this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2026
557 points (98.6% liked)

Open Source

46063 readers
126 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Pay securely with an Android smartphone, completely without Google services: This is the plan being developed by the newly founded industry consortium led by the German Volla Systeme GmbH. It is an open-source alternative to Google Play Integrity. This proprietary interface decides on Android smartphones with Google Play services whether banking, government, or wallet apps are allowed to run on a smartphone.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Corngood@lemmy.ml 78 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (9 children)

Furthermore, a peer review process is planned, through which the consortium members will mutually check and certify their operating systems and smartphone or tablet models. “This is intended to create transparency and replace trust with traceability.”

Still doesn't sound very open.

I should be able to tell my bank to only trust devices running an OS signed by the grapheneos key, and more importantly I should be able to tell them to trust an OS signed by my key.

Edit: I don't mean to shit on this too hard. It might be the best next step.

[–] benagain@lemmy.ml 35 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It is kinda insane though that we've had public/private keys since the internet started walking and somehow we end up with all these over-complicated or pointless ways to use them.

[–] msage@programming.dev 7 points 3 weeks ago

Decentralized systems are more difficult to understand, and also inconvenient.

Also, very hard to monetize.

Therefore, capitalism converts the issue into walled garden approach. Easy for rubes to use, nobody bats an eye.

[–] Dojan@pawb.social 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

I don't get why it has to be that complicated anyway. I should be able to just give them my key, why does a OS or device vendor need to be a part of it? When I get a card I need to verify my identity somehow, times past that was me going to the bank, signing a form and showing my ID card. Fucking Tim Apple or Satya McGoogle didn't have a role in that, why should they now?

Sidenote; I know Satya Slopella is Microsoft but I don't frankly care to learn what the pedo in charge of Google is called.

[–] 20dogs@feddit.uk 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

When I get a card I need to verify my identity somehow, times past that was me going to the bank, signing a form and showing my ID card. Fucking Tim Apple or Satya McGoogle didn’t have a role in that, why should they now?

The government did though in supplying said ID, so there was a centralised trustable organisation that the bank could depend on for verification.

[–] Dojan@pawb.social 8 points 3 weeks ago

Exactly. After that, the bank should accept that I wish to pay with my own device without Google, Apple, or Samsung having a say.

They don’t need GAS approval for me to pay my bills on my computer. Nor to make online purchases on it. Why is it suddenly required on my phone? It’s idiotic.

If I say that my device is okay, that’s all that should be required.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Nyadia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

I see this topic come up often in conversations about degoogled Android and it makes me wonder what if anything I'm missing out on by just using cash/card for payments, cause not once have I been at checkout and thought to myself "man, I wish I could do this with my phone instead" but people talk about this like it's almost a dealbreaker that makes it hard for them to seriously consider switching to Graphene or Lineage or whatever.

[–] h_ramus@piefed.social 24 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

In a lot of counties banks are becoming mobile first. Want to login in the browser? Authenticate with your mobile app to approve. Don't have a mobile phone with the requisites of the bank? Well, go to the branch, take a ticket, wait and then tell them what you want to do with your money. It's not just about paying, banks are moving online authentication to be dependent on Google or Apple, whatever poison you pick.

This seems like same shit different flies. Still dependent on some centralised approval which doesn't help openness and security. We need alternatives to the duopoly but this ain't it, chief.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] newtraditionalists@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Right there with you. Access to my money relying on a device that needs to be charged is just stupid. I'm stranded somewhere, my phone runs out of battery, suddenly I have zero dollars. No thanks.

[–] Chewy7324@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I keep a single bill in my phone case for emergencies (be it an actual emergency or I just want to eat at some place which only takes cash).

If my phone battery runs out I'm stranded anyway, since I can't call anyone or use my public transport ticket.

Im truly struggling to understand what you mean. If your phone battery runs out, and you cant call anyone, do your legs and mouth suddenly stop working? Walk to a bus/train/transport station, use your words and pay for a trip home. obviously, if your money relies on the phone battery, yes you are truly stranded. But if you have a card or cash, you are not. It's quite simple. I guess you just have no imagination and can't fathom that people existed without phones or something? I'm asking in earnest, what do you mean?

[–] NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago

I agree, it’s a nice-to-have but it’s far from necessary. I like having the option as a backup in case I forget my wallet, but I’ll live without it

[–] JoeMontayna@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

It's the hardware, and it feels like mobile in particular is intentionally designed to not be modular. I suspect that is by design to keep it under control of the big companies.

[–] root@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

I agree, with the caveat that it's very nice to be able to pay with my phone/ watch if/when forget my wallet, rather than having to go back home to get it.

[–] Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

India primarily uses Phones to pay. And I'm sure there's a big community that uses custom ROMs.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

I'm sure there was, but I'm not sure there still is.

maybe those who still do that carry around a google infested phone.

[–] puntinoblue@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago

I don’t use the phone that often as a debit /credit bank card but I use it for payments (bills invoices etc.), paying on line, transferring money to people and accounts, and just managing accounts. The phone app is very useful for those functions - especially if the alternative is going into a bank and queuing.

A phone OS that will not work with banking apps is not really a contemporary solution. iOS or Android are the only reliable options at the moment in the US/Europe - Iiuc Open Source Android has to sandbox Google Play for banking apps to work so that’s not viable long-term solution, as Google will only make that more difficult in the future.

