Conversation

The harm being done by Copperhead that I explained in this thread is still ongoing, with few changes from before: twitter.com/DanielMicay/st They've done zero useful privacy or security work since I was pushed out and they haven't even been able to maintain a subset of my code.

Quote Tweet

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Aug 26, 2018

Copperhead is falsely claiming copyright of my code: github.com/CopperheadOS Everyone buying a device from them or licensing the code from them is in violation of my licenses. I had no work contracts, employment agreement or copyright / licensing agreement with Copperhead.

Show this thread

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Replying to

When I was involved, there was a distinction between the open source OS hardening project and Copperhead. The signing keys belonged to the project and the company never had access to them. I destroyed my keys when they demanded having access/control and threatened to seize them.

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Replying to

@DanielMicay

No one should be using that anymore since it's completely dead and hasn't received security updates or the update to Android 9. There was no way to continue updates since they control the infrastructure, even if there had been resources available to keep going afterwards.

10:57 PM · Oct 29, 2018Twitter Web Client

Replying to

That's why it made sense to destroy the signing keys: they were entirely a risk for existing users with no benefits to keeping them. I'm still far away from having the resources to continue development of the broad OS hardening project instead of only certain components of it.

Replying to

I was never going to get back control over the infrastructure to push out updates. It no longer matters because no one should be using it anymore. It's completely dead and hasn't received updates. The successor will be a new set of projects with different branding and licenses.

Show replies