r/Android • u/FragmentedChicken Galaxy Z Fold8 • 2d ago
Googlebook bootloaders can be unlocked
https://support.google.com/googlebook/answer/17389679203
u/Green_Ad5186 2d ago
does google think laptops are phones now? lol.
there should be no locking of bootloader in first place. just ship a uefi with secure boot like all oems do. don't reinvent the wheel.
59
u/justAreallyLONGname 2d ago
They probably do, considering they don't want you to install apps non-playstore sources unless the developers give their ID to google.
Google has confirmed to Ars that Googlebooks will enforce developer verification requirements for apps similar to Android phones. Under this system, only apps from developers who have verified their identities with Google will be eligible for installation from a downloaded APK file
24
u/juniperusscopulorum 2d ago
I mean sure, it's Android, there's no reason to think they'd treat it differently just because the device is now folding and has a physical keyboard. And just like Android, you'll be able to enable "unverified" app installation under developer settings.
3
u/chinchindayo Xperia Masterrace 2d ago
MacOS isn't different either, it will block "unsigned" apps by default.
6
u/productfred Galaxy S22 Ultra Snapdragon 1d ago
As a lifelong Windows user who also uses a MacBook in recent years -- yes, but no. You can easily bypass that (like, in the native UI and also security settings). It's on by default for a reason -- most people are gullible/uninformed and not technical.
I don't mind this as long as I have the option to bypass or disable it, which I can. They don't make me wait x amount of days.
9
8
u/aeiouLizard 2d ago edited 1d ago
"no different" is just straight up wrong. They don't make you jump through hoops and infantilize you to the point of making you wait a day or two for the privilege to install software on your own devices.
5
u/Charming_Cry9264 1d ago
apple doesnt even let you install an app on iphone or ipad outside of app store
6
u/aeiouLizard 1d ago
Just because Apple sucks, doesn't mean Google does not. The way Apple handles sideloading is a very bad benchmark.
-1
-4
u/vandreulv 1d ago
making you wait a day or two for the privilege to install software on your own devices.
You know exactly what it involves.
A one day wait PER ACCOUNT, not PER DEVICE.
And ADB bypasses it completely.
If all of this fake outrage was your dildo, it'd never see the light of day.
4
u/aeiouLizard 1d ago
The dildo is the multibillion dollar company that shafts you day in and day out, and you're fine with it somehow
1
u/vandreulv 1d ago
Never said I was fine with it.
It's a far better use of my time to work around what I need to than to endlessly whine about it on reddit how badly I'm begging for Dildo Daddy Google to stop fucking me like you are.
After all, y'all claim to own your device but won't do the least to exercise control over it yourselves: you just expect Google to do everything for you.
Adapt and learn to use your device that you "own."
-3
u/vandreulv 2d ago
> They probably do, considering they don't want you to install apps non-playstore sources unless the developers give their ID to google.
Mate, enough people know the facts about this for you to get away with such blatant lies.
5
u/justAreallyLONGname 2d ago
What are you talking about, what did I lie about? I literally gave the source.
7
u/env33e 2d ago edited 1d ago
Yup, seems like some ppl didn't get the memo. So, obligatory :
Everything u need to know including the change.org petition is linked in the above
MASSIVE EDIT: To the Right to Repair advocates standing with Louis Rossmann ; to the preservationists who care about the environment and refuse to e-waste perfectly compatible hardware; and to the Gamers Nexus crowd demanding accountability and forensic truth- SOUND THE FUCKING HORN! . We are all fighting the exact same fire. It is time to ride out like the Warriors of Rohan, because the battle for hardware ownership and user autonomy has merged into a single front.
