GrapheneOS project: pixel 11 no longer supports hardware memory tagging (MTE)

150

4400thecat about 4 hours ago 55 commentsRead Article on bsky.app

DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 2513 words in the discussion.

Discussion (55 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

neilv•7 minutes ago

Fediverse link: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117179231167297908

Pfhortune•about 2 hours ago

Feeling like my Pixel 9 Pro was the best timed hardware buy I've made in recent years.

The 10 dropped the physical SIM slot and Google started with their device tree shenanigans that year, with little to no improvements in exchange.

I've got 16GB of RAM and 512GB in an ecosystem that shows every sign of regressing in capacities due to component price inflation.

Very interested to see what Motorola does next year, however.

trollbridge•about 1 hour ago

The 11 is a complete turd. Less RAM than the 10.

Sticking with a 9 Pro or 10 Pro is the smart move right now. I’m actually considering spending $400 to get a broken 9 Pro XL fixed…

codethief•28 minutes ago

> The 10 dropped the physical SIM slot

Not sure about the 10, but at least the 10 Pro still has one.

grapheneos•13 minutes ago

It was removed from the whole non-folding Pixel 10 series in the US. It still has the SIM card slot elsewhere. We had to return a Pixel 10 bricked due to a firmware bug and it was the US model since we'd bought it in the US and sent it overseas with a forwarding service. Google's repair partner shop was quite confused about the lack of a SIM card slot to get the IMEI and we only had a serial number but they figured out using the serial number instead.

There's still dual SIM support either way and you can store dozens of inactive eSIMs. The main downside of eSIMs is widespread lack of transfer support by carriers.

MattTheRealOne•22 minutes ago

Not in the United States. Only the Fold still has a physical SIM slot.

newsomix9xl•about 3 hours ago

"Pixel 11 series is a lot more expensive for an incremental improvement to the CPU, the same underpowered GPU and reduced RAM for the Pro base models. They finally caught up to the last generation of Qualcomm cellular radio. It's overpriced, the upgrades aren't impressive and losing MTE is appalling."

I guess that's a thumbs down then?

perarneng•about 4 hours ago

What, MTE is such a promising tech and for security and now that we need all security we can get. WTF this is terrible development. You cant go backwards when the world needs getting even more secure.

prism56•about 4 hours ago

Such a shame. Google themselves barely utilised it in their stock builds. I wonder if there is some silicon or development overhead they decided to cut.

I'm optimistic about the Motorola partnership and when my 9 Pro is EOL I'll definitely look at how that's played out.

grapheneos•about 3 hours ago

Google likely cut MTE to reduce the die space required by CPU cache. It saves them money on a feature they never deployed by default and only used for a few processes as part of Android Advanced Protection Mode (AAPM) without enabling it in the Linux kernel. Their security team should have gotten it deployed by default for a large portion of the OS by now and then it would have been much harder to justify removing it. The small performance impact of asymmetric mode is irrelevant for the vast majority of the OS and it can also be used in the near zero cost asynchronous mode. We use synchronous in the kernel for security reasons but they didn't have to do that.

It's a completely different story for GrapheneOS where it means losing one of the main kernel and userspace security protections. This is one of the only ways we can significantly harden the Linux kernel with existing security features. The Linux kernel has always been a huge security liability for Android and AI models are making that much more obvious to everyone.

Google will likely end up heavily using MTE in the future. Pixel 11 devices won't be able to benefit from it. They're at the start of 7 years of updates but they won't be getting the benefit of future updates enabling MTE. Pixel 8 and later will benefit from Google likely expanding use of MTE for AAPM and eventually beginning to use it by default. It's unlikely Google will stop working on expanding MTE due to the Pixel 11 hardware decision. Multiple other OEMs are interested in MTE for devices made for businesses and governments even if Google decided it wasn't worth the cost for Pixels.

prism56•about 2 hours ago

Weird omission then... Seems asinine...

WinstonSmith84•about 3 hours ago

I don't understand much from MTE/Android or MIE/iOS but the explanation is also confusing when:

- They claim Apple did a great job integrating MIE in iOS - iOS doesn't encourage to opt into MTE ... Apple's docs warn developers of performance and stability issues

So it seems like even for iOS, this special security feature is only available for Apple own iOS app (at most?).

