Pay securely with an Android smartphone, completely without Google services: This is the plan being developed by the newly founded industry consortium led by the German Volla Systeme GmbH. It is an open-source alternative to Google Play Integrity. This proprietary interface decides on Android smartphones with Google Play services whether banking, government, or wallet apps are allowed to run on a smartphone.
i’m just guessing here but i think that the critical requirements to be able to run banking apps securely on your smartphone are:
- lockable/unlockable bootloader
- quality control of the operating system to make sure it doesn’t contain malware/spyware
- internet connection & open-protocol banking network
the first two parts are general smartphone/laptop security and operating system integrity, which can only be done through hardware/general software developers. Like i think we need reliable hardware manufacturers but also institutions that check that open source software doesn’t contain malware. Like when you run
apt install some-packagewho says that some-package doesn’t contain malware?The third one is the only part that is actually specific to banking. That’s a whole separate topic and has barely anything to do with the first two steps.
Like when you run apt install some-package who says that some-package doesn’t contain malware?
The Debian (or Ubuntu) package maintainer says that. Having an application package available in a distro’s official repository is an endorsement of the safety of that package.
This is something people need to appreciate before they go adding PPAs and flatpaks and whatnot willy-nilly.
I can shop omline on a fucking toaster.
hmm do you have a link to the product?
GrapheneOS is critical of this initiative here and I think their criticism has merit. This simply moves the gatekeeper from Google to a handful of OEM’s who won’t let you use anything other than their blessed OS’s.
I’d say if you have more alternative gatekeepers, that means you have more options and that gives the user more power (to choose).
Or we can back an option without a gatekeeper…
sure we can, the only question is who’s legally liable if things go wrong
Has the GrapheneOS team ever, once, been supportive of ANY other custom ROM initiative? I ask this as someone with both a GOS Pixel10 and a FairPhone 6 running /e/ on my desk this week.
For as good as their security approach is, their constant shit talking of others also making efforts to free us from big tech helps no-one.
Oh the irony of using the phrase “blessed OS’s” coming from the GOS camp.
Yeah it seems they really let perfect be the enemy of the good.
Agree. This type of systems are not even necessary.
One or more neutral organizations could exist certifying devices and operating systems without providing a centralized API. Those organizations could simply provide signed releases with the roots of trust, revoked keys and operating system key fingerprints. Apps could use multiple different certifying organizations. This is already something Android’s hardware attestation API fully supports today.
Then why doesn’t GrapheneOS offer that alternative to banks etc
This is huge. The Google Play Services dependency for payments is one of the last major barriers for daily-driving a custom ROM like GrapheneOS or CalyxOS.
Currently if you want NFC payments without Google, your options are basically:
- Your bank’s website (clunky)
- Physical cards (works but defeats the purpose)
An open standard for payments would also benefit Linux phones (PinePhone, Librem) where Google services aren’t even an option.
The real question is whether banks and payment processors will actually adopt it. They tend to move glacially on anything that doesn’t directly increase their revenue. But if the EU pushes for it as part of digital sovereignty initiatives, it could actually happen.
Furthermore, a peer review process is planned, through which the consortium members will mutually check and certify their operating systems and smartphone or tablet models. “This is intended to create transparency and replace trust with traceability.”
Still doesn’t sound very open.
I should be able to tell my bank to only trust devices running an OS signed by the grapheneos key, and more importantly I should be able to tell them to trust an OS signed by my key.
Edit: I don’t mean to shit on this too hard. It might be the best next step.
I should be able to tell my bank to only trust devices running an OS signed by the grapheneos key, and more importantly I should be able to tell them to trust an OS signed by my key.
How do you know that your OS installation doesn’t include malware? Like there have been many cases in the last few years where
npmmodules were found to contain malware. Who says that’s not also the case in some modules that are a part of your OS?And more importantly, who is legally liable if malware actually does cause harm? E.g. malware acts on your behalf and sends your money to some criminal organization. Not only did you lose money, but now you’re a suspect of supporting a criminal organization!
Of course that issue might be alleviated if you simply don’t have any money to send anywhere in the first place. That might be a viable alternative, but it only works for some people, i’d say. Or you could also set a daily transaction limit of say $100 that you can use to buy groceries; to limit your losses that way. The limit ofc cannot be changed from your phone alone, you need to go to a bank physically to change it or sth. Otherwise malware could again change it on your behalf.