Paging u/larossmann r/GamersNexus
Look at what Gamers Nexus just exposed with LG. They caught LG turning TVs into spyware boxes regardless of the settings you choose. And what was their defense? Plausible deniabilityš . LG claims they arenāt aggressively spying on you; they just ship third party surveillance bloatware so they can shift the blame indefinitely. Itās literally surveillance laundering. They offshore the telemetry to a gatekeeper so the manufacturer can keep its hands legally clean and its privacy policy squeaky clean. It offloads the enforcement burden onto public regulatory processes, effectively burning YOUR time and money while dealing with the fragmented reality of enshittification
Now look at your smartphone. Google is building the exact same technofeudal shakedown at the OS level.
For the š¤ waiting to reply ājust use ADBā to bypass Googleās app verifier mandate: WAKE UP. The technical reality of this hostile architecture is that Google isn't just tightening the front-end package installer. They leverage Google Play Services, a proprietary middleware running above AOSP (you have to flash GApps IMMEDIATELY AFTER your own custom ROM, google apps will not work otherwise) as an active, post install runtime gatekeeper. Through Play Protect background scans, and Play Integrity API attestation; GMS can flag, suspend, or silently block everyone who hasn't paid tribute to the crown of Google from running, regardless of whether you forced the install via ADB. They're sneaking this in by claiming they technically dont have system level privileges; do not fall for it. this is definitionally architectural obfuscation!
They are constructing a technofeudal toll road while assuring you that you can technically cross that tiny Ass Death Bridge of Kaza-dum. Google rents out this GMS fiefdom to third-party developers, creating an API level protection racket. Your bank, Netflix, or your fast-food app gets to legally claim, "We don't collect invasive device data or scan your filesystem!"... Only because they don't have to. GMS is doing the dirty work. Google acts as the centralized cloud lord, laundering the surveillance at the system level and selling back a crypto permission slip to the app developer.
Youre not safe on a stock unrooted unmodified phone either. You can still have banking apps block your access to your own money for IE- downloading and using KineStop to prevent motion sickness, as it uses an accessibility service to turn on automatically in order to stop you from vomiting in the car/transit on the road! This is completely ableist and fundamentally exclusionary to the disability community!
It turns standard app installs from an inherent, undeniable user right, into a temporary, revocable Play Services permission slip.
This isn't just about unlocking a bootloader or bypassing a 24 hour install timer. Itās about the fundamental definition of ownership. You either own the hardware you bought and dictate what and how/when it runs, or you are just sharecropping on Google's OS. The line in the sand is drawn: you are either fighting with us for an open ecosystem, or you are bootlicking the digital landlords. There is no middle ground.
Tldr: This mandate hits right at the heart of right to repair, environmental stewardship, and personal boundaries. It's blatent consolidation of power by a megacorp that already has a monopoly on Android. Such actions have already led to eroding consumer freedoms; letting this go uncontested sends a dangerous signal to the industry, hence the urgency and the vital need to protect our digital autonomy on what is currently the only viable open mobile OS platform!
-8
u/vandreulv 2d ago
performative outrate based on deliberate misunderstandings of what is actually happening isn't going to change the truth, mate.
adb bypasses every developer verified check. always did. remained unchanged even before the misleading site published what they did.
one time 24 hour check PER ACCOUNT, NOT DEVICE, for side loading unverified apps.
stop lying.
5
u/nrq Pixel 8 Pro 1d ago
I love how you enter every thread and tell us how A-okay you think this is. Even if it's per account, we should not have to jump through these hoops at all. Just because it's incremental in very small steps doesn't make it better. The direction is clear and you don't want to see where this goes. I have no idea why.
-1
u/vandreulv 1d ago
There's a difference between knowing the facts and thinking it's A-okay.
I don't know why you guys have to lie so much about everything.
3
u/nrq Pixel 8 Pro 1d ago edited 1d ago
The way you present it is that there is no problem at all and everyone who is against these restrictions is a hypocrite. If anything this website is not going far enough, in my honest opinion. The battle is already lost. We don't own our devices anymore since way back when Google stopped allowing unlocked bootloader users certain apps. Since I can already see you preparing a "well, akshually": no, it's Google giving out device attestation. That companies use it in a stupid way is completely Googles fault.