Given the issues with the judges at ICC and US payment systems, building an alternative to Google and Apple is a high priority

[–] Don_alForno@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago

My bank uses an app as 2FA for online credit card payments. Without this app I couldn't use my cc for online shopping.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 39 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

GrapheneOS is critical of this initiative here and I think their criticism has merit. This simply moves the gatekeeper from Google to a handful of OEM's who won't let you use anything other than their blessed OS's.

[–] Delascas@feddit.uk 22 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Has the GrapheneOS team ever, once, been supportive of ANY other custom ROM initiative? I ask this as someone with both a GOS Pixel10 and a FairPhone 6 running /e/ on my desk this week.

For as good as their security approach is, their constant shit talking of others also making efforts to free us from big tech helps no-one.

Oh the irony of using the phrase "blessed OS's" coming from the GOS camp.

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I wouldn't characterize myself as "the GOS camp" (I use LineageOS) I just happen to agree with them sometimes, and this is one of those times.

I do imagine this response is to some degree influenced by their beef with /e/ (an OS I don't have a high opinion of either, but for other reasons). It just seems to me that people see "not google" and think it's a good thing, but a gatekeeper determining which OS you are allowed to use with what apps is fundamentally a bad idea even if it's not google.

[–] detren@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah it seems they really let perfect be the enemy of the good.

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Agree. This type of systems are not even necessary.

[–] 20dogs@feddit.uk 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

One or more neutral organizations could exist certifying devices and operating systems without providing a centralized API. Those organizations could simply provide signed releases with the roots of trust, revoked keys and operating system key fingerprints. Apps could use multiple different certifying organizations. This is already something Android's hardware attestation API fully supports today.

Then why doesn't GrapheneOS offer that alternative to banks etc

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)

This is huge. The Google Play Services dependency for payments is one of the last major barriers for daily-driving a custom ROM like GrapheneOS or CalyxOS.

Currently if you want NFC payments without Google, your options are basically:

  • Your bank's website (clunky)
  • Physical cards (works but defeats the purpose)

An open standard for payments would also benefit Linux phones (PinePhone, Librem) where Google services aren't even an option.

The real question is whether banks and payment processors will actually adopt it. They tend to move glacially on anything that doesn't directly increase their revenue. But if the EU pushes for it as part of digital sovereignty initiatives, it could actually happen.

[–] JoeMontayna@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Honestly if there was an alternate and functional phone/OS/app store that early adopters who are a little technical can embrace, it would be the #1 platform in under 5 years. People in the know are chomping at the bit to get away from these big monopolzed platforms, and once it gains steam and polish, people will flock to it.

[–] daisykutter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

There are already alternate app stores, and alternate OS and phones that are functional and niche. The real issue is that the Android people knows is not open source, AOSP is the thing open sourced, but thats far from what we use on a daily basis as Android, and Google makes sure every time it can to put hurdles between functionality and open source, some of those hurdles can and are being worked on, some others are out of reach for the open source community

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

i'm just guessing here but i think that the critical requirements to be able to run banking apps securely on your smartphone are:

  • lockable/unlockable bootloader
  • quality control of the operating system to make sure it doesn't contain malware/spyware
  • internet connection & open-protocol banking network

the first two parts are general smartphone/laptop security and operating system integrity, which can only be done through hardware/general software developers. Like i think we need reliable hardware manufacturers but also institutions that check that open source software doesn't contain malware. Like when you run apt install some-package who says that some-package doesn't contain malware?

The third one is the only part that is actually specific to banking. That's a whole separate topic and has barely anything to do with the first two steps.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Like when you run apt install some-package who says that some-package doesn’t contain malware?

The Debian (or Ubuntu) package maintainer says that. Having an application package available in a distro's official repository is an endorsement of the safety of that package.

This is something people need to appreciate before they go adding PPAs and flatpaks and whatnot willy-nilly.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

I can shop online on a fucking toaster.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

I agree it would be good to have third party integrity checks to not require Google Services etc. as part of the chain.

In GrapheneOS, many Google Play integrity check pass, but payments still do not work. You are notified when an app uses the integrity API, but probably only because they have spent a bunch of work sandboxing Play Services. This is what you see when you look at those details:

integrity checks in grapheneos

I guess the obvious problem is that so many apps rely on Google Services, such as for payments, opening the store, checking for integrity etc. On stock android, you can't pick and choose these services separately or use third party ones, unlike using a third party keyboard, for example. Everything is one big proprietary, data guzzling lump.

[–] GMac@feddit.org 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

I don't think I understand this. I don't actually want to pay with my phone, so thats a non-problem to me, but when I can access my bank with a browser on any pc in the world, why do they need attestation on a mobile? I dont see why the requirement is inconsistent.

load more comments (3 replies)

Really hope this happens

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

I think it's cool trying to figure out a way to do this without google, but it still won't solve the fact that credit card payments aren't private and are linked to your identity. As always cash is the way to go.

Also if you are still going to have a credit card (I mean fare I have one too) why not just use a physical card rather than paying on your phone?

[–] flango@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 3 weeks ago
[–] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Why not just use cash? Untraceable, nearly ubiquitous acceptance, are they just too lazy to go to the bank?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›