
Progress update from the Librem 5 hardware department - fosco
https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-2018-09-hardware-report/
======
tptacek
If they were "entirely" ethical (which is a silly concept but it's already
been deployed on this thread so I'll run with it), they'd be more up-front
about the features and limitations of their security model. So:

* Modern phones (and all the flagship phones) have had separation between their basebands and APs for years; a modern smartphone baseband is essentially a USB peripheral.

* The two largest smartphone vendors have large, world-class security teams that do things like audit their basebands. Has Purism?

* A modern flagship smartphone will have some kind of secure enclave. Apple's has dedicated silicon, and an encrypted memory bus linking it to the AP. How does Purism's hardware security model compare?

* I don't know how much Apple and Google spend annually on outside security research for their flagship phones, but it's a lot. Who has Purism engaged to evaluate their designs and spot flaws?

If you want to use a niche phone as a fashion or political statement, more
power to you. But if you try to market that phone as "transparent code is the
core of secure systems", I'll take issue with that; it's neither a necessary
nor a sufficient condition for security.

This phone may very well be more "fair" or "ethical" than an iPhone. But if
it's not as secure as an iPhone, it's unethical to claim otherwise.

~~~
drb91
> But if it's not as secure as an iPhone, it's unethical to claim otherwise.

This seems silly, you can easily flip this on its head and say "Well the
iPhone is closed, so there's no way to verify it has any security". You can't
separate the ethics of security advertising from the ethics of everything else
about how the device works.

~~~
tptacek
Closed source and unverifiable are more orthogonal than not.

~~~
skullum
How can they be orthogonal when eventually you need open software of some kind
to make a verification?

If the software I use to verify the closed source software is closed, then I
will need another piece of software to verify that the verify-ing software is
what it says it is and so on until we reach a piece of software that I can
verify with my own eyes (or a friend has verified with their eyes).

We all eventually have to place our trust somewhere but we shouldn't have to
agree with where __you __decided to trust.

~~~
tptacek
You don't need open software of any kind to verify it.

~~~
adiusmus
It sure helps though. And being able to compare source code to binary is good
for checking blobs.

No one knows what nasties are hidden in these blobs that run on EVERY phone
out there. I’d actually go as far as saying cell phone processing modules are
completely insecure. Unlikely to receive updates. Poorly documented. Security
standards are likely to be weakly implemented with gaping holes.

As for proof, I’d point at the lack of source code as a starting point. Open
source doesn’t guarantee security but it at least lets interested parties try
to the degree they want or need to.

~~~
pvg
_As for proof, I’d point at the lack of source code as a starting point._

Much better proof would be frequent exploits through the vectors you consider
examples glaring insecurity.

~~~
adiusmus
Sure. Go and have a look at GSM and friends. I’d say the cellular network in
general is routinely being manipulated. The protocols and standards for over-
the-air are demonstrably insecure and assuming the actual hardware is also
insecure is reasonable as well.

~~~
pvg
Part of the point of this thread is that 'modern flagship phones' are designed
with problems like that in mind. You're the one claiming to have 'proof' they
are trivially insecure.

~~~
adiusmus
I pointed at the lack of source code as a starting point for proof of complete
insecurity. I pointed at the ease of the existing protocols in active use as
an example of that insecurity. That insecurity is the basis for Stingray fake
towers. If you can fake the tower then the cellular modules can’t be much
better.

I’m sure various agencies are quite frustrated by their inability to use the
cellular modem as an entry point into Apple’s phones. That by itself is
another pointer.

I didn’t claim to have proof other than that.

~~~
pvg
That's proof for the values of proof that include 'innuendo'.

~~~
adiusmus
You haven’t addressed any of my points to any particular depth. So I’m not
sure why you have such faith in this tech.

------
btashton
> We went with Redpine Signal as their chipset does not require a firmware
> download at runtime like other vendors; having a downloadable firmware would
> violate the Free Software Foundation’s RYF requirements.

This really does not resonate with me. In most of these chips there is a
functional or partially functional firmware in ROM, then the OS applies a RAM
patch to provide full functionality or address functional or security issues.
I'm not sure how I would be more free or secure if Broadcom or Intel placed
the full firmware in the ROM and never updated it, than if the continued to
supply updated firmware blobs.

The firmware for these devices historically is riddled with security issues,
just recently this CVE affected most of the Intel AC WiFi cards [1]

Also Redpine supports firmware blob updates with some versions of their
hardware, so I'm not sure if they are just playing word games here by saying
it will WORK without extra blobs, but then expect everyone will really still
use the blobs to stay up-to-date. [2]

[1] [https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-
center/advi...](https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-
center/advisory/intel-sa-00128.html) [2]
[https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/lin...](https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-
firmware.git/tree/rsi)