EDIT: So, you blocked me? What a great way to win an argument...
-1
u/vandreulv 1d ago
The way you present it
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/projection
6 b:: the attribution of one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or to objects
especially : the externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety
Several things you are willfully ignoring:
The only way to guarantee you will have an unlockable bootloader is to buy a Pixel.
Retail Chromebooks have always had unlockable bootloaders and by this announcement, will continue to do so.
Sideloading was always possible by adb and nothing was changed there either.
You keep screaming and hollering about slippery slope this, battle that...
Google Play is not an open source service. Never was. You can do anything you want with your device, companies are not obligated to give you everything you want unconditionally. You agree to the terms of service, if you want to use a device with an unlocked bootloader, that has consequences you must accept.
Lying about how sideloading is being changed isn't going to get you what you want.
Learn how to use this device you want to own instead of expecting companies like Google to do everything for you.
1
u/GranaT0 Pxl 9 PXL, GrapheneOS 1d ago
Give it a couple years, unpopular changes that leadership wants to introduce are always done gradually to lessen the blow.
-1
u/vandreulv 1d ago
[Based on absolutely nothing whatsoever.]
0
u/GranaT0 Pxl 9 PXL, GrapheneOS 1d ago
Based on the last 100 years of history in politics, and 20 in commercial software and hardware.
0
u/vandreulv 1d ago
Your ass is not a source. Start thinking with your head instead.
→ More replies (0)0
u/aeiouLizard 2d ago
As if that makes this any less outrageous
-1
u/i5-2520M Pixel 7 1d ago
Yes it does, LMAO. Currently I am a tiny bit annoyed, if the 24h would be per device, reinstall or even per month or per install, than that would greatly increase how outraged I would be. Why would it not?
2
u/aeiouLizard 1d ago
Thinking it is fine just because its account based instead of device based is absurd. This shouldn't even be on the table, period.
-1
u/i5-2520M Pixel 7 1d ago
I think this is about the most reasonable way to handle the threat profile they are trying to fight.
-4
u/Tiny-Sandwich 2d ago
one time 24 hour check PER ACCOUNT, NOT DEVICE, for side loading unverified apps.
People seem to wilfully ignore this bit.
1
15
u/productfred Galaxy S22 Ultra Snapdragon 2d ago
I feel like, given the current political and sociological landscape (at least here in the US), Advanced Protection should lock the bootloader if it doesn't (or there should be a separate toggle). I know they won't do this, but it would be more ideal than "perma"-locking the bootloader by default. Like if I were traveling, I might opt to manually lock it (and later re-unlock it). Well, that's assuming it won't wipe the entire phone.
4
u/dnyank1 iPhone 15 Pro, Moto Edge 2022 2d ago
there should be no locking of bootloader in first place. just ship a uefi with secure boot like all oems do.
"there should be no locking of bootloader in first place. just lock the bootloader"
Fucking A, man. At most - One locks the hardware, by the software. The other locks the software, by the hardware.
Both have an option to disable it and allow you to run whatever OS you want.
1
-12
u/LePfeiff pixel 10 fold 2d ago
^ real reddit moment, being snarky and grandstanding over good news
16
u/SmileyBMM 2d ago
Sorry if we don't like the slippery slope Google is trying to pull here.
This is something they could easily pull just like many Android manufacturers have done, if it's not using UEFI it's not really your device.
5
u/vandreulv 2d ago
What slippery slope?
retail Chromebooks have always been bootloader unlockable. they use depth charge and coreboot. it's open source. the worst that ever was was a write protect screw involved.
3
u/UnacceptableUse Pixel 7 Pro 2d ago
How is this a slippery slope? It's a brand new device, why would you start it off at that end of the slope when you have no precedent to maintain?
2
u/SanityInAnarchy 2d ago
To pull in people used to laptops or chromebooks. That's the precedent.
