GrapheneOS: Talks shit about Fairphone and their 'ancient' hardware on socials, not considering them as an option at all.

Also GrapheneOS: Partners with Motorola/Lenovo despite more devices in their lineup having relatively mediocre chipsets than not.

@maddy I think @GrapheneOS are just sellouts at this point...

I don't trust any phone and just have a "#StupidPhone" I can rip out the battery and dump into a faraday bag into my fridge.

That does way more in terms of security...

@F3715H @maddy No money has changed hands between us and Motorola and we specifically said we don't want devices sold with GrapheneOS to have a significantly higher price so that we can get significant funding from it. It will be possible to install GrapheneOS on the devices for free. How is it selling out to work with a company where they improve their devices to meet our requirements and they get to earn more money while what we get are more devices meeting our requirements for our users?

@GrapheneOS @maddy unless Motorola were to offer #GrapheneOS on all their current devices, that's easy to workaround.

Given that they sell sub - €250 devices brand new without any SIM- or Net-Lock, they'll obviously only gonna care about their high-end flagships that are 4-digits.

https://www.alditalk.de/motorola?q=-sk-2406-smartphones-motorola&pageSize=30&sort=products_price-asc#

motorola Smartphones bei ALDI TALK | ALDI TALK

motorola Smartphones bei ALDI TALK

@F3715H m8 stop wasting your time with @GrapheneOS...

They made it very clear in the past that they don't give a damn, and are #Stallman-Style extremists that go full "My way or Highway!" on anything.

@maddy

@kkarhan @F3715H @GrapheneOS @maddy No, it's not true. It is ironic to compare a security and privacy project like GrapheneOS with Stallman, who founded the FSF and is anti-security to the point of blocking firmware updates because the code is proprietary and does not comply with their open-source philosophy.
@Xtreix my point is that @GrapheneOS are also uncompromizing to the point of artifically reducing the amount if devices it could run.

@kkarhan @GrapheneOS Wanting a wide choice of devices is understandable, but you must also understand that a project like GrapheneOS with limited resources can only fulfill its mission if the supported devices have the necessary prerequisites, such as official support for alternative operating systems and all the standard security features listed here : https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

Unfortunately, there are few devices that meet this requirement, only Pixel devide actually, because it costs really a lot of money, and that most of the time, manufacturers weren't really interested, but times seem to be changing with Motorola Mobility contacting the GrapheneOS foundation about a partnership.

GrapheneOS isn't here to improve device security and privacy just a little bit, it's here to improve it significantly, and they can't do that magically. They can't take a mobile device with mediocre security out of the box and turn it into a reasonably secure device. Hardware security is just as important as software security.

If you are looking for broad device compatibility, you can use LineageOS, which is much more in line with the goal of this project, and to support devices for as long as possible in order to give obsolete devices a second life.

GrapheneOS Frequently Asked Questions

Answers to frequently asked questions about GrapheneOS.

GrapheneOS

@Xtreix well, @GrapheneOS chose their requirements and they can happily design their own platform instead.

  • I just think that their stubbornness makes them look like Stallmanist extremists to the point of being unbearable cringe and completely loosing the plot.

To the point that it's cheaper to go black/red and teach that to people, even at the risk of inconvenience.

  • I mean, in many juristictions one will have to do so anyway, but that's not tue point here…

I think #GrapheneOS prefer to "die on their hill" of "moral superiority" than fave the reality that 99% of people can't and won't blow $500 - $1000+ on a phone when any half-decent Netbook with @tails_live , @torproject and #4G or #5G modem can do the same.

Otherwise we'll see them fail the same way @signalapp did, which is eitger getting shut down (#EncroChat-style) or being uncovered as a controlled opposition / honeypot (like #ANØM aka. #OperationIronside aka. #OperationTrøjanShield)…

Red/black concept - Wikipedia

@kkarhan @GrapheneOS @tails_live @torproject @signalapp

"GrapheneOS chose their requirements and they can happily design their own platform instead."

There's no need to reinvent the wheel. AOSP is a secure, open-source platform that has been around for almost 20 years. I don't want to debate rumors that Google wants to make AOSP proprietary because there is no evidence to support this, especially since it would not benefit them in any way.

"I just think that their stubbornness"

It's not stubborness and I explained why.

"They are the antithesis to #Tails when it comes to #UserFriendly-ness and approachability for #Normies and #TechIlliterates

It's probably the first time I've seen “Tails” and “Normie” in the same sentence, It's not that Tails is difficult to use, but I'm really not sure that many “normies” use it or even know it exists. The user experience on GrapheneOS is almost identical to Pixel OS, the standard operating system for Google Pixel devices, so using GrapheneOS is likely to seem much simpler and familiar to normies, as they will already be used to it.

"Espechally since the problems woth #MobilePhones and the underlying technology ain't fixable with an #AndroidROM

GrapheneOS is not a ROM, Pixel OS is not a ROM, and LineageOS is not a ROM either, theses operating systems are not ROMs.

"Instead we need to foster a #SecurityCulture and proper #ITsec, #InfoSec, #OpSec & #comsec

Indeed, and what GrapheneOS does about security is completely appropriate, including informing people and giving them good advice.

"Otherwise we'll see them fail the same way @signalapp did, which is eitger getting shut down (#EncroChat-style) or being uncovered as a controlled opposition / honeypot (like #ANØM aka. #OperationIronside aka. #OperationTrøjanShield)…"

Signal did not fail, and mentioning Encrochat, ANON, and honeypots in the same sentence is irrelevant. These things have absolutely nothing in common with Signal, you seem to be believing made-up stories.

@Xtreix

[email protected] is a troll, he is not interested in a serious, constructive discussion, and prefer to spam his posts with a million hashtags in the hopes of getting some engagement and attention out of it. He's also been spreading wild conspiracy theories about privacy projects like Signal, and he actually blocked me after an argument on Mastodon, because I called out his BS. Engaging in a conversation with that account doesn't really make sense.

@Andromxda Thanks for the info, that makes sense with what I've seen

@Xtreix OFC @Andromxda can claim bs all day but that doesn't make my points any less true.

I'll be proven right, and I'll shout "#ToldYaSo!" agai.

  • And I'll be confident you'll apologize at that point.
    • You'll see.

Until then, I'll sit back and and wait till your fanboyism of @GrapheneOS will hit reality like a car slamming into a concrete wall at 200km/h.

  • I got bigger projects to do than being an unpaid caretaker of shitposters!

#thxbye #next #EOD

Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼 (@[email protected])

@[email protected] [email protected] is a troll, he is not interested in a serious, constructive discussion, and prefer to spam his posts with a million hashtags in the hopes of getting some engagement and attention out of it. He's also been spreading wild conspiracy theories about privacy projects like Signal, and he actually blocked me after an argument on Mastodon, because I called out his BS. Engaging in a conversation with that account doesn't really make sense.

Infosec.Space
@Xtreix I'll give you a timeout for the 1st strike.