this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
102 points (99.0% liked)

Privacy

4195 readers
227 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FG_3479@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hardware attestation verifies that the phone and the OS its running on are real and not an emulator or a fake malware laced version.

It ensures that you don't get your bank account stolen by a fake ROM with an infostealer inside.

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Hardware attestation verifies that the phone and the OS its running on are real and not an emulator or a fake malware laced version.

No, it verifies that the phone is running an approved OS. If the app developer does not add your OS' keys it will fail. This included GrapheneOS.

We have been web banking for decades on platforms without hardware attestation. The potential for anti-competitiveness abuse is not worth it.

It also does not protect the user. If your system is actually compromised they can simply replace the app, not allow it to run etc. I don't see how it protects the user if they chose to run an emulator, what exactly is the threat to the user there?

[–] FG_3479@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

If someone injects malware into your GrapheneOS image then the attestation won't pass. That is how it works.

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 20 hours ago

Where did I say a malware injected GrapheneOS image will pass hardware attestation?

The problem is that an unmodified GrapheneOS image may also not pass hardware attestation if the app developer has not whitelisted GrapheneOS's key.

Also I hope GrapheneOS would simply inform the user or refuse to boot if the image does not pass attestation. In that case an app itself requiring attestation, based on it's own list of accepted keys, has no security value, only gatekeeping potential.