08-26-15 12:53 AM
27 12
tools
  1. LazyEvul's Avatar
    Yesterday, Blackphone announced they've partnered with Google for the Android for Work program: https://n4bb.com/silent-circle-joins...-work-program/

    The program appears to give Blackphone access to Google services - despite running a forked, secured version of the OS.

    So, we know BES is already part of this program. And we know that BlackBerry has a reputation for security they'd like to keep, but if they start forking Android to achieve that security, it would not qualify under OHA rules. Assuming the Android rumours are true, could Android for Work be a way for them to produce an Android device with greater appeal for enterprise?

    I don't know if the program would go as far as allowing BlackBerry 10 to remain with the Android runtime, but it certainly seems to allow the manufacturer a lot more control over their implementation of Android.

    Posted via CB10
    07-31-15 10:31 AM
  2. missing_K-W's Avatar
    From my understanding Blackphone runs PrivatOS with a forked version of Android.

    If this is the case than it pretty much makes the OHA police on these forums have to regroup, recoupe and completely reevaluate their own understanding of the OHA. (Where the OHA is now and where it is headed)

    Sent via Passport!
    07-31-15 10:48 AM
  3. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    From my understanding Blackphone runs PrivatOS with a forked version of Android.

    If this is the case than it pretty much makes the OHA police on these forums have to regroup, recoupe and completely reevaluate their own understanding of the OHA. (Where the OHA is now and where it is headed)
    There's nothing to reevaluate. Being a "forked" version in and of itself does not make it ineligible for Play Services etc..

    As long as the forked version is built on the AOSP and meets other very specific criteria, then they are considered "compatible versions" and still eligible. Xiaomi and Oppo are two examples of compatible forks. PrivatOS on the other hand, was not considered a compatible fork most notably because of the extreme changes they had made in security (front and foremost being the complete overhaul of the App permissions system being completely redone). Today however, Android M has completely overhauled their app permissions system (to include granular user controlled permissions) and enhanced security throughout. So it's probably likely that the next Blackphone or version of PrivatOS can be made OHA compatible because they can utilize the new AOSP build released with the advent of Android M.
    07-31-15 11:32 AM
  4. missing_K-W's Avatar
    There's nothing to reevaluate. Being a "forked" version in and of itself does not make it ineligible for Play Services etc..

    As long as the forked version is built on the AOSP and meets other very specific criteria, then they are considered "compatible versions" and still eligible. Xiaomi and Oppo are two examples of compatible forks. PrivatOS on the other hand, was not considered a compatible fork most notably because of the extreme changes they had made in security (front and foremost being the complete overhaul of the App permissions system being completely redone). Today however, Android M has completely overhauled their app permissions system (to include granular user controlled permissions) and enhanced security throughout. So it's probably likely that the next Blackphone or version of PrivatOS can be made OHA compatible because they can utilize the new AOSP build released with the advent of Android M.
    So basically what you are implying to me is that Google themselves is making it easier for those who want GPS's to have it on their devices. This is a Google work around to the OHA.


    Sent via Passport!
    07-31-15 11:44 AM
  5. conite's Avatar
    So basically what you are implying to me is that Google themselves is making it easier for those who want GPS's to have it on their devices. This is a Google work around to the OHA.


    Sent via Passport!
    The OHA only stipulates that Android is the primary OS, the device says "powered by Android" on boot, Google Play Store is primary app store, other Google apps are pre-installed, and that it achieves a level of certification based on strict high-compatibility thresholds.

    Blackphone may meet all of these. BlackBerry Runtime isn't even close.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    techvisor likes this.
    07-31-15 12:10 PM
  6. BlackQtCoder's Avatar
    The OHA only stipulates that Android is the primary OS, the device says "powered by Android" on boot, Google Play Store is primary app store, other Google apps are pre-installed, and that it achieves a level of certification based on strict high-compatibility thresholds.

    Blackphone may meet all of these. BlackBerry Runtime isn't even close.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    We're not talking about BlackBerry runtime. QNX hypervisor is a totally different thing.

    Posted via CB10
    missing_K-W likes this.
    07-31-15 12:14 PM
  7. conite's Avatar
    We're not talking about BlackBerry runtime. QNX hypervisor is a totally different thing.

    Posted via CB10
    Understood.

    Do you think Hypervisor meets these criteria?

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    techvisor likes this.
    07-31-15 12:15 PM
  8. missing_K-W's Avatar
    Understood.

    Do you think Hypervisor meets these criteria?

