Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 17, 2020 19:42 UTC (Fri) by TheGopher (subscriber, #59256)
Parent article: Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

So this provides a clear path for Microsoft to move to the linux kernel, right or left?

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 18, 2020 23:00 UTC (Sat) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] (15 responses)

It might be fun if Microsoft used Linux more. Linux is already well-represented in Azure workloads. That said, "the cloud" is where operating systems are often viewed as commodities.

I have an Android phone because it uses Linux. I can't say I'm happy with it. Android is a privacy nightmare, has abysmal security, and keeps internals away from the user. Not very Linux-like.

Microsoft could do more with Linux but if the experience turns out like Android, I wouldn't be interested.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 1:24 UTC (Sun) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (7 responses)

Maybe it is a good time to start watching efforts to make a platform to run Postmarket or Mobian phone OSes, such as Librem 5 and, especially, PinePhone, and maybe to participate in getting them ready for wider use, or set up recurring donations.

You might start with reducing dependence on Signal, moving to the Matrix/Element end-to-end encrypted message infrastructure, which has proven to be more portable to different platforms.

Maybe pre-order a PinePhone for $200. (Hint: if you do, make sure the phone is the only thing in the shopping cart. Order other stuff separately.)

I have no affiliaton with Pine or Purism, besides outstanding orders.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 2:45 UTC (Sun) by gus3 (guest, #61103) [Link] (6 responses)

Something tells me you're spamming. Your comment has nothing to do with the article, or the topic of the thread.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 9:38 UTC (Sun) by ldearquer (guest, #137451) [Link] (2 responses)

To me it certainly looks connected to the comment it replies to...

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 23:17 UTC (Sun) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (1 responses)

Indeed, it is a response directly to the comment that it is a response to.

Topics do drift. That is not a bug.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 20, 2020 13:12 UTC (Mon) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]

Your comment was also quite useful in reminding myself and others that the mobile phone situation isn't hopeless. We can and should support development efforts that are more respectful toward users. The PinePhone in particular looks nice.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 20, 2020 19:52 UTC (Mon) by Jandar (subscriber, #85683) [Link] (2 responses)

> Something tells me you're spamming. Your comment has nothing to do with the article, or the topic of the thread.

The parent-post said:
> Android is a privacy nightmare, has abysmal security, and keeps internals away from the user. Not very Linux-like.

So talking about non-Android Linux phones is very on topic.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 20, 2020 19:53 UTC (Mon) by zdzichu (subscriber, #17118) [Link] (1 responses)

The article is about emulating Windows system calls, so non-Android Linux phones are nothing but offtopic.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 21, 2020 11:33 UTC (Tue) by Jandar (subscriber, #85683) [Link]

> The article is about emulating Windows system calls, so non-Android Linux phones are nothing but offtopic.

So either Android and non-Android Linux phones are off topic (regarding the article). But not the criticized post had started to write about them but the parent-post and reacting to existing topics in a discussion can't be off topic relating to the discussion. It can be off topic regarding the parent article but calling a direct response to something mentioned in another comment "spamming" is dishonest.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 12:06 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (6 responses)

Uh, Android has massively better security by any standard that I can think of than mainstream Linux does. Extensive custom SELinux rules, a per-app permission system, every app runs in its own Unix uid... you couldn't do this to desktop Linux without rewriting everything.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 19, 2020 19:29 UTC (Sun) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] (5 responses)

I respectfully disagree. Security features are nice, but you have only to look at "all permissions" for nearly any application installed by default on Android. Look at Google Play Services, which includes the following mandatory permissions:

"disable your screen lock"
"have full network access"
"record audio"
"access location in the background"
"take pictures and videos"
"reroute outgoing calls"

I can't remove these permissions. I can't audit their use. I can't examine the source code. Not my idea of secure, private, or user-respecting.

If pointing out issues with Google Play Services is too easy, look at "all permissions" for other apps. There is also the matter of Android's exploit track record, and all of the well-documented issues with applications served from the official Google Play Store.

My point is that Android uses Linux but offers none of its benefits.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 20, 2020 12:35 UTC (Mon) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link]

All the "privacy" initiatives Google sponsored in the past years have been trying to protect Android and Chrome data both from "evil" telco operators/ FSB / CIA / whatever and "evil" users. Google documents will not call it that way, but they will dismiss any actual user control because of straw-men like social engineering… The truth is the only power Google wants to give users is the power to do things Google agrees with.

You can not understand Android or Chrome security choices if you do not acknowledge they are extensions of Google IT, and the user is outside the target security perimeter.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 23, 2020 10:22 UTC (Thu) by domenpk (guest, #12382) [Link] (3 responses)

What you write is valid criticism, but it's not a comparison in any sort of way.

What's the permission system on common Linux desktop like? Most "apps" are running under same UID, have access to all the data users actually care about, many peripherals etc.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 23, 2020 13:59 UTC (Thu) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] (2 responses)

You're right about typical distributions. However the security features of Android are useless if the user has no choice but to accept all or none of an application's permissions. Some Android applications allow users to disable some permissions, while some applications fail to function at all unless you accept everything. Worst of all you have no choice whatsoever about which applications can use networking.

Android's additional security features are meaningless in practice.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 23, 2020 14:47 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] (1 responses)

> Android's additional security features are meaningless in practice.

Incorrect.

Android completely isolates applications from each other. One application cannot see/access the data of another.

> However the security features of Android are useless if the user has no choice but to accept all or none of an application's permissions.

That sounds like a problem brought on by using proprietary software, not the underlying permission/security model.

Android's model requires those permissions to be explicitly stated and granted, which is a huge step forward from the free-range model of a traditional desktop environment (Linux or Windows or whatever) -- where applications have carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want -- including audio, video, networking, and access to every file the user has.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 23, 2020 16:20 UTC (Thu) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]

> Android completely isolates applications from each other. One application cannot see/access the data of another.

Unless the storage permission is required which makes the external storage a free-for-all. I trust you'd agree that there's plenty of valuable application and user data on the external storage.

Great points about a traditional desktop environment. An exploit or hostile application shouldn't allow the compromise of a user's entire home directory by default. We can and should do better.

Emulating Windows system calls, take 2

Posted Jul 21, 2020 9:36 UTC (Tue) by rvolgers (guest, #63218) [Link]

Not really, as the proposed mechanism clearly puts the emulated system calls at a performance disadvantage vs native Linux system calls.