That is the method I use. My link in a previous post is to the XDA forum thread for the project. Your link is to the project’s github repo. The README.md in the githup repo doesn’t mention anything about root or rooted debugging, but it hasn’t been updated in nearly three years. The first post in the XDA thread has been updated more recently and says
Precondition
adb installed and in execution path
Ubuntu Linux (other should work, too)
a rooted Android device (either by adbd unsecure or by e.g. Magisk / SuperSU)
It doesn’t mention rooted debugging or adb root (unless that is what he means by “adbd unsecure”) but it definitely does work on a non-rooted device, so long asadb root is present in the ROM and enabled via Developer options
Reacting to this and all similar “de-Googled” comments. /e/ is not “dont touch anything Google” de-Googled, but rather “remove as much as possible from Google but keep most of the functionality”. Thats why there is microG included, thats why there is AppLounge (yes, the apks dont come straight from Play store, but rather through an intermediary - but they are the Play store apks in the end anyway).
So my opinion is, that if you really want to “not touch anything Google”, then you are on the wrong OS. microG is part of it, so why not SafetyNet? On the other hand, my knowledge of SafetyNet implementation and microG are limited, so I might be wrong in how much “privacy trade-off” they provide. Happy to learn if someone has more info;)
I suppose third option could be offering easier method to get ih8sn working while keeping adb root. It’s relatively easy but getting information to conf file might require a lot work. And all this isn’t something basic user is expected to be able to do. Also that is just temporary solution till summer 2024 afaik.
The implementation of SafetyNet is already in microG, so already in /e/OS. The thing is that at some point it stopped to work, so we had to improve it, to make it work again. Note that it does not have any impact in term of privacy regarding Google (like with push notifications, anonymous calls are used).
Regarding Privacy & Google:
a) we remove all AOSP native calls to google servers, such as connectivity check, NTP servers, etc.
b) we replace core services such as location (when not using GPS) when it’s possible (in this specific case this is using Mozilla Location services)
b) we put a lot of effort into making as many Android apps as possible work on /e/OS, while not exposing /e/OS users to Google personal data collection. This is made possible because all those services that are part of Google Play services are used to consolidate data on commercial Google Android, using users’ Google accounts. In /e/OS the approach in this case is to address the required APIs without a Google account behind. So those calls are seen as anonymous and Google can very hardly consolidate personal data this way (technically it would be difficult but potentially possible, but in the real world, they don’t need to address this kind of specific case when they already know about 80% of smartphone users on the planet)
Regarding other privacy features: /e/OS is adding extra features related to apps personal data collection with the tracker control unit in Advanced Privacy + more or less exotic features (faking IP address, mocking location…)
In order to sumarize: /e/OS is neither into ideological postures nor into hardened security that could be useful to targetted people, but rather into a pragmatic approach to offer a usable mobile OS while protecting (normal) user’s personal data collection from Google & commercial apps publishers.
I don’t trust anything Google. With the Great Reset underway, I would not be surprised this Google’s SafetyNet is part of their strategy to control everything people do.
As we have 85 devices that already do not have the problem, (Build S or Murena Phones), I think the best use of time is for those popular phones still using older Builds is to try and get them to Build S. If that is not possible, (My LeEco S2 for example) AND a lot of people ask for it (which I doubt there will be for that phone.), then MAYBE port that device. Just put in the description whether SafetyNet is supported or not. Let’s keep moving forward.
Not exactly, in fact only a modified boot.img has to be reflashed after each /e/update (it could be an old one),
then you have to update it using magisk
Hi
Am not a developer and I do not catch 100% of all the technical explanation shared here.
As I will soon become an e/ “normal” user the I give a lot of importance to protect me to google control.
This is what I expect from e/os.
If protection has to change or put at risk against google, and nearly only for banking apps, I would prefer not safetynet.
But as a normal user (next week on a S9+) I trust e/ tecnicians-developers to keep google out of any type of tracing.
I don’t really understand what is at stake here (so I won’t be voting on anything) but as a rather less tech-savy user my perspective is that I want an OS that just works, also in the aspects of banking apps. If e-OS won’t be easy to use, won’t be easy to install or certain important Apps (like banking apps) are not working I have to switch to something else. I don’t have the time nor the knowledge to work around problems hence why I’m here in the first place.
The (inconvenient?) truth ist that any App which depends on microG in /e/OS to make it work without the genuine Google Apps and services might fail to work at any given time.
In practice up until now this turns out to be less dramatic than it sounds in theory, because microG does a really good job posing as Google in the absence of Google, and Google don’t try to actively sabotage microG with changes on their side too often, at least not visibly (with the user noticing Apps acting up or not working). Banking Apps are even more tricky because of their increased security requirements.
In the end overall a lot of Google-dependent Apps are working just fine on /e/OS.
But the possibility that any such App stops working just fine for a while (or for good in a worst case) is always there, awareness of this is important and should play a role in the individual decision whether to use /e/OS or not.
If I didn’t have an FP4 with eOS 1.7 and A12, I would vote to have SafetyNet.
I chose eOS to have a phone with the same features as others with Android stock, while looking for an alternative to Google’s dominance.
Otherwise, as I did in the past, I would have rooted my phone and installed others ROMs, but I should have had a second phone for banking apps, identification apps and who knows which others.
(Traduced from italian with LibreTranslator)