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    Well with Blackphone having a base of PrivatOS and a forked version of Android. There should be no reason why BB10 with the QNX hypervisor wouldn't qualify

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07...nd_eat_it_too/

    Sent via Passport!
    BlackQtCoder likes this.
    07-31-15 12:18 PM
  9. conite's Avatar
    Well with Blackphone having a base of PrivatOS and a forked version of Android. There should be no reason why BB10 with the QNX hypervisor wouldn't qualify

    Sent via Passport!
    Forked does not mean disqualification - so long as the other criteria are met. If you can check off all the things I listed above - you're good to go.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    techvisor likes this.
    07-31-15 12:20 PM
  10. missing_K-W's Avatar
    Forked does not mean disqualification - so long as the other criteria are met.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07...nd_eat_it_too/

    This article describes the QNX hypervisor well

    Sent via Passport!
    07-31-15 12:21 PM
  11. conite's Avatar
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07...nd_eat_it_too/

    This article describes the QNX hypervisor well

    Sent via Passport!
    The article does not speak to the issue at hand.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    07-31-15 12:30 PM
  12. BlackQtCoder's Avatar
    The article does not speak to the issue at hand.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    We have to take a look to QNX Hypervisor to know if it's able for booting an Android OS like a regular Android phone.

    If the answer is "yes", could meet OHA's rules.

    Posted via CB10
    07-31-15 01:50 PM
  13. conite's Avatar
    We have to take a look to QNX Hypervisor to know if it's able for booting an Android OS like a regular Android phone.

    If the answer is "yes", could meet OHA's rules.

    Posted via CB10
    What's the point of hypervisor if you only run Android? That's a lot of expense.

    Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339
    techvisor likes this.
    07-31-15 02:05 PM
  14. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    So basically what you are implying to me is that Google themselves is making it easier for those who want GPS's to have it on their devices. This is a Google work around to the OHA.


    Sent via Passport!
    I'm not implying that at all. The criteria hasn't changed in any way to qualify to be an OHA compatible fork/rom/OS. Where did I infer there's some kind of workaround? I merely stated that the most likely reason for the next version of the Blackphone suddenly becoming OHA compatible would be because they'd probably reverted their PrivatOS to the AOSP build of Android M instead of using their own heavily modified version.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    missing_K-W and Superfly_FR like this.
    07-31-15 02:26 PM
  15. LazyEvul's Avatar
    I'm not implying that at all. The criteria hasn't changed in any way to qualify to be an OHA compatible fork/rom/OS. Where did I infer there's some kind of workaround? I merely stated that the most likely reason for the next version of the Blackphone suddenly becoming OHA compatible would be because they'd probably reverted their PrivatOS to the AOSP build of Android M instead of using their own heavily modified version.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    The Blackphone 2 is set to go on sale in September, which should be before the launch of Android M if rumours and prior OS launches are any indication (correct me if I'm wrong here).
    07-31-15 03:15 PM
  16. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    The Blackphone 2 is set to go on sale in September, which should be before the launch of Android M if rumours and prior OS launches are any indication (correct me if I'm wrong here).
    That remains to be seen. The final developers preview was supposed to be this week or next, but it was pushed back a week or so (not many details why). Typically every OEM will be prepping devices by this point to be ready to launch devices with the new version. Just a guess, but I'd speculate that by September, M will see its release. 2 months is feasible, and a device release being delayed isn't unheard of. Especially for a device like the Blackphone where a delayed release wouldn't be out of the ordinary.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    07-31-15 03:29 PM
  17. Ed YANG's Avatar
    At current state we may see that BlackPhone is a small company. But... should their product sells... in a large volume to enterprises around the globe, there will be a high chance that one of the major player in the market will buy them up and make use of the security stuff whatever they have... BB's in trouble.
    08-02-15 01:23 AM
  18. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    Reminder: Blackphone is a niche device sold through a limited number of carriers, with a sub $600 price plus a $99 year sub for services. (add restrictions about apps here).
    Shall you consider a possible option, then I'd suggest to see : http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/22/b...ck-smartphone/ where BlackBerry is already involved.
    Even more selected/restricted user base and tighten OS. There's the (Boeing) "Black" device and the "Blackphone". Doesn't compare, despite a similar/confusing name. For Secure (read: not only encrypted) devices, G.S is not a concern.

    2cents.
    Last edited by Superfly_FR; 08-02-15 at 05:31 AM.
    08-02-15 05:20 AM
  19. lawguyman's Avatar
    We have to take a look to QNX Hypervisor to know if it's able for booting an Android OS like a regular Android phone.

    If the answer is "yes", could meet OHA's rules.

    Posted via CB10
    The OHA agreements that became public during the Oracle/Google litigation state that a Device to which Google Services are licensed runs "only the Android operating system." "Only" means one operating system. Not BB10 plus Android.

    Unless Google's requirements have changed, there is no possibility that hypervisor has anything to do with BlackBerry future device plans. I think you guys are barking up the wrong tree here. Plus, don't you think it logical that BB10 already runs a form of this hypervisor in order to get the Android runtime to work?

    This is just grasping at straws. BlackBerry has done nothing to suggest hypervisor will be used. All available evidence says it would not be allowed by Google.

    Posted via CB10
    DenverRalphy likes this.
    08-02-15 07:36 AM
  20. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    The OHA agreements that became public during the Oracle/Google litigation state that a Device to which Google Services are licensed runs "only the Android operating system." "Only" means one operating system. Not BB10 plus Android.

