(post deleted by author)
As I understand the security updates come with the OS updates and that is projected to at least Android 15
But as has been pointed out this does not equate to SoC firmware updates from Qualcomm.
Updates to what? The OS or the Firmware ?? or is it just the Titan chip?
Not knowing much about the security issues, for the security must haves, the Pixel does sound a better option, but luckily that’s not something I’m concerned about.
What about security?
Another thing Google has shouted about is how secure this chipset is. Tensor has a security core (which means sensitive tasks can run in a dedicated environment) and it’s joined by a Titan M2 security chip. Between the two, this makes the Pixel 6 range more resilient to attacks than previous models in the range.
In fact, Google claims that the Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro have the most layers of hardware security of any phone, and independent security lab testing has shown that it can withstand all sorts of high-tech threats, such as electromagnetic analysis, voltage glitching and laser fault injection.
The Google Tensor chipset also allows the Pixel 6 to get five years of security updates, where other Android phones mostly only get a few years of these.
All far beyond my requirements I imagine.
Full OS updates
2 Likes
I see the launch date is 25th Oct as is the FP4 
However the issue is not so much security, which the Pixel has in abundance but why the FP4 doesn’t have such.
It’s been fairly well established that Fairphone don’t have the same resources to design a phone as quickly and their focus is on fair trade. Add to that the user replaceable parts and that’s a lot of work that other companies consider less important.
Well I support the Fairphone company on the fair trade as the driving force, so I accept that security issues are not the priority.
It’s difficult to keep to the topic and find any feedback that brings any resolution to the OP
2 Likes
Security vulnerabilities are a lot like software bugs
Actually, they are software bugs (or hardware bugs)
Just by downloading apps you are presenting a risk, even if they are on the Google Play Store.
Yes. You are right. That’s why it’s important to keep your software up to date such that malicious apps cannot interfere with your data.
I think that since this is such a recent change for Qualcomm, it may have been unavoidable.
It was public knowledge for 10 months. Hardly unavoidable. Expensive? Maybe, but definitely not unavoidable.
On a side-note: It might even be time for the phone manufacturers to start putting pressure on Qualcomm to do better?
I agree 100%. They should do better, but this has to come from larger players than Fairphone. Those may not be interested in longevity, they prefer to sell you newer devices.
I will consider opening a ticket.
Another reason for posting this was that I just wanted to let the community know about this. Not everyone might read tech news. Hoping that if more members of the community are aware that this puts more pressure on Fairphone to align this better in the future.
@soong
I’m in the same boat. I will also get a Pixel 6, even though I would much rather give my money to Fairphone than to Google.
Has anyone asked Fairphone how many years of security support they will provide?
- Software support for at least 5 years
We also aim to provide updates for Android 14 and 15. However, since Qualcomm will not offer support in the development, we cannot guarantee them.
Updates to what? The OS or the Firmware ?? or is it just the Titan chip?
Google makes their own SoCs now. This means they can provide updates to EVERYTHING for as long as they want.
All far beyond my requirements I imagine.
We can agree to disagree. I think a Smartphone is such a central device in many peoples lifes that security should not be a compromise anyone is willing to make.
I see the launch date is 25th Oct as is the FP4
However the issue is not so much security, which the Pixel has in abundance but why the FP4 doesn’t have such.
It’s been fairly well established that Fairphone don’t have the same resources to design a phone as quickly and their focus is on fair trade. Add to that the user replaceable parts and that’s a lot of work that other companies consider less important.
Well I support the Fairphone company on the fair trade as the driving force, so I accept that security issues are not the priority.
It’s difficult to keep to the topic and find any feedback that brings any resolution to the OP
I see. You summed it up pretty well and you seem to fully understand me.
I can also accept this as a resolution.
The only thing that I would add to this is that one part of Fairphone’s marketing is focused on longevity of the device. In their FAQ the fist point is literally:
- Long-lasting design
IMO in the context of this thread this just seems like an afterthought at best and a lie at worst.
3 Likes
It seems a bit harsh. Qualcom release the SoC 750 Sept 2020 and expect it to be in use by 1st Jan 2012/
Fairphone have to design around a SoC and it take 9 months… By the way where did you get the info that there is only 2 years of Qualcomm support for the 750
and ???
In December 2020 - 10 monts ago - Qualcomm announced that they would start giving 4 years of security support for newly released SoCs:
Is that 2021 10 months ago ??