~~~
abrowne
I believe the FSF position is that non-updatable firmware can be considered
"part of the hardware", while updatable firmware cannot. I think they're
concerned that updated firmware could change how the device functions in ways
you can't control.

~~~
btashton
Except that I am almost 100% certain [1] that they are using the RS9113 which
as I suspected IS updateable (in some cases wirelessly) [2]. In fact in the
Linux Firmware tree they have multiple firmware images depending on how you
want the device to function. [3]

>The host MCU can update the RS9113 module FW over UART using the kermit
protocol or over SPI using the proprietary binary protocol. The default UART
baud rate is 115200 kbps 8N1 with xon/off or no flow control. For baud rate
>900000, hardware flow control must be used. Refer to the WiSeConnect PRM for
more info - the "Upgrading the Firmware in Module" section discusses the SPI
mode and "Firmware Upgradation" section discusses the UART mode.

[1] [https://source.puri.sm/bob.ham/image-
builder/commit/856c9caf...](https://source.puri.sm/bob.ham/image-
builder/commit/856c9caf647aca14edfb125fb86b94ddb1240287) [2]
[http://www.redpinesignals.com/faqs.php](http://www.redpinesignals.com/faqs.php)
[3]
[https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/lin...](https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-
firmware.git/commit/rsi?id=c1aa76a28c8031f747f6589e9b0f5aca8924a5e7)

------
pergadad
A very laudable effort and hopefully it goes well. But to be clear, the first
ethical smartphone is Fairphone. I don't see how exactly this one could get
even close to trying to be ethical in the way Fairphone does, but it might
just be me having a different understanding of 'fair'.

~~~
msla
> But to be clear, the first ethical smartphone is Fairphone.

Ethical products don't spy on users. Fairphone uses Android, so it isn't
entirely ethical.

~~~
Fnoord
> Ethical products don't spy on users. Fairphone uses Android, so it isn't
> entirely ethical.

Because customers want Google.

The bootloader is unlocked. If you want to install Fairphone Open then you
can. That's an Android version sans Google/OpenGapps. [1]

If you want, you can also install different firmware. Examples: LineageOS
(with or without OpenGapps), LineageOS + microG, SailfishOS, UBTouch.

[1] [https://code.fairphone.com/projects/fp-
osos/index.html](https://code.fairphone.com/projects/fp-osos/index.html)

~~~
snaky
Can you add your own key to the bootloader and lock it again staying on your
own firmware?

~~~
Fnoord
AFAIK you cannot. Is that ever possible, on any unlocked bootloader?

FWIW, the SoC is a SD801.

~~~
culot
I wonder if it would be possible to implement that feature on an Android
device that allowed you to flash your own custom appsboot/lk? I've only spent
a little bit of time in LK stuff, but it seemed to me that that was where that
functionality lives.

From leaked LG LK code it shows that's definitely where their bootloader
unlock keys lived [at one point a couple of years ago].

Since the Librem device is a different beast, though, I wonder what their
bootstack looks like? Super curious now!

------
megous
Other than the physical switches (which sounds not all that interesting, since
if I'll be in control of the software/OS, I can trust the GPIOs controlling
some MOSFETs switches pretty much the same), this phone can only really
differentiate itself by being very friendly to the FOSS developers/enthusiasts
crowd.

A phone where you could get creative and manipulate every aspect of it without
the artificial [security/functionality/SDK] limitations imposed on apps you
can write for Android or that other comapny's phone OS I don't like even more.

A phone that will not get planned obsolescence.

A phone with OS that can be managed just like any other linux distro, where
you can write apps in any of the readily available languages, etc.

