Unfortunately, the headline is somewhat optimistic compared to the reality, I think.

The thread makes it sound like it could have been disabled due to errata or performance issues. Basically, it looks like the software Google is shipping intentionally doesn't use MTE on the Pixel 11 hardware. That raises the question of...what does Google know is wrong with MTE on the Pixel 11?

AOSP eng here;

I don't interact with Graphene or any of their folks at all; I'm just a distant observer like most folks here.

Still, I can't help but think that Graphene seems to want to complain about everything and anything that doesn't fit their niche use case. (As much as it seems beloved here, people that flash custom Android OSs are the very definition of niche users.)

My personal attitude to Graphene seems to get a bit more negative with each one of these "rants" and I doubt I'd go far out of my way to help them, even if I had exposure to them.

For anyone else not knowing what MTE stands for:

> Memory safety bugs, which are errors in handling memory in native programming languages, are common code issues. They lead to security vulnerabilities as well as stability problems.

>Armv9 introduced the Arm Memory Tagging Extension (MTE), a hardware extension that allows you to catch use-after-free and buffer-overflow bugs in your native code.

https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/arm-mte

It’s absurd that a small project like Graphene is able to run rings around a giant like Google in the security sphere. Almost makes you wonder if some of those vulnerabilities are intentionally allowed to exist.

Vulnerabilities in the world’s most popular (by volume) mobile OS could provide a plausibly deniable global espionage backdoor.

So not only a price increase: less RAM, performance scraping backwards, crippled/lost features, a camera system that captures stuttering audio and video imperfectly often, and Pixels dropping out of AOSP.

Google Pixel has the marketshare it deserves.

I am almost certainly going to live with whatever drawbacks in terms of camera quality, battery life, etc. Come with their Motorola phone when it's time to upgrade. MTE is such a non-negotiable for modern digital security on phones it's crazy Google would be so okay with this regression.

What's especially stuck in my mind lately is how insecure basically all desktop OS' feel. In at the point of buying a second and third GPU for my desktop to run my email and browser in dedicated VMs because everything feels as watertight as a sieve. Qubes seems more and more appealing in a world where every open source software supply chain is under seige, corporate software underprioritizes security, and most sites will stop at almost nothing to surveil you.

I truly lament this new reality where MY computers I PURCHASED feel to use like I'm reaching blind into a paper bag filled with razor blades.

Phones typically have 2 operating systems: one to handle telephonic functions like managing tower connections and separate operating system for user applications. The security implication here is that the telephonic operating system has access to the same system resources as the application operating system at the same time, right? The problem is your data is always available in plaintext to the telephonic OS because it has to be stored somewhere before it gets encrypted, so assuming graphene OS doesn't handle both functions its not a perfectly closed loop system.

"Aside from MTE, Google downgraded the Pixel 11 series GPU compared to the Pixel 10 series in addition to reducing RAM for base Pro models."

I will make a note not to buy this model.

Is this the worst quality control lapse since the Huawei Nexus core failures?

Boo. I was delighted by its introduction in pixel 8. I thought this was a resurgence of the old Google, actually giving a f about software, security and the end user.

iPhone 17 has it now. maybe Google's work here is done

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/1ndcrug/iphone_17_in...

My strong instinct is that GrapheneOS's plan could be problematic:

Generally, do not to invest in features that the upstream vendor isn't fully committed to. It might work today, but tomorrow or next year, etc., it might not. They might even deploy other things that are incompatible or do other things that assume the feature is disabled. In fact, plans to do those things might be the reason they disabled MTE.

Also, never support products or projects that won't work well. When someone's Pixel 11 is slow, they will think and post that 'GrapheneOS is slow'. Blaming Google will not be very credible and will look like you're just trying to duck responsibility. Your brand's name goes whatever you release; people will associate their experience with GrapheneOS (also because GOS is the new, unconventional thing; Google is the established norm); if their experience is bad, they will associate it with GOS.

So, where does the restriction for side loading apps live, on the device or the OS? Curious about getting the Pixel 11 Pro if/when I can install GrapheneOS.

For those don't know you will either code in Rust or make sure MTE enabled.

A company making multi billions of dollars in profit still looking to save money selling their flagship phone?

To clarify, regarding the confusion: it was disabled, leading them to think it didn't outright exist.

Why disabled? Well, its performance is apparently quite poor. But why?

...Apparently to save money.