For those unfamiliar, GrapheneOS is a privacy and security enhanced custom ROM endorsed by Snowden. Despite these big names, plenty of people give it backlash
Even @TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml gives it backlash despite being a moderator of Lemmy’s biggest privacy community. A quote here: “grapheneOS trolls are downvoting every single post and comment of mine, and committing vote manipulation on Lemmy. They are using 5-6 accounts.” That was in response to downvotes on a comment posted in the c/WorldNews community, which is entirely unrelated to technology.
One of the reasons is that GrapheneOS can only be installed on Google Pixels due to security compatibility, which makes complete sense considering Android should be most compatible with Google’s own devices. GrapheneOS even lists the exact reasons they chose Pixels, and encourage people to step up and manufacture a different supported device.
One year ago, Louis Rossmann posted this video outlining his reasons for deleting GrapheneOS. Mainly, he had multiple bad experiences with Daniel Micay (the founder and main developer of GrapheneOS) which put his distrust in the GrapheneOS project. Since then, he has stepped down and will no longer be actively contributing to the project.
So, I am here to learn why exactly people still do not like GrapheneOS.
GrapheneOS only works on Google hardware. Part of the advantage of Android is device variety, but GrapheneOS forces you down a narrow path. Want a rugged device, a headphone jack, microSD? Well Google doesn’t offer those so GrapheneOS can’t meet your device requirements.
I think part of the reason is there’s a chip that limits brute force attacks and it’s not in other phones
GrapheneOS has defined a set of security standards for their operating system which have hardware requirements. These standards have been published and there have been efforts to engage with hardware manufacturers to adopt the required hardware. Blame the manufacturers for skimping on security, rather than Graphene being unwilling to compromising their values.
It would be possible to ship generic system images with separate updates for the device support code. However, it would be drastically more complicated to maintain and support due to combinations of different versions and it would cause complications for the hardening done by GrapheneOS.
Sounds like they could, but have resource limitations to do it. It’s also a knock against Google whose hardware has gotten worse. Personally, IDGAF about these project-imposed requirements if I can’t have the standard headphone jack on portable device.
What is this level of grand security that requires blind trust in Google and its proprietary security chip? Why do other phones keep getting not hacked if they are so flimsy and insecure? How do we know these chips aren’t just like Intel ME or Apple’s numerous security chips or old Snapdragon Hexagon DSD chip devices that now have permanent hacked backdoors? Are you telling people to trust Google?
Android project is open source, unlike Google’s proprietary hardware.
GrapheneOS has not once been independently vetted for security, or tested against kits like Cellebrite. On top of it, they have lied about testing. https://i.imgur.com/woNxPhx.jpg
On top of it, they have lied about testing. https://i.imgur.com/woNxPhx.jpg
Yeah, no. Pretty sure that’s just a rando with GrapheneOS logo as their avatar. The way they talk doesn’t sound like the dev to me, and I also don’t think the dev would ever misspell a word like “cellular” as “cullar”.
There are plenty people with that graphene logo doing this work. This is how they identify each other with. How do I know? ryan97 was a spy sent by GOS to my privatelife Matrix room who siphoned all the chats for a whole year. It is not necessary that Micay himself is omnipresent everywhere. He has his social media army to do this stuff.
“What is this level of grand security…” Enumerated here: https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices
Once manufacturers can implement those things, then you will have an alternative to Google hardware for running Graphene. I’m not telling people to trust anything, don’t put words in my mouth.
Who is PrivacyPhones and why should I believe they are in any way affiliated with Graphene?
I don’t hate GrapheneOS but if your issue with the Android ecosystem is largely due to Google’s decisions in the software side, promoting Google’s hardware because currently they allow you to use alternative software is compromising your future options.
Removed by mod
Those things do break the security model though. Theyre right about that.
Removed by mod
Security and privacy are not always aligned.
Removed by mod
Now that’s a paranoid take lmao
I don’t feel comfortable using google devices no matter what reasons they state. As a free software project-and the biggest one in the custom ROM space-it should offer the freedom for users to choose their own devices. A lot of users are fine with losing these supposed “security” reasons for getting away from google, and they would like to repurpose existing devices instead of buying new pixels. It’s almost like it’s a blatant way for selling google pixels. Oh and don’t get me started with the binary blobs.
Basically because Daniel “MacCock” behaves like a massive paranoid schizophrenic prick when he doesn’t take very strong meds (that’s my take on it anyway). And as others have mentioned, his claim to have stepped down is just that, “his claim”. Everything points to him still very much being at the help of the project.
I like the project, but any software I use being directed by someone like that guy is a huge red flag.
I’m shocked that anyone can think that saying what you said here is ever okay.
The “claim” that you’re talking about was misinterpreted by so many people and warped by people who are hostile against GrapheneOS. The former lead developer only said that they were stepping down as the lead developer and another person would take over. They said it would take a long time for all of the duties to be transferred over to other people.
I’m good with a project that’s concentrating on privacy being run by a paranoid fuck. If he’s pouring all his lunacy into making it as locked down as possible, seems like a good thing to me.
