Jump to content

PRO1, No more System Updates


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, claude0001 said:

The problem is that security issues in the binary blobs owned by Qualcomm are not going to be fixed. Even LineageOS 19.1 is still on the "vendor security" level of April 2020.

Yes, I know that. That is the reason why I am hoping longer support for Pro1-X. However, custom ROMs are better than nothing for Pro1.

https://www.xda-developers.com/how-android-security-patch-updates-work/

"This means custom ROM developers are at the mercy of whatever OEM they're developing for, and if the OEM releases updated blobs or not. This is fine for devices that are still updated by the manufacturer, but for devices that aren't, the patches applied can only be applied to the Android framework and the Linux kernel. This is why LineageOS' Trust Interface shows two security patch levels - one being platform, the other being vendor. Even though custom ROMs for unsupported devices can't fully integrate all of the latest patches, they're going to be more secure than the older, outdated ROM."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FlyingAntero said:

Yes, I know that. That is the reason why I am hoping longer support for Pro1-X. However, custom ROMs are better than nothing for Pro1.

https://www.xda-developers.com/how-android-security-patch-updates-work/

"This means custom ROM developers are at the mercy of whatever OEM they're developing for, and if the OEM releases updated blobs or not. This is fine for devices that are still updated by the manufacturer, but for devices that aren't, the patches applied can only be applied to the Android framework and the Linux kernel. This is why LineageOS' Trust Interface shows two security patch levels - one being platform, the other being vendor. Even though custom ROMs for unsupported devices can't fully integrate all of the latest patches, they're going to be more secure than the older, outdated ROM."

The catch here is that f(x)tec is NOT the software OEM of the Pro¹. The OEM is a Chinese company which ditched f(x)tec and they are the legal owners of the whole source code of Pro¹ with SD825 SoC. (Such code that had to be rewritten after they were ditched because they didn't have the rights to repurpose it)

Edited by brunoais
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, brunoais said:

The catch here is that f(x)tec is NOT the software OEM of the Pro¹. The OEM is a Chinese company which ditched f(x)tec and they are the owners of the legal owners of the whole source code of Pro¹ with SD825 SoC. (Such code that had to be rewritten after they were ditched because they didn't have the rights to repurpose it)

That is why I said in the previous message that I don't know the reason behind this. I know that IdeaLTE was responsible for the software development. However, we did not have promised 90 days security updates in the first place so was there some issues with the co-operation between F(x)tec and IdeaLTE or was the cost an issue? Now it seems that IdeaLTE website is down so maybe they just disappeared. I have not seen any official statement about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

However, we did not have promised 90 days security updates in the first place so was there some issues with the co-operation between F(x)tec and IdeaLTE or was the cost an issue?

IdeaLTE just ditched them. They took the money and didn't fulfill the contract. What F(x)tec promised was what IdeaLTE was legally contracted to do for F(x)tec. It also included the batch of SD825 SoC for the Pro¹ igg batches.

19 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

I have not seen any official statement about this

When there's something in court, that's standard practice. F(x)tec is in court with them. Given so, we only get some informal information here and there. Whatever F(x)tec mentions publicly or officially can be used against them.

Edited by brunoais
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, brunoais said:

IdeaLTE just ditched them. They took the money and didn't fulfill the contract. What F(x)tec promised was what IdeaLTE was legally contracted to do for F(x)tec. It also included the batch of SD825 SoC for the Pro¹ igg batches.

When there's something in court, that's standard practice. F(x)tec is in court with them. Given so, we only get some informal information here and there. Whatever F(x)tec mentions publicly or officially can be used against them.

Thanks for the info. I was aware of the court thing but I did not know who was the other player. I thought that it was the supplier of the SD835 chips.

BTW, do we know who is the manufacturer of Pro1-X?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so behind the times. I have never used Android 10 or 11. I miss the dessert names.
But like @EskeRahn I am careful where and what I connect to and have Norton Security on my Pro1 along with about 12 security patches for browsers and email.
I never log in to public networks or anything that is "free".
I also turn data on when needed and turn it off when done. I don't keep Bluetooth on.
I don't know what the bigger and better is.

I am bummed about not getting patches and bug fixes, but at least T-Mobile isn't gonna come along and deprecate my phone.

Be your own safety, surf responsibly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, FlyingAntero said:

I thought that it was the supplier of the SD835 chips.

That one is IdeaLTE too. The contract is that IdeaLTE supplies the chips, IdeaLTE designs the board (within the size constraints) and IdeaLTE makes the drivers and the Android build but in a way it can be shared with partners so other Android-based OS could be made. With IdeaLTE gone, so is EVERYTHING (that is not "self-components") that made the Pro¹-Pro¹.

Something sort of similar happens now but this time (this is my speculation based on facts) F(x)tec seem to have done some extra work to make sure they wouldn't end up with nothing if the current contract breaks the same way as it happened with IdeaLTE (even though they were already screwed by them with the HDMI out).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Noob said:

To be honest, I'm still surprised that the issues with IdeaLTE left Fxtec high and dry. I would have thought that terms of the deal included all source files, so another vendor could continue the work.

When you're not a millionaire, with limited resources, natively (or close to natively) knowing Chinese, with low bargining choices and (speculation:) the other party not budging on the terms of the contract... You take it and have something or you don't take it and you don't get the idea turned true.

Even though IdeaLTE licensed the code for limited parties to see and use for purposes of alternative Android OS (speculation: May have been what F(x)tec guys were able to bargain for) pretty much all the hardware and firmware (of the hardware itself, not the OS) was locked behind closed source.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms