Conversation

How does mobile Firefox still have no integrated PDF viewer but instead make you download and shell out to a dedicated PDF app (requiring you to find one you trust and waste storage space each time you view a PDF)?!

Replying to

GrapheneOS has a security-focused PDF viewer based on using pdf.js in the WebView. Can use it elsewhere: * play.google.com/store/apps/det * github.com/GrapheneOS/Pdf Apps can directly open a PDF with it without saving it as a download but browsers may not commonly have support for that.

github.com

Release 7 · GrapheneOS/PdfViewer

Full list of changes from the previous release (version 6). Notable changes: update pdf.js to 2.10.377 update other dependencies update minimum API version to 26 (Android 8.0+) update target API v...

Replying to

and

It's currently very barebones but we plan on improving it quite a lot in the near future. Our focus was making a privacy/security focused Camera app but now that app is quite mature and we plan on shifting focus over to making the PDF viewer into a modern app with more features.

Replying to

Is the camera app available standalone?

Replying to

Yes, at github.com/GrapheneOS/Cam. It isn't available on the Play Store because they started enforcing using Play App Signing so we would need to make a separate build with a different app id for the Play Store. We'll probably release it there when CameraX is a bit more mature.

github.com

Release 9 · GrapheneOS/Camera

Full list of changes from the previous release (version 8). Notable changes: fix serious regression from the previous release for the in-app gallery breaking filtering in an edge case where all ph...

Replying to

Uhg, how gratuitously breaking for users. Aside: Have you considered publishing in F-Droid too? Might get more exposure.

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Replying to

@RichFelker

We're fine with them publishing Auditor, Camera and PDF Viewer in their official repository through their theoretically supported reproducible build approach. It's supposed to allow shipping developer builds after reproducing them but they hadn't ported to v2/v3 apk signatures.

10:05 PM · Jan 14, 2022Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

I think that's still stalled. It's something they're supposed to support but it doesn't seem like it's actually available. Their usual approach of making alternate builds would be fine if they prefixed them with org.f-droid. but they normally don't do that which is problematic.

Replying to

and

If a user installs a normal F-Droid release of an app in one profile and then tries to install the developer release in another, they get a signature verification error due to key pinning / downgrade protection applying across profiles since the underlying apks aren't duplicated.

Show replies