to harvest the data/phone numbers and any claim of enhanced security is void.
I write this after having lost the second account to the phone number required screen despite being in possession of all the credentials which were ever assigned to that account...
You can also just get a burner phone number for a few bucks.
For example, the banking app I have refuses to be installed from the Play Store on GrapheneOS due to "not-certified" device, but works perfectly fine when installed by Aurora.
The check seems to be purely store-based and never enforced later.
But using Aurora I can install it just fine and it works flawlessly.
(for me, the whole point of using GrapheneOS is privacy and not sending data to Google, so using the PlayStore is not an option)
Google states: Using a false name or incorrect information when creating a Google account is against Google's Terms of Service.
I don't really see the point of using GrapheneOS instead of Stock Android if I then have to use the play store.
Also on GrapheneOS, Play Services and Play Store come unprivileged, sandboxed like any other app. So Google is not an admin on your phone, which I would argue is one step towards "severing the umbilical cord".
Moreover, GrapheneOS doesn't have any issue with apps sideloading.
And more. There are many reasons to use GrapheneOS.
GrapheneOS has privacy features such as Contact Scopes and Storage Scopes which are most useful when using privacy invasive apps. Using privacy invasive apps doesn't defeat the point but protecting against those is a core part of the purpose of GrapheneOS. Our Sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer is a privacy feature itself to enable people to use those as regular sandboxed apps without invasive access to be able to run apps depending on them.
The problem with this is that increasingly Google is insisting on having a phone number to create a Google account. Further, they are aggressively deleting old accounts that appear to be dormant.
The good old days of creating a Google account with just an email seem to be swiftly becoming a thing of the past.
I dare you try creating a Google account that isn't tied to anything else.
Nowadays you can't even create an account in desktop browser without first having to scan a qr code from a mobile device first.
"Hope ya got ten bucks!"
(I got a random 5G Moto phone for ~$10 on clearance and it was an absolute shitter of a phone full of garbage packed in malware, but after cleaning and debloating as much as I can, it's at least a nifty toy to poke at Termux or something.)
Aurora Store still works fine. It doesn't require the default-enabled account sharing feature. It's not Aurora Store which is getting blocked but rather account sharing. Account sharing is against Google's terms of use and is now being detected more aggressively. We've warned about this for years but it took longer than expect for them to ramp up banning it. It's likely going to continue getting stricter.
That isn't completely possible these days. Last I checked they want an existing email address and/or a cellphone number for verification. I guess "not tied to anything else" is proportional to how much you trust them to delete either of these bits of info after they are used, and not associate them with other accounts you might have used them with in the past/future.
I use it on a phone with (unfortunately) regular google play services. If I sign into the play store, that same account will be used for all other google services on the phone too. I'm not going to do that. I just don't want a google account (nor an apple one for that matter)
Interesting, I never tried Aurora on Graphene. For me the combination of Play Store and F-Droid worked really well so far.
Like my personal phone?)
Installing Google Play service is in itself a privacy downgrade.
How can I get this wonderful thing?
For example the eBay app. Does not allow installing from the play store on grapheneos.
Braindead dev claims this is to limit the "piracy" and bug reports, nevertheless it's either Aurora or APKMirror.
WTF?
GrapheneOS uses Pixels because those are still the only Android devices with reasonable security including decent updates, working encryption for users without a strong passphrase and the hardware functionality usable to provide decent exploit protection. GrapheneOS is in the process of adding support for upcoming Motorola devices meeting the official requirements.
lol. lamo, even.
I think the increased popularity of GOS is going to draw in more users like me who picked it for reasons adjacent to Graphene's original purpose, and I hope it's not too annoying for their community.
Have you looked for help? It sure isn't because of any Google component being disabled
today I bothered to try various anonymous Aurora accounts and found finally the one working (like 5th in row) and updated the apps, I can live with updates once a week, not exactly sure what is OP doing
I mean if they are really rate limited just give me waiting time, I don't really care whether I have to wait in queue for an hour if it will update the app later without my intervention
btw. I am not using graphene, find it too paranoid for my taste, though I use my phone without google account for like 10+ years and current phone is first where I have (not disabled/have preinstalled) google play services
It's a shame that there is no official way to install apps on android without a google accout[1], since it's a basic functionality, just like calls or a web browser.
[1] For obvious reasons I don't want her to download apks from the internet.
It's the app publishers defaulting to Google that's the biggest issue.
At least WhatsApp has an official APK download, most apps don't.
That said, Google will still let you update apps without being signed in. Hold the Play Store icon to open the quick action menu. From there you can go to "my apps" and update all of the apps on your phone, bypassing the login prompt. Not great, but a workaround that should do the trick while Aurora finds another way to hack their way into the Play Store APIs.
Aurora hasn't worked right for the most part for a year due to device attestation shit.
I'm meh on it. Not being able to install the shit from play store isn't such a bad thing. It is lame as hell that Google is doing their damndest to make apple look user friendly.