Then also:

> Even Signal doesn't opt-in. Our approach enables forcing using MTE in the standard allocators regardless.

So does that mean that Signal and any other apps are enrolled in MTE on Graphene?

grapheneos•about 3 hours ago

iOS uses MTE for nearly all of the important parts of the OS. It uses MTE within the kernel and for a substantial portion of the base OS processes. They focused on deploying it to the most security relevant processes first but it's deployed for a large portion of the OS beyond those. Apple has done a very good job protecting the OS with it. They've done a very poor job getting the app ecosystem to adopt it.

Android has more app ecosystem adoption than iOS due to having a better open source app ecosystem where GrapheneOS users have asked apps to enable it by default. Many GrapheneOS users are also force enabling MTE for user installed apps via our recommended toggle for it. Those users are reporting invalid memory access to developers via our dedicated notification system for invalid memory accesses it catches. For Android app developers, not opting into MTE doesn't mean their app won't be used with MTE due to GrapheneOS.

GrapheneOS uses MTE for the kernel and nearly every userspace process including all the base OS apps. We've had to fix many upstream Linux kernel and Pixel kernel driver bugs found by MTE. However, we aren't trying to fix the Pixel userspace drivers code ourselves so we have a few userspace processes excluded from MTE caused by userspace driver library/service bugs.

We recommend users enable our toggle for enabling MTE by default for every user installed app not explicitly marked as incompatible in our compatibility database. GrapheneOS has user-facing notifications for invalid memory accesses caught by MTE providing a traceback to share with the app developers. Users can use the per-app toggle to work around it if it makes an app unusable. We take the same approach for other aggressive exploit protections provided by GrapheneOS. Exploit protections with only rare compatibility issues are enabled by default for apps with a per-app toggle to opt-out and no toggle for the global default.

brookst•about 3 hours ago

I see a significant difference between making a security feature available but opt-in during a teething phase, and removing the feature altogether. Am I missing something?

Limit5332•about 3 hours ago

This isn't terrible development, it's simply that GrapheneOS devs can't do miracles They can't just continue supporting phones if they have security downgrades, especially if it's an important feature.

HybridStatAnim8•about 3 hours ago

I think they mean "this is a terrible development" in the sense that this is terrible news/turn of events. They arent criticizing GrapheneOSs software development.

xizst94•about 3 hours ago

Lost any remaining respect for Pixel with the decisions they've made for Pixel 11. The product design and hardware teams have both tried to one up each other and who can deliver the bigger pile of steaming crap.

bestouff•about 3 hours ago

They also say that the Pixel 11 is a very very tiny improvement wrt the Pixel 10, with less RAM and more expensive.

So basically they say don't buy it, wait for the Motorola phones.

grapheneos•about 3 hours ago

Pixel 11 has an incremental upgrade to the CPU, the same underpowered GPU and less RAM for the base Pro models. It has a new major version of the secure element (Titan M3) which likely greatly improves Before First Unlock state security for users without a strong passphrase. It has a better radio from a performance and efficiency perspective but it's still a more than yearly generation behind Qualcomm. The cellular radio firmware is also likely a security downgrade but the userspace code is more secure due to moving to AOSP IMS code. If these devices hadn't removed MTE, then they would have been a sidegrade with marginally better security. Removing MTE ruins these devices for GrapheneOS. We could still support the Pixel 11 series but it would be greatly rolling back overall security to before the Pixel 8. It does at least have PAC and BTI but MTE was the main improvement with the Pixel 8 rather than those.

Limit5332•about 3 hours ago

They have their reasons. Pixels are only getting worse and worse after the 9

hypercube33•about 1 hour ago

IMO they peaked with the Nexus 6 - camera has gotten worse and they make up with it in software or try to. You could and can see this at night or stacked shots in N6 vs pixel 4,5,6.