And who guarantees that your PC doesn’t have malware?
Seriously, people will gobble up all the shit served to them without a question asked or giving it a second thought.
And who guarantees that your PC doesn’t have malware?
Microsoft is legally responsible if the software they provide is found to actually contain malware.
I don’t get why it has to be that complicated anyway. I should be able to just give them my key, why does a OS or device vendor need to be a part of it? When I get a card I need to verify my identity somehow, times past that was me going to the bank, signing a form and showing my ID card. Fucking Tim Apple or Satya McGoogle didn’t have a role in that, why should they now?
Sidenote; I know Satya Slopella is Microsoft but I don’t frankly care to learn what the pedo in charge of Google is called.
When I get a card I need to verify my identity somehow, times past that was me going to the bank, signing a form and showing my ID card. Fucking Tim Apple or Satya McGoogle didn’t have a role in that, why should they now?
The government did though in supplying said ID, so there was a centralised trustable organisation that the bank could depend on for verification.
Exactly. After that, the bank should accept that I wish to pay with my own device without Google, Apple, or Samsung having a say.
They don’t need GAS approval for me to pay my bills on my computer. Nor to make online purchases on it. Why is it suddenly required on my phone? It’s idiotic.
If I say that my device is okay, that’s all that should be required.
I don’t frankly care to learn what the pedo in charge of Google is called.
Blunder Pinochet. Or is it Sundial Pinoy. Or Thundercat Pyjamas.
Compost. That’s all they’re good for.
It is kinda insane though that we’ve had public/private keys since the internet started walking and somehow we end up with all these over-complicated or pointless ways to use them.
Decentralized systems are more difficult to understand, and also inconvenient.
Also, very hard to monetize.
Therefore, capitalism converts the issue into walled garden approach. Easy for rubes to use, nobody bats an eye.
I see this topic come up often in conversations about degoogled Android and it makes me wonder what if anything I’m missing out on by just using cash/card for payments, cause not once have I been at checkout and thought to myself “man, I wish I could do this with my phone instead” but people talk about this like it’s almost a dealbreaker that makes it hard for them to seriously consider switching to Graphene or Lineage or whatever.
Unfortunately there is a significant security advantage in using Google Pay or Apple Pay which no one has yet mentioned. When you make a payment with chip-and-PIN using your physical card, your real card number is exposed to the merchant. The proprietary wallet services on the other hand use a device-specific token in place of the card number.
In practice, this means that if a retailer is compromised, there’s no usable card data to steal or clone, which removes a large class of fraud that still exists with physical cards.
My bank (Monzo) doesn’t even offer an alternative way to interact or sign up except through the smartphone app.
FWIW, Monzo works on Lineage OS with no gapps. I can’t use google pay but I have a card for that.
In a lot of counties banks are becoming mobile first. Want to login in the browser? Authenticate with your mobile app to approve. Don’t have a mobile phone with the requisites of the bank? Well, go to the branch, take a ticket, wait and then tell them what you want to do with your money. It’s not just about paying, banks are moving online authentication to be dependent on Google or Apple, whatever poison you pick.
This seems like same shit different flies. Still dependent on some centralised approval which doesn’t help openness and security. We need alternatives to the duopoly but this ain’t it, chief.
I’ve never encountered what you’re describing. There’s always other ways to authenticate than through a mobile app, at least from my experience, and I think I’ve used about a dozen different banks/credit unions over the past 15 or so years. Last credit union I cut ties with had ZERO MFA for their web portal, except on account creation. Like, no SMS, no email, nothing - just user+pass, and making sure you have the right background picture of the login screen you picked on account generation (like, a duck or a football or whatever). Completely ridiculous in 2025 (when I cancelled my account).
Regarding the OP, I think any new competition in this space right now is good, even if it ends up just being a triopoly vs a duopoly (fat chance with this thing but we can hope).
Ideally though we need an open protocol/standard that can be implemented through any manner of device software.
No offense but it sounds like you’re from the US, where banking is 20 years behind in comparison to Europe.
The other commenter is right, some banks are mandating 2FA using your phone even to log into web banking, so phone authentication is still required.
Also some EU countries have pretty much become cashless although it’s obviously still legal tender. Even some tiny village in the middle of Denmark has card readers.
If this shit is what “ahead” looks like, I’m happy being “behind.”
Some countries are all-in on the digital transition and for a lot of things shops don’t even accept cash anymore. Digital QR code transfers are preferred. Be thankful that the banks that you deal with haven’t gone down this path.
2 factor TOTP exists and is secure enough for corporates to have adopted long time ago. Banks can adopt similar authentication methods but choose not to.
On the OP, not sure what the solution could be. However, going down this path seems flawed.
Right there with you. Access to my money relying on a device that needs to be charged is just stupid. I’m stranded somewhere, my phone runs out of battery, suddenly I have zero dollars. No thanks.
I keep a single bill in my phone case for emergencies (be it an actual emergency or I just want to eat at some place which only takes cash).
If my phone battery runs out I’m stranded anyway, since I can’t call anyone or use my public transport ticket.
Im truly struggling to understand what you mean. If your phone battery runs out, and you cant call anyone, do your legs and mouth suddenly stop working? Walk to a bus/train/transport station, use your words and pay for a trip home. obviously, if your money relies on the phone battery, yes you are truly stranded. But if you have a card or cash, you are not. It’s quite simple. I guess you just have no imagination and can’t fathom that people existed without phones or something? I’m asking in earnest, what do you mean?
I agree, it’s a nice-to-have but it’s far from necessary. I like having the option as a backup in case I forget my wallet, but I’ll live without it
I agree, with the caveat that it’s very nice to be able to pay with my phone/ watch if/when forget my wallet, rather than having to go back home to get it.
I don’t use the phone that often as a debit /credit bank card but I use it for payments (bills invoices etc.), paying on line, transferring money to people and accounts, and just managing accounts. The phone app is very useful for those functions - especially if the alternative is going into a bank and queuing.
A phone OS that will not work with banking apps is not really a contemporary solution. iOS or Android are the only reliable options at the moment in the US/Europe - Iiuc Open Source Android has to sandbox Google Play for banking apps to work so that’s not viable long-term solution, as Google will only make that more difficult in the future.
Given the issues with the judges at ICC and US payment systems, building an alternative to Google and Apple is a high priority
It’s the hardware, and it feels like mobile in particular is intentionally designed to not be modular. I suspect that is by design to keep it under control of the big companies.
India primarily uses Phones to pay. And I’m sure there’s a big community there that uses custom ROMs.
Honestly if there was an alternate and functional phone/OS/app store that early adopters who are a little technical can embrace, it would be the #1 platform in under 5 years. People in the know are chomping at the bit to get away from these big monopolzed platforms, and once it gains steam and polish, people will flock to it.
There are already alternate app stores, and alternate OS and phones that are functional and niche. The real issue is that the Android people knows is not open source, AOSP is the thing open sourced, but thats far from what we use on a daily basis as Android, and Google makes sure every time it can to put hurdles between functionality and open source, some of those hurdles can and are being worked on, some others are out of reach for the open source community
I’ve never developed on Android, but would it be hard to port most apps to AOSP at this point if the developer wanted to?
It’d be effortless.
Yeah so I don’t see what the issue is. If they gave me stock android from 8 years ago I would still be happy to use it, and most basic users probably wouldn’t even know the difference. There are very few features released in the past few years that I couldn’t live without. Probably the only notable one I can think of is notification history. Other than that it has been all downhill, like removing the ability to easily record calls, which iphone can do no problem. As it is now I have to use a differnt phoen a a bunch of hacks to get it to work. It’s my device, let me assume the risk. Nanny bullshit.
This is a fantastic initiative.
I agree it would be good to have third party integrity checks to not require Google Services etc. as part of the chain.
In GrapheneOS, many Google Play integrity check pass, but payments still do not work. You are notified when an app uses the integrity API, but probably only because they have spent a bunch of work sandboxing Play Services. This is what you see when you look at those details:
I guess the obvious problem is that so many apps rely on Google Services, such as for payments, opening the store, checking for integrity etc. On stock android, you can’t pick and choose these services separately or use third party ones, unlike using a third party keyboard, for example. Everything is one big proprietary, data guzzling lump.
PIX neles
Really hope this happens
This works be fantastic and I might actually switch at that point.
Would be cool, but i doubt any users in the US can benefit from it since google is so dominant.
iPhone is dominant in NA.
Why not just use cash? Untraceable, nearly ubiquitous acceptance, are they just too lazy to go to the bank?
A lot of places don’t take cash.