Failing this, it's just overpriced wannabe Android clone.

~~~
onefish
I'm with you there in not really buying into the whole security, trust, and
ethics story line which mostly seems to be appealing to a bandwagon of
sentiments around corporate and government spying. Unfortunately, these
sentiments are probably the only reason otherwise-average people - the kind of
people who don't care about recompiling the kernel for their phone, on their
phone, or jiggling GPIOs to remove power from subsystems - would probably buy
anything other than an Android or Apple phone. Without this both comparatively
large in one respect (with respect to the set of all reasonably tech-savvy
people) but comparatively minuscule in another (with respect to the set of all
smartphone consumers) set of people, you're going to end up with another
OpenMoko Freerunner type situation where the only people using it are the
frankly ultra-fringe types like us who care more about having a pocket
computer that behaves like, well, an actual computer should and are frustrated
with the creative limitations of SDK-based lock-in.

I sometimes wonder how much Purism actually cares about all this security,
trust, ethics rhetoric and how much of it is a bunch of geeks who just want to
finally have a smartphone which can run an actual Linux distribution and
figured "hey, consumers are pretty riled-up about this whole government spying
thing - and it's pretty easy to audit open source software for that sort of
stuff - maybe we can work an angle..."

~~~
megous
> Unfortunately, these sentiments are probably the only reason otherwise-
> average people - the kind of people who don't care about recompiling the
> kernel for their phone, on their phone,

I guess that's true, but these people probably will not be the driving force
of the community around the phone. They'll be helping sustain the vendor
financially, which is also valuable though.

I already have a mobile device to play with with a similar design to this
phone, that has a separate 3G modem and can also be made to make calls. It's a
bulkier 7" tablet. It will never get an opensource GPU driver, and suspend to
ram is also out of the question for now. But it's fun to play with and
explore.

Recently, I had fun with adding touch UI support for u-boot, to implement a
boot menu and some battery indicator:

[https://megous.com/dl/u-boot.mp4](https://megous.com/dl/u-boot.mp4)

Also if you drop the typical Linux userspace, and replace systemd with a
custom init binary, create a DRI based UI app it's possible to get cold boot
times to useable GUI in 1-2 seconds from pressing a button. So I'm excited for
what will be possible to do if the hardware of that phone ever materializes.

------
craftyguy
I hope Purism takes as long as necessary to get the Librem 5 right. The last
thing the world needs is another rushed phone design..

------
andmarios
Not directly related, but sometimes I do wonder how free software can compete
with the services of the behemoths (maps, assistants, etc).

So the other day I hit this article [1] on planet.kde.org about KDE Itinerary,
an application that can store your boarding passes and offer some additional
services, such as calendar integration or notifications in case your
destination has a different socket type, they drive on the left side, etc. It
seemed quite useful and some parts are novel. Maybe there is a future for
phones with just free software.

[1] [https://www.volkerkrause.eu/2018/08/25/kde-itinerary-
overvie...](https://www.volkerkrause.eu/2018/08/25/kde-itinerary-
overview.html)

~~~
hegz
I have been using only open source apps for the last year. For basic stuff
like podcast streaming and IM the Foss stuff is better than the proprietary
stuff. For complex things like maps and assistants its like taking a step 5
years back in the past.

OSM and is no where near as good as google maps at most things but its still
perfectly usable.

The average person probably won't be happy with a purely foss phone right now
but if its something you care about then it can be done fairly easily.

~~~
fosco
what podcast streamer do you use? looking for alternative.

~~~
hegz
"SoundWaves" on fdroid. I just searched podcast and downloaded the most
recently updated app and it was pretty good.

~~~
fosco
thank you, appreciate the response. downloading now will try for a week and
see if I like, currently use podcast addict free version.

------
tomcam
This kind of moral preening makes me sick. I will probably become a customer,
but phrases like "the world’s first ethical" really, really rub me the wrong
way. tptacek has covered many of my issues below, but, simply put, it implies
that the rest of us who work for telecoms or who choose not to buy the Purism
are lesser.

"Don't do evil" hit me the same way. I assume Google is well-intentioned, but
there are many, many areas in which Google and I have moral disagreement
regarding the way they operate. That's fine. Principled people can differ.

The same is true with Microsoft and Kroger's and Costco and lots of other
brands I deal with. I know for a fact these companies support causes I believe
to be immoral. I suspect in turn they disagree with some of the causes I
support. But they don't rub my nose in their superiority with smarmy phrases
like "don't do evil" this or "first ethical" that.

In the case of Purism, a much quicker way to my heart and wallet is say it's
completely open for the following reasons. That's enough for me. I don't need
your fundamentalist preacher bloviating on top of everything else.

~~~
vertex-four
Purism is a manufacturer that directly buys into the principles of the FSF -
that closed-source software is probably the most important ethical issue in
computing. You can read about why on the FSF’s website.

------
alain94040
[random idea] Rather than worry endlessly about SOCs and radios not being open
enough, why not build a protocol on top of blackbox components that
eliminates, through some kind of encryption, the need for openness?

To push the argument to the extreme, even if you find a radio component that
matches your requirement of free, it's still going to talk to a radio tower
that you don't control, running a software stack that you don't approve. This
problem never ends, unless you imagine some end-to-end channel that you
control, and then you don't care about the lower layer's lack of openness.

Does that make any sense?

~~~
comesee
I agree with you, but the issue here is that in traditional phone
architectures, the baseband processor could interrupt and monitor the
execution of the main CPU (for efficiency purposes). So theoretically you
couldn't be certain that your plaintext wasn't being exfiltrated. With a
separate baseband, it's a lot harder (but possible) for a blackbox CPU to
exfiltrate your info.

------
bubblethink
I wish they would do more practical engineering work on the only real product
that they do have, which is the laptop. I visit their forum from time to time,
and there are multiple long standing posts with multiple people facing
problems due to battery drain, fan issues, suspend/resume, freezes etc. All
this grandstanding is useless if the product fails basic usability criteria.

------
bo1024
Lots of criticism here focusing on use of the word ethical. I don't care to
argue semantics, I'm just really excited for this phone!

~~~
3131s
I thought that was odd too. There is one instance of the word "ethical" in an
otherwise technical article and it's hardly egregious compared to the
marketing speech of nearly big tech company:

> _We will continue to evolve as we understand better how this subset of the
> industry works. The success of our phone is critical, as it will provide us
> with the legitimacy and leverage we need to bend hardware suppliers to our
> way of thinking by showing them that we have the potential to be market
> leaders with ethical products that respect users._

~~~
confounded
See dang’s comment way down. The link was originally to a very self-
congratulatory press release from the marketing person, and later changed to a
blog post with details and exposition from the CTO.

Purism’s style in press releases is pretty annoying, but I really appreciate
the blog posts.

I backed the phone. I’ve backed most GNU+Linux replacements for my iDevices.

If it half-works it will have wildly exceeded my expectations!

I wish them the very best.

~~~
bo1024
Thanks, that explains a lot. Sometimes HN's moderation style of changing links
causes this kind of confusion.

------
jancsika
> The cellular modem is arguably the most complex part of a mobile phone.

Ok, so in the dev kit/final product will there be a physical switch to turn it
off?

Or at least a CLI command? Possibly a GUI with a big toggle labeled "Turn off
the insanely complex unauditable OS that I must run to live in the 21st
century because patents"?

~~~
daurnimator
I would assume/hope that the "airplane mode" would do such a thing...

~~~
Fnoord
Yes, but the idea is that airplane mode can be faked in such a way by software
that you cannot be sure its entirely off (remember Android still scanning
WLAN/Bluetooth even whilst it was off?). With a hardware kill switch, you have
more assurance it is off. With tinfoil, yet even more.

~~~
jancsika
Tinfoil manifests a _much_ worse UX than the kill switch. The foil is
physically separate from the phone and can easily get misplaced or torn such
that the phone is no longer able to be secured. Moreover, the user can be so
physically exhausted that they neglect to retrieve the foil from their fanny
pack and properly wrap the phone (not to mention checking for any areas where
holes might let the signal escape which takes extra time).

It is at least an order of magnitude quicker for the user to toggle a kill
switch that resides at all times on the phone. Negligence due to physical
exhaustion is thus eliminated-- as long as the user can physically access the
phone they have sufficient energy to click the kill switch. And as long as the
user is able to reach the phone they can access the kill switch, which isn't
necessarily true for the tin foil.