I particularly like the recent duress PIN code upgrade. Seems like something every OS should have in it. I don’t need some cops fucking around with my social media and banking info because I got stopped for jaywalking.
It’s not just paranoid, it’s totally toxic and aggressive. He attacked and verbally abused dozen of different project for naive reasons, and spread FUD and slanders about other developers and projects
I don’t like it because its not actually FOSS. It includes closed source software (Sandboxed Gservices, Android Auto, etc.) which completely defeats my main goal of wanting to take power away from big corpos. I dont want that to even be an option in an OS I’d recommend because if the easy way is there lazy people who dont care about their privacy will use it. Ive actually installed a few custom Roms for friends and their phones always end up with Insta/Snap/Discord installed and it just defeats the whole purpose…
For what it’s worth, GrapheneOS includes neither Google Play nor Android Auto. Like nearly any Android-based OS, it allows you to install apps of your choosing, but it does not include either of those. It is a FOSS project through and through.
Why are so many people so fast to downvote over a misconception? GOS does not include any Google anything, it does allow to install, but it is the most bare ROM out there in terms of pre-installed stuff, for sure.
I am not defending “MacCock” and his goons in any way, shape or form, I believe they are all certifiable, but misconceptions don’t help anyone either, which is why I chose to clarify this.
Personally is due to the toxicity of their dev and socials team, basically if you ask something, you are wrong and they are right, if you recommend other options, you are wrong and they are right. They have been publicly raging war against cybersecurity content creators that dare question some decisions or do honest reviews (OS Is good but has it’s but scenarios) … Once they get better with their PR relationships most of the hate will go away.
I’ve been using grapheneOS and never knew the toxicity. Crazy.
Groups like this need to understand that their PR would do better if they said nothing at all rather than just being an asshole.
See also: CEO of Kagi search who thinks he can browbeat people into agreeing with him. It makes me never want to use Kagi.
Just shut up and let your fucking products speak for themselves. The more you rant about your philosophy to others, the less they actually want to use your products.
I dont hate it but id rather just use lineage os cause of broader device support. I live a degoogled life and would rather not have to explain to people I dont use and avoid google services yet own a google manufactured phone lol.
I like lineage is and have used for 5+ years. I’m now using it without google services. I mainly use it because I can’t really afford a pixel phone and the many supported devices lineage is has is phenomenal. That being said I would love to tey graphene os.
Here you go:
“Google makes the most secure phone. Including for securing your phone against Google.”
Its better then explaining you rather risk your data security then buy a phone from Google.
I really don’t mean to make this sound like FUD, but what about that blackbox security chip only used in google phones, that they promised to open source but never did? No OS can get around that…
Is there a fully open source phone?
People have to learn to separate software from its developer.
For example, I don’t care about Hyprland lead dev being an asshole sometimes, if the WM he’s developing works good. I don’t care about Cider’s devs political positions if it doesn’t directly affect my experience with the software.And people also have to learn, that if someone uses any particular software, they aren’t necessarily using it the way developer pointed out they should.
I use GrapheneOS on my device, but that doesn’t mean that I completely follow devs philosophy. I don’t use Vanadium, 'cause I don’t wanna support Chromium monopoly. I use F-Droid to install my apps, even if developers think, that I should get my apps directly from its devs.Does GrapheneOS founder or developer philosophy that you don’t agree with makes Graphene a bad OS? Of course it doesn’t. GrapheneOS is still one of the best options on degoogling your device if not the best.
I know this is somewhat controversial but I agree with this when it comes to FOSS software. Proprietary is a different story. But for foss software, the developer literally gains nothing from you using their software. So if the software is good and works to your benefit, why not use it? Yea okay the developer is a POS but how does that affect the product? And you using GrapheneOS does not mean you are supporting the developer as again, this is a FOSS product, you are not paying them with money or data or code.
if the software is good and works to your benefit, why not use it?
sometimes people just don’t feel comfortable using work of someone who opposes their rights. even just using the product gives the creator more exposure, recognition, possible funding in the future if it gets big enough, and so on. so, if the creator is openly transphobic, for example, trans folks won’t want to use the product, and doubly so when the community around the product is toxic, too. they’re voting with their feet.
That is understandable, but no need to be going out and attacking people who recommend GrapheneOS like the mod did. It would be much better if he just points out the major flaws of the GrapheneOS community the same way that Techlore and Louis Rossmann did, rather than dogging on anyone and everyone who recommends an otherwise great operating system.
It’s likely because the developers are highly opinionated, and this is true even for topics they don’t know very much about. See the entire discussion about implementing battery charge limiting in GrapheneOS. This makes for a lot of friction for people who would like to see more focus on usability in GrapheneOS as opposed to it being purely focused on security.
I stopped reading threads on their forums because the developers are so abrasive even though I still use the rom, because I don’t mind the loss of usability compared to other roms. I can completely understand why there is a lot of negative sentiment around it though.
Wow, Graphene really doesn’t have charging limits?
I assume this is the discussion you referred to, and I think it broke my trust in the project.
Oh, wow, that dude in the thread is proud in his ignorance.
deleted by creator
Interesting! I assume it involves a smart plug and an automation script that monitors battery level?
deleted by creator
It really does not. I use an external device connected via Bluetooth to achieve this on GrapheneOS, and others use home automation.