GrapheneOS supports installing the standard Play Store app as a regular sandboxed app without special access. For people using sandboxed Google Play, we recommend the sandboxed Play Store for obtaining apps only published on the Play Store. That doesn't mean we recommend obtaining apps from the Play Store as the best option. We prefer people getting developer signed builds of apps, ideally through an app store with enforcement of standards such as a minimum API level and better enforced policies against abuse than the Play Store. Accrescent is very promising. There will hopefully be more serious Play Store alternatives to replace what it used to provide prior to them phasing out developer signed builds and beginning to gate access to apps.
On GrapheneOS, Aurora Store is mainly useful as a way to work around the Play Store having a way for developers to restrict their Play Store listing from devices not passing the Play Integrity device and strong integrity level.
Not that it requires Google to "open up" their play-store, but that they must allow other app-stores to work on the same level. So basically allowing devs and users to move elsewhere.
Apple moved first with making a special 'sideloading' case for apps not under their control, Google is just copying what they did.
No more free sideloading.
This seems like it was destined to get banned somehow... and I don't think it means that the store itself is blocked, just the pool of accounts they (ab)use.
Not news nor "blocking".
It affects using Aurora Store "anonymously" because that means using shared accounts, so far higher activity per account.
It's possible they're also detecting contemporary usage of the same account.
But there's a slight chance that it's just due to someone abusing the accounts outside Aurora Store.
Honest question, because AFAIK there's no guarantee or (legal) requirement to support any API. Whether that's fully documented, has SDKs or whether it's something reversed-engineered doesn't matter WRT the support the company owning the API is supposed or required to give.
Or am I wrong there?
Play Store won't let me install them, but AuroraStore will, and most of the time they work fine after that.
For example, I have Balatro running on my Ayn Thor this way.
Even this particular error ("Server busy, try again later"). I've been seeing over the past weeks but then a few days later it worked again. I'm not too worried. It also happens or me right now indeed.
and in the end I don't really care whether my apps won't get updated anyway, only app which will start bitching about being outdated is whatsapp, which can be for now downloaded directly from whatsapp without playstore (I have also telegram as backup which also allows direct APK download) so not too worried even if Aurora was down for couple of months, I don't use any banking/payment apps in my phone for a reason
Aurora Store isn't one of the main recommendations from GrapheneOS for obtaining apps. It's mainly useful as a workaround for installing Play Store apps requiring the device or strong integrity level for their Play Store listing. It would be better to find another way to deal with this.
I think it's fine the mission of the project isn't directly aligned with some of us, though I can tell we often get on the core contributor's nerves lol
For example, let's say hypothetically I want to be secure against the threat of Google pushing a targeted update to my phone that runs malicious code. Turning on automatic software updates from Google would make me vulnerable to that threat. Using MicroG instead of Google Play Services would make me less vulnerable to that threat. But Graphene devs say things like "MicroG is less secure than Google Play Services".
Similarly, if you want privacy you might secure your device by locking the bootloader with your own keys - not a third-party vendor's keys. Saying that's "insecure" is extremely misleading: it just puts you in charge of security, instead of abdicating to someone else.
I wish there were something like GrapheneOS that let you choose, yourself, who to trust instead of requiring you trust an OS vendor implicitly.
Far, far too "opinionated" for my taste. I frankly do not need the hyper paranoid security features like a hardened memory allocator or disabled root. I would rather be able to use my device the way I want, even if that's notionally "less secure".
I really wish there were another option. Lineage is too far in the opposite direction and feels like ad-blocked stock. Google still owns my phone, there's just a more pleasant coat of paint on it.
There's plenty of people like that in the GOS community (the forum and the Matrix). Everyone generally understands that different people have different threat models and may want to do things that aren't the most secure. Otherwise everyone would be using GOS in airplane mode with disabled cameras and only paying for things with Monero.
The core dev team is obviously a bit more security absolutist, but even they usually dont mind
I don't see the word "privacy" in that sentence though.
- ALL: Log me in to all Google Services
- Calendar
- GMail
- YouTube
- ...
Wether or not the most recent example is the best example, doesn't matter. What matters is when the government says "jump" in legalese, google's lawyers say "how high?"
But you have to keep paying the monthly cost, if you loose access to a phone number in your Google account it's game over for any account recovery or "let's verify it's you" it might decide to throw your way.
Yeah now they have IMEI and all the other device specific info anyway they might as well forego the phone number
I get the part about disabled root - you're choosing to sacrifice freedom for security - though I don't understand why you wouldn't want a hardened memory allocator. It provides additional security over the stock OS for very little cost (slightly more resource consumption), in an era where we absolutely need as much security as we can get; what are you losing by gaining this?
All you can do is leave their ecosystem as much as you can and accept you will never be fully rid of them
Their tracking is baked into various apps even if you don't have an account with them. Anything with social media integrations can report back to the mothership behind your back.
Maybe in the future you'll recommend other phones, so it'll be less bad, but for now - you've verified that the "inaccurate statements"
Pixels are currently the only devices providing the updates and security features listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. GrapheneOS has an official partnership with Motorola where their devices are being improved to meet these requirements and provide official GrapheneOS support. We're actively working on it with them. We've reported vulnerabilities, weaknesses and made feature proposals to Google for Pixels but they certainly haven't directly helped us or supported us.