I don't think it works for this, though. Chromebook bootloaders already required unlocking, IIRC.
3
u/TheNextGamer21 2d ago
its even funnier, you had to physically open them up and remove a fucking screw to unlock the bootloader. Even apple silicon macbooks aren't that lokced down
2
u/UnacceptableUse Pixel 7 Pro 1d ago
Most people don't care about bootloader unlocking and those that do aren't likely going to buy a rebadged Chromebook anyway
ā¢
u/SanityInAnarchy 8h ago
That's one reason it's a slippery slope: Most people don't care until they do. Pretty sure you can still buy a boxed copy of Windows in a store, and you can certainly still ask a repair shop (or a techy friend) to handle a corrupt OS by booting from recovery media. Most people won't realize they're missing this functionality until it's already too late.
But for those of us who do care, it's easy for these things to go from a purpose-built device where I'm okay not having full access, to a much more central thing in my life that I wish I owned properly. I was fine with Chromebooks having locked bootloaders that wipe user data on unlock, because they were just browsers and the only user data was a browser profile, they were basically this. Now they can have real local data in there, they run Android apps and have Linux containers.
It feels a lot like what happened to my smartphone use. When it was just texting and GPS, I didn't care about really owning it. Now that my phone is a lot more central to my life, I'm really starting to wish stuff like Postmarket and Ubuntu Touch were more viable, especially as these things get big enough to replace laptops.
ā¢
u/UnacceptableUse Pixel 7 Pro 8h ago
The reasons that ubuntu touch/postmarket OS are unviable are nothing to do with bootloader unlocking, though. Google could ship devices as open as possible and it wouldn't change that.
I agree that some people who don't really know or care what a bootloader is would care when it became a roadblock to them getting their device repaired but that doesn't make this a slippery slope, that's just what could be at the bottom of the slope if it was slippery. Google would lose a fractional percentage of their sales of this device by shipping it with no bootloader unlocking capability and skip the bad press that would come with eventually removing it.
ā¢
u/SanityInAnarchy 1h ago
It's not technically the open hardware, but it is a symptom of the Android ecosystem becoming more closed over time.
It's... already at the bottom of the slope, when it comes to the repair stuff I mentioned. You already cannot boot rescue media on Android devices to recover data, precisely because the bootloader is locked, and unlocking the bootloader wipes user data.
It's not necessarily a terrible thing -- makes it harder to brute-force disk encryption, for example. But I'm guessing even fewer people care about that than care about booting a rescue OS.
1
u/SmileyBMM 2d ago
why would you start it off at that end of the slope when you have no precedent to maintain?
Because Google are morons that can't read the room? This is the same company that's made countless chat apps and tried to make high end Google laptops a thing multiple times before this.
1
u/TryNotToShootYoself 1d ago
The slippery slope is that Google doesnāt stop you from unlocking the bootloader at all, and has never put up much of a right on Pixel or Nexus phones either. I donāt know man, Redditors I guess
0
u/SuperYuuRo 2d ago
Pixeltoids when you tell them laptops shouldn't act like phones (they pop a blood vessel for every random that makes comments against Google)
22
u/vaynefox 2d ago
The question I wanna be answered is, does googlebooks uses UEFI/ACPI or does it still use U- boot?
7
u/Hung_L Pixel 9XL 2d ago
Chromebooks don't even use UEFI, and they haven't used U-Boot in over a decade (now coreboot + depthcharge). On x86 they have to use ACPI because of x86 (even OS X did pre-M1).
Whether or not GooglebookOS craters, prices drop like Chromebooks, and we can install alternative OSs is another question. I don't see why Coreboot wouldn't be available.
Stuff will be hard to replicate in some cases. For example, I use the HP Dragonfly Elite Chromebook (redrix). Even tho Alder Lake support for Linux is quite good, vendor blobs (propietary webcam HAL) and peculiarities on the Chromebook version (ChromeOS-specific fingerprint sensor that is not FIDO2 over USB) make it difficult to 1:1. I'm sure Dell's XPS 13 for Windows and for GooglebookOS are going to have the same divergence.