Edit: that thread isn’t what I’m referring to. There was a larger one, perhaps on their github, with a link to a blogpost about why charge limiting “isn’t necessary” being cited as the justification for why the rom doesn’t have the feature. Either way, it’s frustrating to read and best ignored.
What a weird situation. I suppose it’s nice those workarounds exist, even if they’re not ideal.
They do?
I dunno, maybe ask the person that says they hate it?
Your title is a sophist argument tactic called “begging the question”.
Bruh he’s literally asking the question
Uhhhhh it’s an OPEN question available to people who DO dislike the OS, so no. No just ASKING a question is NOT “begging the question”.
It’s asking a question.
It’s very close to begging the question, though. It really depends on OP’s actual intent, which is hard to determine through text. But it does seem like it could have a, “Those of you who still hate GrapheneOS, why are you wrong?” tone to it.
Edit: Reading through OP’s comments, they do sound genuine to me, I’m mostly just explaining why someone might mistake the post for begging the question.
Being hostile to a real question’s answers is also not begging the question.
Begging the question is a logical fallacy where someone is purposefully leaving out info or otherwise twisting things to end at a conclusion that was never properly supported. The point is there is an unsupported conclusion they’re trying to jump to.
Simply asking a question, even one with an obvious or sarcastic answer, is seldom “begging the question”.
Begging the question is a logical fallacy that assumes the conclusion within the premise. If OP was not being genuine, then the faulty conclusion would be “there are no good reasons to dislike GrapheneOS, therefore why do people dislike GrapheneOS?”
No, that’s NOT begging the question, that’s just being an ass about actually asking a question.
Maybe I have the wrong fallacy, or I’m just really stretching on this one.
This was my line of thinking:
- premise = there are no valid reasons to dislike X
- conclusion = people who dislike X don’t have any valid reasons
Well, since neither of you seems to want to post references, I’ll add a link.
Honestly, I think you summed up the biggest issues. As much as I look forward to getting a Pixel for my next phone solely for GrapheneOS, it’s understandable for people looking to degoogle to not want to buy a Google phone. The developer I think is the bigger issue. Despite having since stepped down, his behavior went unchecked for long enough to make quite a bad reputation and leave a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths. While recovering from that will simply take time, I have wondered why they haven’t taken the opportunity to come out with a Graphene-lite for non-Pixels. Something like CarbonOS as secure as possible sans Google hardware. Could easily overtake Calyx/Lineage.
The problematic dev never stepped down they still pull the same crazy shenanigans like banning anyone he disagrees with.
I recommend people look at DivestOS, and will probably go this myself in the near future
DivestOS is a security hardened version of Lineage and supports Bootloader relocking ans verified boot for at least several phones.
the develop is also a very cool guy, very intelligent and does not sperg out like an autist like Micay
I have wondered why they haven’t taken the opportunity to come out with a Graphene-lite for non-Pixels
The issue I see is simply a lack of developers to do so. Trying to split the team between two mostly different projects would most likely cripple both.
They tell you why right on their website. They dev for Pixels because it’s a stable platform with a predictable future.
If you’re not going to listen to the devs, I don’t know what to say.
@Charger8232 @DARbarian I don’t think that’s it, it’s more that they’re a project where you’re expected to buy a device for it, in this case a Pixel.
Pixels have amazing security features and they don’t want to lose that.
I think the issue is Play Integrity/SafetyNet. If you can’t lock the bootloader, you can’t get it without using illegal hacks. GrapheneOS only passes Basic Integrity but that’s just details
@Charger8232 The main dev is definitely still there it seems, (and still making claims) more over the harassment comes from all the devs (and by consequence, users)
@Charger8232 It makes it worse because they keep trying to make points and compare with others, like, OK, WE GET IT. Go on, continue fueling hate and then claim to be the victim.
@Charger8232 I shouldn’t even say anything but it’s too much.
It’s unfortunate the grapheneos community has a bad reputation, but I think the fact that Daniel stepped down and that the project is very committed and ticking all my personal boxes (and more) really keeps me devoted. I wish there were more options of phones, but I have no issue personally with it requiring google pixels as they have convinced me with what seems like rational and well supported arguments. I do wonder if as someone else mentioned, it may be interesting to have a GOS-light for other phones, just to give them a chance to get into GOS and try it out before getting a dedicated phone. It feels like a high barrier to entry, and a limited version may still be better than anything else available to those people? Just a thought.
Lol, this same mod banned me for a few days from this community because I was trying to tell him that he’s just making shit up about GrapheneOS
Lol, this same mod banned me for a few days from this community because I was trying to tell him that he’s just making shit up about GrapheneOS
https://lemmy.ml/post/16172444/11306405
Here is why you were banned.
screenshot, because I love to
The video link here shows what the message you wanted to convey as a troll, using the title of video. Even though you had absolutely nothing to prove GrapheneOS was good, you went on to dogpile on me to prove your point. That b** video link thing you did is why you earned the temp ban. You can choose to be spiteful about it, or admit you acted like the thing you were telling me through the video title.
Happy?
