GrapheneOSWe strongly oppose the Unified Attestation initiative and call for app developers supporting privacy, security and freedom on mobile to avoid it. Companies selling phones should not be deciding which operating systems people are allowed to use for apps.
🌸 Ⓐnarkitty lumi-nhac 
@GrapheneOS what the fuck. that is absolutely horrifying
remote attestation is a technology that has no good uses. it's just drm
everyone should have the freedom to run whatever they want on their own devices. this freedom should never be taken away and it should be enshrined in law that it can never be taken away
someone else should not be able to decide whether my device is "secure" enough for their purposes. this is reverse security. the os needs to boot securely and the attestation chain should go upwards, with each stage verifying the ones on top of it. not this opposite world bullshit
remote attestation is a technology that has no good uses. it's just drm
everyone should have the freedom to run whatever they want on their own devices. this freedom should never be taken away and it should be enshrined in law that it can never be taken away
someone else should not be able to decide whether my device is "secure" enough for their purposes. this is reverse security. the os needs to boot securely and the attestation chain should go upwards, with each stage verifying the ones on top of it. not this opposite world bullshit
luna the doggie 
@lumi @GrapheneOS IMO remote attestation really only has a place in organizations that provide managed devices to members, for verifying the integrity of the device as whatever threat model the organization has requires.
For personal devices it enables a lot of anti consumer uses.
For personal devices it enables a lot of anti consumer uses.
@lunareclipse @GrapheneOS in my views it's a pandora's box that should never be opened, the gigantic downsides outweigh the marginal upsides by quite a lot