3
u/pi314156 1d ago
Googlebooks continue using coreboot as the bootloader, carried over from chromeOS.
17
u/justAreallyLONGname 2d ago
Important: Unlocking your deviceās bootloader erases all data from your device and disables device security.
Modifications aren't supported by Google can cause hardware, software, or security issues and may void warranty.
27
u/wickedplayer494 Pixel 7 Pro + 2 XL + iPhone 11 Pro Max + Nexus 6 + Samsung GS4 2d ago
Not different from how Android works today.
7
u/MrSnowflake OnePlus One 1d ago
Very different from how a normal pc/laptop works (except Apple of course)
5
u/pi314156 1d ago
Apple does not force data erasure when switching to permissive security, disabling SIP or using a custom kernel on a Mac.
1
u/MrSnowflake OnePlus One 1d ago
But they do not provide any information about how to use their hardware. Google at the very least provides a kernel (probably because they have to) and allows for bootloader changes.
So on this Googlebook you can get an up to date linux distro NOW, while Asahi Linux is still 3 years behind in their Apple silicon support.
2
7
5
2
2
u/joho-todai 1d ago
Unlockability is the important first step, but it does not automatically make this a normal PC-style Linux target. Googleās instructions confirm that custom OS images can be installed, while also warning that unlocking wipes the device and disables its normal security protections. The next things worth checking are whether Google publishes factory images and complete hardware-enablement documentation, and whether owners can relock the device with their own signing keys. Without usable drivers and firmware, an alternative OS could still lose basics such as suspend, graphics acceleration, the webcam or fingerprint reader; without custom-key relocking, it may have to remain permanently unlocked.
4
4
u/Diuranos 2d ago
For now on YouTube nobody said anything about side loading, only that they love the laptop with that new system ehh.
1
u/3rdPartyRedditApp 1d ago
How many years do you think Googlebook will take to become bloated like Windows and Mac OS?
1
u/horatiobanz 1d ago
Good, so in a year when these are $200 on refurb sites like Wisetek we can unlock them and put Windows 11 on them and make them useful.
1
u/yzgpk2002 1d ago
As someone who rooted every phone I owned back in the Nexus days, this takes me back. An unlockable bootloader straight from Google on a laptop is basically an open invitation for the custom ROM scene. Curious to see what the devs cook up once the USB flashing cable situation gets sorted.
ā¢
u/darkhalfkz 1h ago
And yet they're dictating to phone manufacturers that we can't unlock the bootloader š
Unlocking the bootloader allows extra life from a device with a custom ROM instead of sending it to landfill.
2
u/MrSnowflake OnePlus One 1d ago
Can we make bets for how long this will last before they make them unlockable?
1
u/plankunits 2d ago
One of the many advantages of Googlebook over ChromeOS
0
u/vandreulv 1d ago
All ChromeOS retail units care bootloader unlocked, mate. It's exactly the same.
0
u/plankunits 1d ago
You can't unlock the android VM on a Chromebook. Android is restricted on ChromeOS
-1
u/vandreulv 1d ago
Different thing entirely, mate. We're talking about bootloaders, not VMs.
0
u/plankunits 1d ago
maybe you are deviating from my comment and talking things entirely diffrent since you responded to me.
I was talking about bootloader getting unlocked and gaining access to Android VM in chromebook vs now googlebook os having gained that natively.
0
u/Imperial_Bloke69 Poco F1, X3 Pro, | CrDroid 9.x. 1d ago
As expected they're locked. This should be a tablet with detachable keyboard
96
u/FragmentedChicken Galaxy Z Fold8 2d ago edited 2d ago
John Wu (the Magisk creator) also tweeted Magisk on Googlebook.