No, there will be 3 years of OS updates and 5 of security updates
1 Like
I don’t think swapping socs is as easy as putting a new part where the old one went it would require a board redesign so they probably just didn’t want to push the date out, catch a bunch of flak for that from the parts of the community who are just like you said phone now! Why no phone now, me anger, and and devepment costs go up either cutting their bottom line or raising the price
1 Like
Qualcom release the SoC 750 Sept 2020 and expect it to be in use by 1st Jan 2012/
The first device to feature the processor was the Xiaomi Mi 10T Lite 5G and it was released in October 2020:
Fairphone have to design around a SoC and it take 9 months
Well, it apparently took Xiaomi only 1 month.
(And no, I don’t want to argue about the fact that Fairphone is way smaller and all that. I know that already and I accept that. It just shows that it’s technically possible to do it in one month.)
By the way where did you get the info that there is only 2 years of Qualcomm support for the 750
Two sources:
- In this article:
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-qualcomm-4-android-os-updates/
They say:
Qualcomm will support 3 Android OS version updates (launch release + 3 letter upgrades) as well as 4 years of security updates. That’s an additional year than they previously provided for their flagship 800-series chipsets.
So Qualcomm promised 3 years of security updates before.
- Fairphone themselves state in their FAQ to the FP4:
We also aim to provide updates for Android 14 and 15. However, since Qualcomm will not offer support in the development, we cannot guarantee them.
Since Android 14 is most likely going to be released in 2023, this means that Qualcomm will end their support for the SoC before that. 2023 - 2020 = 3 years of support.
You are right. However, if you look at the timeline:
September 2020: 750G was announced
December 2020: Qualcomm announces longer support for newer SoCs
October 2021: Fairphone 4 is released
Between September and December are 3 months. This means they would have had to sacrifice 3 months of development at most. 3 months of development time for at least an additional year of OS updates and an additional year of security updates. They took at least 10 more months to release the phone so it just seems like they should be held accountable for that.
Thanks for your input. I will now stop responding to this thread. The issue has been discussed enough. I think I provided enough sources to prove my points.
My conclusion: I really love the idea behind Fairphone. Essentially every manufacturer should follow their principles. But in the end they sell a product. They promise 5 years of usage for that product. In my opinion this promise is dishonest. The two reasons for that
- they chose an SoC that will only be supported by Qualcomm for two years after the FP4 is released. This means there will inevitably be security vulnerabilities tied to the chipset that they cannot fix after those two years.
- They could have significantly improved that situation by choosing a more recent SoC that gets longer support. They didn’t do that. Most likely to keep costs low. This means they chose a cheaper device over a longer support period. That is not what I expect from a company dedicated to the environment and the longevity of their devices. They deserve to be called out for that.
2 Likes
There seems to be so many assumptions as to what Fairphone could and could not have done, it’s easy to look back.
Were Faiphone aware that 3 months into the future Qualcomm would make a new announcement about adding a year to SoC support and would it made a difference. All questions for Fairphone.
Creating a post to argue over this has brought up some interesting ideas but as for calling out Fairphone, that it just like bad mouthing someone ~ I find no benefit in reading such?
4 Likes
Your second point is not valid since it costs more to make a release of a new Android version without the help of Qualcomm than to pay a bit more for a newer SoC.
4 Likes
mmmhh might not have the same specs but Teracube goes the same way as Fairphone. Their phones will be support 4+ years. Despite the announcement of Quallcom they also have to rethink business as in long therm we can NOT really NOT be doing as we are using stuff right now.
I dont agree with so called Free at all. They have not deliberately chosen an old SoC. I dont know why he is so afraid of Hardware Security issues as the main part is the software. Of if he is so afraid he should stop using smartphones which are 5G able. Despite the official announcement I think Quallcom still will deliver security updates. But time will bring it to us.
3 Likes
Hi This is a little off topic.
- Here are posts about the Teracube
My poste is not off topic as I was talking about the way they go and not their phones. So please remove all your posts as they are REALLY offtopic. And clearly I dont get what your problem is picking out just one name out of a full post.
Hi maybe you didn’t notice I ‘liked’ your post. I don’t have a problem with it.
I was just linking some info about the Teracube that supported your post, especially
I already said it (this not that) was a little off topic but I don’t see why you are so upset.
firmware is software, using 5G or not has nothing to do with the subject.
Yes it has. He is talking about security issues on Hardware. Specifically on a chip. So please dont lecture me what what is. Or do you really think 5G is just hardware?
I see then I misinterpret it. Sorry for that. And no I did not see that you liked it. So no harm don, yes?
1 Like
No harm, not at all. Have fun
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.