    Unless Google's requirements have changed, there is no possibility that hypervisor has anything to do with BlackBerry future device plans. I think you guys are barking up the wrong tree here. Plus, don't you think it logical that BB10 already runs a form of this hypervisor in order to get the Android runtime to work?

    This is just grasping at straws. BlackBerry has done nothing to suggest hypervisor will be used. All available evidence says it would not be allowed by Google.

    Posted via CB10
    There are differences (albeit very minor) between the current implementation and the proposed "hypervisor" (which is really nothing more than a new buzzword for Virtual Machine which is nothing new). The only difference is that instead of trying to run Android inside of BB10, the Android OS would run semi-independantly from BB10. Either way, it's not an implementation that would allow for Google Play Services as it would still be 2 operating systems running on the same device.

    Hypervisor is just another in a long list of BB/RIM buzzwords that basically means nothing as they're just new words attached to an old concept in an effort to garner attention.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    08-02-15 04:46 PM
  21. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    Reminder: Blackphone is a niche device sold through a limited number of carriers, with a sub $600 price plus a $99 year sub for services. (add restrictions about apps here).
    Shall you consider a possible option, then I'd suggest to see : Blackberry helps Boeing with its hyper-secure 'Black' smartphone where BlackBerry is already involved.
    Even more selected/restricted user base and tighten OS. There's the (Boeing) "Black" device and the "Blackphone". Doesn't compare, despite a similar/confusing name. For Secure (read: not only encrypted) devices, G.S is not a concern.

    2cents.
    Sounds like Blackphone and BlackBerry are in the same "boat".

    I think BlackBerry's real problem is despite what they say about focus on enterprise.... they are still trying to do High Security, Enterprise, Small Business, Consumers and Developing Markets. And BB10 just doesn't have the support to cover the needs or all these markets.

    I think BlackBerry will follow Blackphone.... they will release an Android Device that will use Android for Work along with BES to secure the device.

    While I'd love to see Chen showing off a Hypervisor with Android and BB10 both running at the same time... from their past dealings with other OEMS, that just isn't something I think we'll get to see "officially".
    08-04-15 08:42 AM
  22. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    Uh ? Compare thousands to millions ?
    Not the same boat. At all.

    AFAIK / FTR
    GeeksPhone (they handled the hardware) is dead.
    BP2 is nowhere to be seen yet, the above won't help (expected in autumn?). Former BP has been hacked quite easily.
    Most devices makers, if not any besides apple and MSFT, have/will join Google for work program. It's not partnership, it's standard integration.
    And, of course, BlackBerry is already part of it.

    Now, claiming the - generic - support of Google Play store and services is anyhow compatible with 'security' is simply... A joke IMHO.

    What I mean here is that - as 'sexy' the idea may be - no one is able today to make an Android (I mean, full featured one, not heavily locked) secure. And Chen repeated it : 'if I can make it as secure as our DNA devices, I might go that way. But I didn't find the way yet' (of course, the likes. My words, not his)

    Posted via CB10
    08-05-15 03:40 AM
  23. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    I agree that an Android Solution is not going to offer the level of security that a BB10 device has. And I'm not convinced that an Android solution could be ready by this fall.

    But sales are what sales are and BB10 is not a viable product... Chen has now outsource everything having to do with hardware (in other words they are out of the hardware business - they are just a reseller)... except for BB10. And he either has to continue development of BB10 with only 3 - 4 million devices a year, or he has to find a way to outsource the OS.

    The question isn't can a device be hacked, but can the "secured workspace" be accessed without alerting the management software and the device being locked out of the network.

    The next US president might not be able to use a BlackBerry.... but maybe a few million of his employees will.
    08-05-15 11:23 AM
  24. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    Nope. If a device can be 'hacked' (read rooted) it's barely possible he gets the same 'full operational capability' BlackBerry has with DOD.


    Posted via CB10
    08-08-15 03:56 PM
  25. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    Nope. If a device can be 'hacked' (read rooted) it's barely possible he gets the same 'full operational capability' BlackBerry has with DOD.


    Posted via CB10
    I'll be honest I DON'T KNOW what the US Military will and will not use in different circumstances. I don't know where they are planning to deploy the KNOX devices they are testing. I don't know what certifications the DroidBerry would get.

    But maybe BlackBerry would rather have the basic users and let DARPA, Boeing, and Silent Circle fight over the ultra high security niche?

    All I know for SURE is that without change there won't be any smartphones with the BlackBerry name on them for much longer....
    LazyEvul likes this.
    08-19-15 09:31 AM
27 12

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone here use their Classic for music?
    By ClevelandBB in forum BlackBerry Classic
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 01-17-16, 12:40 PM
  2. Battery is draining fast on BlackBerry Passport
    By Maya80 in forum BlackBerry Passport
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-31-15, 09:59 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-31-15, 10:06 AM
  4. Why are my headphones being confused as a headset?
    By justinriddoch in forum BlackBerry Classic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-31-15, 08:54 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD