Is Fairphone really interested in sustainability?

I mean Fairphone’s support claims are already a stretch:

Release vs EOL date:

  • FP1: December 2013 through July 2017
  • FP2: December 2015 through March 2023
  • FP3: September 2019 through September 2024
  • FP4: September 2021 through September 2026
  • FP5: September 2023 through September 2028

On the Linux kernel side:

On the Qualcomm side, they typically only provide three years of support for their platforms, yet:

For bonus fun:

  • FP2 was running Android 10 with its claimed March 2023 support, despite Android 10 not having any Pixel Security Bulletin’s since October of 2020

This means:

  • FP2 was already truly unsupported a year after release
  • FP3 was already truly unsupported months ago, despite claims of longer support
  • FP4 and FP5 will be met with the same fate

To be clear:

  • I do genuinely appreciate that Fairphone keeps providing updates for so long, I just wish the support claims were actually properly clarified.
  • Fairphone was doing CVE backports for Linux 3.4 until the very end which was pretty awesome to see, but at the same time such CVE backports do NOT make a kernel secure.
  • Running end of life kernels or platform blobs is insecure, despite whatever ASB patch level is claimed.

Edit:
Fairphone can easily address this situation:

  • Rename the current support dates to “best-effort support”.
  • Add a proper “full support” date, based on the soonest EOL date of all given underlying components.
  • Examples:
    • FP2: Full support until October of 2016, Best-effort support until March of 2023
    • FP3: Full support until January of 2023, Best-effort support until September of 2024
    • FP4: Full support until December of 2024, Best-effort support until September of 2026
    • FP5: Full support until December of 2025, Best-effort support until September of 2028
  • Post a PR writeup about transparency and a call to action to other vendors to provide longer support periods.
15 Likes