Aegis, and it's wrong reasons-to-be has (justifiably) created a huge hatred against security frameworks.
Oh, the hatred was already there. See any number of equally broken and hated attempts like Symbian Signed, Trusted^W^W^W^W^Weacherous Computing, Tivo etc locked devices, and more recently UEFI boot.
Originally Posted by
On the other hand the basis of it's implementation (fine-grained permissions system) not only is correct, it is in my opinion needed in any modern smartphone with so much personal data stored in it.
That's not what it's for. It's designed to protect the "content" (and by extension the device and content vendors' business models) from you, the owner of the device, and in order to do that it puts your computer under the control of everyone in the foodchain except you.
Originally Posted by
We are now protected by obscurity, but if I publish tomorrow a dancingbunny_8.32_armel.deb on devel and I promise android app compatibilty I can just upload all of MyDocs of the poor guys that installed it to my server and then wipe their N900 with the init script on next reboot. (or even flash zeros to the kernel area, overclock to death and other nice things).
And if you believe Aegis can protect you from that I've got a nice bridge to sell you too ;-) Trivial proof: inception.
Originally Posted by
A current smart device, phone whatever, must have the user in full control.
That, and an active community with decent skills, peer review and responsiveness is the only thing that can work IMHO. Cherry was a good example around these parts.
Originally Posted by
A control panel applet should be enough to allow realtime granting and revoking privileges to apps. Thus we need a security framework, with the roles reversed, and the human the only one with full caps.
That doesn't work. You either end up with too coarse granularity (Android) or too fine (SELinux).
Oh, the hatred was already there. See any number of equally broken and hated attempts like Symbian Signed, Trusted^W^W^W^W^Weacherous Computing, Tivo etc locked devices, and more recently UEFI boot.
No I meant in the maemo community (of course there were other failed security systems before
That's not what it's for. It's designed to protect the "content" (and by extension the device and content vendors' business models) from you, the owner of the device, and in order to do that it puts your computer under the control of everyone in the foodchain except you.
That is what I am saying, It was made for the wrong reasons, but we can use it for good ones
And if you believe Aegis can protect you from that I've got a nice bridge to sell you too ;-) Trivial proof: inception.
Aegis can't because it's poorly executed, and was made for the wrong reasons, but anyway, all fences have holes. But I would like if I it at least tried to protect my contacts and data from irrelevant applications. Or my cpu from malware. It's one thing to try and find exploits, and another to fry peoples phones for fun. In fact I would almost blindly trust any developer who did find an exploit to $SECURITY_SYSTEM, because he has nothing to prove. On the other hand a 14yo can brag that he fried peoples phones because he understands debian postinstall scripts.
That, and an active community with decent skills, peer review and responsiveness is the only thing that can work IMHO. Cherry was a good example around these parts.
Indeed, but cherry was installed on all N900's. Somebody was bound to spot it. $RANDOM_APP_IN_EXTRAS may publish your personal data for months before somebody spots it.
That doesn't work. You either end up with too coarse granularity (Android) or too fine (SELinux).
Tree-like structure?
Simple use-case, unrelated to security. I want to open my twitter app to check out an old tweet without it connecting to the net right now. I want to be able to revoke that right (symbian was good at that, but only for inet connection, not other perms)
Anyway, I would be happy even with too coarse granularity. At least I could sandbox-test an app.
@ Jamqpa: i would like to say a big thank you for taking the time out of your day to translate these articles for us none Finnish readers
No problem mate
I think it is easier to spread the "right" information by doing the translation from the Finnish source. As Rauha mentioned above, internet is getting filled by articles that refers to another article which refers to the next one (and don't forget to add some Google Translate here) and every time the story changes a bit.
That could be handle better from Jolla if they estblish real information channals. But t the moment I think they take all the press and aricles they can get, even if its not correct
No, it will not have Harmattan SwipeUI cause its Nokia properiaty. It may have SOME of the ideas taken from WebOS and Harmattan. (Swipe up to close apps for example)
but dont expect eventview etc...
I still think that it does not preclude Nokia from licensing it to Jolla. Even if there is no event view, that in itself is an abstraction and can easily be adapted to a new UI. The button less design and swipe gestures will provide much needed differentiation to other smart phones out there.
Or if Jolla can blow our minds with their own completely new UI that is better than Swipe, I'm cool with that. Let's wait and see.
That could be handle better from Jolla if they estblish real information channals. But t the moment I think they take all the press and aricles they can get, even if its not correct
Press is press if it's a story on Engadget it has a higher chance to be seen, people will look into it and follow their twitter.
Swipe from edge is already used in chrome for android to switch tabs, so I think we'll be seeing it more and more as an interface gimmick. Sure Google is a bigger lawsuit magnet than jolla could be so, there will probably be a warning. On the other hand there are no software patents in europe, so at least in our side of the world swipe can be safely copied and reused.