I'm pretty sure if I try calling my bank or searching the website to confirm the developer's public key fingerprint, there's not going to be any answer. You have to ask Google's servers to give you the APK and trust what it gives you, either via the front-end called Aurora or the front-end called Play Store
https://github.com/privacyguides/verified-apps-android
https://github.com/privacyguides/verified-apps/
I think in general trust is established for Play Store apps by downloading the app with the Play Store on a phone with Google Certified Android. Then the app can get the signing key for storage in the database. Then this can be used to verify APKs downloaded outside the play store.
Grandma doesn’t care if it looks like an update or not.
> Turning on automatic software updates from Google would make me vulnerable to that threat. Using MicroG instead of Google Play Services would make me less vulnerable to that threat
It is. microG runs Google DroidGuard blobs in a privileged process (to pass Play Integrity Basic). Reminder for those who forgot about DroidGuard: it's an obfuscated binary blob delivered to you by Google on each request that uses a special VM with constantly changing registers, etc. to avoid analysis.
On GrapheneOS that crap runs in a sandbox.
a burner sim, like a literal criminal, is the only way today.
As of Android 10, apps cannot obtain permission to access non-resettable hardware identifiers such as the serial number, MAC addresses, IMEIs/MEIDs, SIM card serial numbers and subscriber IDs. Only privileged apps included in the base system with READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE whitelisted can access these hardware identifiers. Apps targeting Android 10 will receive a SecurityException and older apps will receive an empty value for compatibility. The currently enabled carrier-based messaging app for SMS/MMS/RCS is a special case that's given access to certain device identifiers including the IMEI. This is normally the GrapheneOS fork of AOSP Messaging but can be changed to another app by the user.
Since these restrictions became standard, GrapheneOS only makes a small change to remove a legacy form of access to the serial number by legacy apps, which was still around for compatibility. It used to need more extensive changes such as disallowing access to the serial number but those restrictions are now standard.
And “worried about anonymity in that way”… that’s the topic being discussed here.
You probably "just" need to pull down while on the "Latest" or "Updates" tab, to update your repository (it will show a small banner at the top while it's doing that). It's incremental, so it may take a while if it has been some time since you last did it (and auto-updates are disabled).
The way F-Droid works is that it downloads the whole index and then the catalog, version checks, etc, all runs locally, quite similarly to some package repositories actually.
I am not claiming its intuitive, but I think that part works fine once you understand how it works.
We search for stuff, install it, it updates in the background. We install some of our own repos, but the bulk of our apps come from F-Droid's default repos.
Hard to reconcile your account with my experience without specifics.
https://github.com/rumboalla/apkupdater
though personally I use it only for Fdroid, Gitlab and Github
I very much prefer Obtainium these days despite the setup steps. I don't think it's a coincidence that Obtainium, Aurora, Zapstore, etc. are gaining mindshare over F-Droid, just like how Brave has explosive growth over FF.
Sounds like an accurate recreation of the Play Store experience to me.
You're sure you understand what it does?
As far as cell service goes well yeah there is no such thing as anonymity. Towers will always know your location as long as the radio is on and that can be correlated easily.
In any case, my parent comment was meant for stock Pixels, as mentioned by armadyl further up in this thread.
> Google Play receives absolutely no special access or privileges on GrapheneOS as opposed to bypassing the app sandbox and receiving a massive amount of highly privileged access.
It doesn't mention IMEI here, but hopefully READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE is included in "privileged access."
That one lists:
ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE
ENFORCE_UPDATE_OWNERSHIP
FOREGROUND_SERVICE
FOREGROUND_SERVICE_SPECIAL_USE
INSTALL_PACKAGES
INTERNET
POST_NOTIFICATIONS
QUERY_ALL_PACKAGES
RECEIVE_BOOT_COMPLETED
REQUEST_DELETE_PACKAGES
REQUEST_INSTALL_PACKAGES
UPDATE_PACKAGES_WITHOUT_USER_ACTIONThere is no READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE mentioned there.
> That's also incorrect, because the gmscompat app is just a helper app.
> Those permissions are handled by the OS under the play services app
EDIT: "GmsCompatConfig is the text-based configuration for the GrapheneOS sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer. It provides a large portion of the compatibility shims." [1] This seems to indicate that the permissions requested by Play Services are being honored with the shims from the helper app. That would alleviate the permission problem.
1. https://github.com/GrapheneOS/platform_packages_apps_GmsComp...
There are additional special permission toggles for RCS and Android Auto. The issue with RCS is mainly that they split the implementation across Google Messages and Play services. Android's standard permission model gives special access to the app selected by the user as the messaging app but Google Messages expects Play services to have special access too.
The shims defined with GmsCompatConfig are a small subset of the overall compatibility layer. It has many shims which need to actually implement the functionality such as remapping the Play Store using privileged installation APIs to the regular ones available to user installed app stores. It has to remap the APIs used by dynamite modules to ones not requiring privileged SELinux policies too. It has a mix of shims which simply stub out the functionality and many which need to handle it as a regular sandboxed app would need to do it.