They bought the best phone hardware and software companies (Motorola and Android) and gutted them both.

grapheneos•8 minutes ago

They purchased Motorola Mobility for the patent portfolio as essentially a nuclear deterrent against Apple and then sold it to Lenovo. They're doing quite well internationally but haven't been a big brand in the US for a while. Their flagship phones are going to have GrapheneOS as a selling point soon and we'll hopefully be able to expand beyond the high end over the next couple years.

belowavgiq•5 minutes ago

There is really no "they", all Nexus phones weren't made by Google. Hence why, the 5X aside, everyone has nice memories of them.

ysnp•about 3 hours ago

Can someone from AOSP/Pixel hardware security shed some light? This is strange timing, especially when the approach has been validated by Apple also.

inigyou•about 2 hours ago

Probably just that Google doesn't use it so why pay for it? They're not obligated to support whatever GrapheneOS wants.

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

They do make limited use of it for Android Advanced Protection Mode (AAPM) introduced in Android 16. It no longer provides this upgrade for protection against exploits on the Pixel 11. They could substantially expand AAPM to using it across much more of the OS and could also start using it without AAPM since there's no significant downside to using it for most of the userspace code outside of the kernel.

inigyou•1 minute ago

It sounds like it was a failed experiment. Since it worked, it probably lost on a cost/benefit analysis. Which is fair enough.

Cider9986•about 1 hour ago

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/41564-pixel-11-doesnt-meet-...

mentalgear•about 2 hours ago

I wish ShiftPhone - which is fitting all my other needs - would offer a config that would work for GrapheneOS.

ahmadtbk•about 1 hour ago

I'm guessing this is why the pixel 8-10 models have been in such high demand recently

sdcfgy•about 3 hours ago

Urgh I was about to buy one for GOS. Maybe back to iPhone it is.

grapheneos•about 3 hours ago

You can get a Pixel 10 or wait for the upcoming Motorola flagship with GrapheneOS support. Pixel 11 only has an incremental CPU upgrade and the same GPU as the Pixel 11 anyway. It isn't much of a hardware upgrade and is even a downgrade for RAM with the base Pro devices. It's more expensive than the Pixel 10 was too.

The upcoming Motorola flagship will have a dramatically better CPU and GPU than the Pixel 11 and competitive cameras. It will still have 7 years of updates, MTE and a secure element with the features used by GrapheneOS. Motorola Signature (2026) is the predecessor not quite meeting our requirements mainly due to lack of MTE but also lack of other features which had to be developed.

WinstonSmith84•about 2 hours ago

Motorola doesn't have a great track records for flagships smartphones. I will keep finger crossed that we won't have to choose again between security and features but either way it's a great news, and I truly hope that GrapheneOS will be adopted by more manufacturers in the future

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

Motorola Signature (2026) was well received. They committed to 7 years of updates and provided top tier smartphones cameras which were previous limitations. Razr Fold (2026) has the top rated camera for a folding device on DXOMARK, unlike the huge camera downgrade for folding Pixels.

https://www.dxomark.com/smartphones/

We aren't sure when the first Motorola folding devices we can support will be released, but that will happen.

OJFord•about 2 hours ago

Is the Motorola partnership that they're ensuring support in the phone, and helping the port with docs/support perhaps, or is it even actually shipping with GrapheneOS?

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

They're implementing all of the features required by GrapheneOS, are helping us port GrapheneOS to the devices and may help us maintain it. They'll provide us with the drivers and firmware needed to support it too. Selling devices with GrapheneOS is planned but the details and timeline aren't worked out.

matheusmoreira•about 2 hours ago

Eagerly waiting for the Motorola flagship! Will it be released worldwide?

prism56•about 2 hours ago

One thing about Motorola. They aren't known for supporting devices long term with fast updates.

Is there any guarantee that in 4 years this device will be getting monthly patches, source and builds regularly?

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

Motorola Signature (2026) has 7 years of support and the successor to it is what we'll be supporting. GrapheneOS will be providing the updates for a device running GrapheneOS so it doesn't particularly matter how quickly they ship the AOSP patches or major Android updates themselves. GrapheneOS already provides AOSP patches months before Pixels via our security preview releases. We provide Linux kernel patches many months earlier than Pixels but it's currently limited by the speed of Greg KH's GKI LTS branch unless we start doing it ourselves again.