Additionally, there are a variety of social engineering attacks that can cause
a user to become reluctant to wrap their phone in tinfoil, reluctant retrieve
the foil, and even reluctant carry their fanny pack with them. None of those
attacks exist for clicking a toggle, especially one designed as an elegant
part of the phone's facade (which itself may go unnoticed by the would-be
attacker).

Finally, toggling an unobtrusive switch on one's phone doesn't invite
onlookers to come over and start discussing unwanted topics like PGP
keysigning parties, onion sites, and how the average life span would have
increased by 20 years if everyone were still using Gopher.

------
fosco
Additional details of launch at [0].

Details on hardware report at (as of today)[1].

[0] [https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/](https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/)

[1] [https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-2018-09-hardware-
report/](https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-2018-09-hardware-report/)

------
krn
I am totally fine with PCs, which allow me to install any OS I prefer. And I
am totally fine with smartphones, which allow me to flash any ROM I prefer.
This way I get both, secure hardware and private software.

------
cmsimike
Looks like an HDMI mini is confirmed, which means time to build my own in-car
librem-based infotainment center, starring Kodi and Home Assistant!

------
adiusmus
Looks good in principle. It meets a lot of my requirements.

I’m not sure what ethical means when a corporation says it. Purism at least
state what they mean and how they apply it.

What I’m looking for in a mobile phone: Good screen. iPhone X quality. 4gb
ram. 16gb main storage. Headphone jack nice but not required. Linux OS.
(Android is ok) Ability to write my own apps for custom accessories. Some kind
of AppStore. (Debian apt repo is ok) Secure Enclave. Cellular is not directly
on main system bus. Accelerated graphics. Decent sound. Fast enough to play
video with background tasks. Removeable battery. Repairable.

~~~
vertex-four
Sounds like you’re looking for the Pixel.

~~~
culot
The Pixels don't have removable batteries, and certainly are repair-
unfriendly.

Too bad LG quit doing removable batteries, their phones with that design were
relatively repair-friendly.

~~~
adiusmus
I think I’ll wait another 12 months. The pixel / current iPhones don’t excite
me yet.

------
shmerl
I still don't get it, why they didn't pick Plasma Mobile as their primary UX.

~~~
comesee
Does it matter? If it's open, someone can create a plasma mobile distro.

~~~
shmerl
It matters for resources focus IMHO.

------
danharaj
So, when it is said that it is ethical, does that extend to labor conditions
in Purism's upstream supply chain? I would buy such a phone for its more
robust privacy, but I wouldn't call it ethical if it was produced with
conflict minerals and virtual slave labor.

Not that you can really escape those realities the way things currently are.

~~~
craftyguy
It seems like it will be made in China, so I'm not certain it gets a checkmark
for "no virtual slave labor". I could be wrong I guess.

------
tarboreus
I don't see anything on their sites about accessibility features. An ethical
FLOSS phone is an awesome idea, but I'm concerned that if they don't think
about accessibility at all in making it then it will be hard or impossible to
add those features in after the fact.

------
j0e1
Would PureOS support Android APKs? I think that is something I'd need to
consider before making a leap.

~~~
dman
I hope they dont go that way. The amount of engineering effort required to do
that would be immense and it would be a constant game of playing catch up to
android to ensure that all APKs work.

Disclaimer: Views expressed here are my own and do not have anything to do
with my employer.

~~~
simcop2387
The way I'd do it, is support the kernel extensions needed (or some wrapper)
for the android specific stuff and leave it to the community to start actually
making things work. There's a lot of research and work already done out in the
android community to strip off a lot of the google play stuff from android and
leave you with a functional device. I suspect that a lot of that would make
the job easier on the software side. The API side (display, sound, etc.) will
probably be a lot more difficult but it has been done in the past. Google's
done this with ARC Welder and running some APKs in Chrome. Not sure if it's
open sourced or not but if it is then it'd probably handle a good part of the
work.

~~~
dman
Amount of engineering effort involved here would be immense and its unclear if
a startup could achieve this and keep up with the developer/ecosystem velocity
of Android.

Disclaimer: Views expressed here are my own and do not have anything to do
with my employer.

------
nmg
Every time I hear about the Librem 5, I get excited about the idea that I
could run Debian, or Arch, or another open source OS on a phone. But I can
find scant details about how this would be implemented.

