> there is 250gb of source code to build android
No, there isn't.
> who has time to build it let alone review it?
How exactly do you plan on doing any meaningful review of the Linux kernel, no one else is doing either? Also, a browser engine has more code + more time to build.
Conversation
You are not hearing me. I agree with you.
I want to start ripping things out, and eventually rip out the kernel too.
The modern smartphone approach has too much bloat to ever be fully reviewed or trusted in the way I want.
1
Yeah, and so does Linux, or Chromium. You certainly can't use an ARM SoC which is actually largely a black box (unlike a closed source library where you have all the unobfuscated, simply compiled code, and could review it in the that form, which may even be better for your goal).
1
1
So, no web browser with what you want to do, and definitely no massive monolithic kernel with immense intertwined complexity like Linux. It's far harder to review Linux than even 10x or more code spread out into small components with clear boundaries and APIs.
1
You seem to have a very warped idea of how code review works and what it accomplishes, especially if there is actually supposed to be understanding of the code as a whole, and full review of all of it. That's just not realistic for a project like Linux or a web rendering engine.
1
No team is ever going to be able to fully review and understand a project like Linux. It is beyond human understanding / capabilities. It's immensely complex without clear boundaries between different things. No one is even attempting to do any kind of full picture review of it.
2
As I have said several times now, I do not think anyone stands a chance of fully reviewing or auditing the Linux kernel.
I do however see that as a placeholder while everything else gets stripped down.
I want the Linux kernel replaced with a microkernel.
1
It's not something that can simply be replaced with a drop-in replacement unless that includes running the Linux kernel on top of it or using gVisor which is what we are considering doing in the long term for GrapheneOS. You'll be building around how Linux and *nix works.
1
1
If app compat with an existing platform is a non-goal, it doesn't really fit. There are projects and companies developing devices meant to be secure in a much more meaningful way. I do not think it can be built on the Linux kernel, and definitely not any major Linux distribution.
2
1
You can get Linux way way more hardened than any Linux distro that exists today. An immutable squashfs statically compiled into the kernel to get a bare minimal mvp... Then port the user space to something even leaner. Gvisor etc may help for sure.
1
1
That's userspace hardening, not kernel hardening, and the kernel is by far the biggest issue even with a richly functional userspace like Android. Kernel vulnerabilities are the majority of the severe ones and are part of most real world attacks. It's the easiest way out of the
app sandbox or better sandboxes. It renders most of the OS security inconsequential once there's a decent application security model and other security features. It's not possible to really do much better while still having Linux as the weak link at the core of everything.
1
Particularly when each major release of Linux is making the issues substantially worse. It's not getting better. When you move from an older LTS to a newer one, you're getting massively increased complexity, massively increased attack surface, less understanding / review overall.
2
1
Show replies
I have to do what I know how to do one layer at a time. Maybe as people like you go deeper in GrapheneOS and similar I can learn enough to take in swapping the kernel too. This is going to take years and I have realistic baby step expectations.
1