Motorola will directly Qualcomm firmware and drivers we need which are mainly from Qualcomm. The updates will be up to us.

lawn•about 2 hours ago

That's the point of GrapheneOS. They've been excellent at providing fast updates and long-term support for their supported devices.

Let Motorola do the hardware and GrapheneOS the software.

inigyou•about 2 hours ago

Just buy whichever device GOS does support right now. It's always been very picky about device support.

matheusmoreira•about 2 hours ago

Same here! I had everything lined up to import the phone just for GrapheneOS!

Google just can't help being a fucking disappointment at every single opportunity!

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

aboringusername•about 2 hours ago

It's funny how much Google lies about Android being 'secure' [1] and how much GrapheneOS, for free, improves the security of everyone with their work. Google should be, immediately, merging all patches/changes GrapheneOS makes and releasing a new build of Android to AOSP. Instead, users are subject to weak efforts to protect their security and privacy while Google parade about how good and amazing they are. They mention [1] 'This unencrypted data can be used to build user profiles or, in the hands of malicious actors'...And can't see the irony. They ARE the malicious actor and they absolutely build profiles about everyone. Whatever happened to the 'privacy sandbox' initiative again?

Anyone who values Graphene's work will purchase one of their Motorola devices, whatever the cost, otherwise it seems your choices are going to be giving up more data and control to Google, because they are clearly, obviously and systematically trying to remove GOS from Pixels (lack of source code, removing hardware features, making it purposely difficult to support pixels).

I predict by 2030 GrapheneOS will not support any new pixels entirely. The existing pixels will eventually die off and that will be that.

[1]: https://blog.google/security/new-android-network-security-pr...

inigyou•about 2 hours ago

They see the irony, they know the irony, they know their money comes from that irony being ignored so they will never lampshade it.

aboringusername•about 2 hours ago

It's obvious they see open access to users data as a threat to their business model. No, they haven't suddenly decided to care about your privacy, they want to deny other actors access so you need to get data directly via them. They will obviously still collect it themselves via their numerous methods (play services, chrome, ad networks etc).

dreamcompiler•about 2 hours ago

Good riddance to Google. I'm happy GOS is no longer dependent on their hardware.

My concern is that Motorola is a Chinese company. Sure, Pixel and Apple phones are made in China too, but they're overseen by American companies. How can we know these Motorola phones will not one day be placed on the "do not trust" list like e.g. Huawei phones?

inigyou•about 2 hours ago

You should buy one before that happens then. Maybe buy several. Or get a proxy in Europe to smuggle them for you.

grapheneos•about 2 hours ago

It's upcoming Motorola devices providing GrapheneOS support rather than current ones.

inigyou•about 2 hours ago

Then when it comes out you should buy one. In any case, don't buy a device for GOS unless GOS supports it right now.

dackdel•about 2 hours ago

placed on the do not trust list?? who places them on this list? and why do you listen to the people who place them there.

MattTheRealOne•about 2 hours ago

The US government puts them on the list. I don't care that they are on the list, but it does mean they can't sell the devices in the United States. If that ever happened to Motorola, and there were still no other devices that Graphene OS supports, then there would be no options left.

grapheneos•about 1 hour ago

Pixel 10 has 6 years of support remaining and the more recently launched Pixel 10a has even more of the support time remaining. We're hoping the Pixel 12 series brings back MTE so that it's only 1 generation not meeting our requirements. We could support the Pixel 11 series if we wanted but we'd have to heavily recommend against it. We haven't fully decided on how to handle it yet.

esseph•about 2 hours ago

> placed on the do not trust list?? who places them on this list?

The President of the United States, or members of the Federal Government that have the various levers of power.

> and why do you listen to the people who place them there

If they won't allow the devices to be imported then it's not really an option. Which also means they wouldn't be allowed to connect to the cell network.

Or they could be barred from all Federal or State facilities, having to be left in a faraday bag upon entry.

Federal grants and loans to states and companies could be denied if company policy allows the use of those devices for corporate communications and purchasing decisions, etc.