~~~
roblabla
Not sure what you mean? It gets implemented by using a touch-friendly Window
Manager, touch-friendly apps, with apps for all the phone features you'd
expect?

It's all open source BTW. Look at
[https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Purism](https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Purism)

~~~
comesee
Yup, it's roughly the same idea as building a touch friendly website.

------
RileyJames
This is very interesting. I couldn’t find any details regarding the hardware
for the initial device, I assume this is because it still in production. Is
there a ball park we can expect?

I love the idea of an open source phone which could be used as a phone &
laptop replacement. Even if I’m still likely to carry an iPhone as well (but
probably as a wifi only device if PureOS can a handle my phone needs).

~~~
boojums
The article mentions they will use NXP's i.MX 8M which has 4 ARM A53's [0].
That would make it similar to Qualcomm's Snapdragon 410 as far as having 4x
A53's, but the process and clock speeds could be different.

[0] [https://www.nxp.com/products/processors-and-
microcontrollers...](https://www.nxp.com/products/processors-and-
microcontrollers/arm-based-processors-and-mcus/i.mx-applications-
processors/i.mx-8-processors:IMX8-SERIES)

------
phobosdeimos
Cheap Chinaphone: €300 DNS66 and Yalp store so that nobody gets payed:
priceless

There are easier ways to frustrate the tech industry. Oh and if you live in
the US mobile networks will still sell you out no matter what brand your phone
is. They all have to connect to cell towers.

~~~
snaky
> Over 40 models of low-cost Android smartphones are sold already infected
> with the Triada banking trojan, says Dr.Web

------
matheusmoreira
They seem to be focusing a lot on phones nowadays. What about the laptops? No
progress on that?

------
wodenokoto
Does anyone know how the camera stacks up against, maybe not iPhone X, but at
least 6 or 7?

~~~
snaky
You can switch it off. [https://puri.sm/posts/hard-not-soft-kill-
switches/](https://puri.sm/posts/hard-not-soft-kill-switches/)

~~~
wodenokoto
Haha, okay. I'll try again:

How do they compare when explicitly turned on?

------
keithnz
how is it ethical? surely if it was ethical it would be spelled out what its
ethics are and how it guarentees those ethics are maintained across it's
entire business practices including its supply chain? I'd also expect if it is
shown that it is not ethical in some way, then the phone isn't ethical, and a
full refund would be provided :)

~~~
jancsika
I'm pretty sure they are piggy-backing directly on the FSF's "Respects Your
Freedom" certification.

------
dang
Url changed from [https://puri.sm/posts/2018-09-librem5-hardware-roadmap-
annou...](https://puri.sm/posts/2018-09-librem5-hardware-roadmap-
announcement/), which points to this post, which has more details.

------
leowoo91
Why nobody can bring a hit marketing idea instead of getting stuck into a
better product design trap?

~~~
yjftsjthsd-h
Feel free. I await your Show HN.

~~~
leowoo91
Thanks! It might take a while but I hope someday.

------
grizzles
> we foresee a delay in production until April 2019.

This is the only bit I read, the rest was blah blah. The first entirely
predictable delay of many, if I might add. They are on a long road to "Sorry
we tried, here are some discount coupons for purism laptops". Well, it won't
be that long really, unless a badly needed funding angel swoops in.

Their delusion is in some sense laudable, as any startup should believe it's
own bullshit. But when you know better than they do about their chances, it's
still hard to watch folks put themselves through this.

~~~
flukus
> Their delusion is in some sense laudable, as any startup should believe it's
> own bullshit. But when you know better than they do about their chances,
> it's still hard to watch folks put themselves through this.

It doesn't look like they're a startup as far as I can tell, they're a laptop
manufacturer with 2 products on the market for a few years, doesn't look like
there's any VC money in the mix either.

~~~
grizzles
When you take on a project that requires leverage of 100:1 over your current
annual profit, I'd argue you are a startup again. That commitment will easily
swallow the company.

Note: I'm generously estimating their profit at around $1M year. ~$100M was
the cost to bring up the Essential phone.

