Hi,

I am (very, very early) in the process of degoogling. I am definitely not a high risk as far as needing to be completely locked down. It’s more about trying to have a little more control over how my data is used.

I am looking at Graphene OS, but I am a little confused how certain apps (that rely on Google services) work. I have a Pixel 8 and will have it for the foreseeable future.

The apps I currently use that I would still need (or their equivalents) are:

  • Clash Royale (Supercell)
  • Notion (Notion Labs)
  • Clickup (Mango Technologies)
  • Business Calendar 2 (Appgenix)

  1. If I installed these exact apps “sandboxed”, what exactly does that mean from a user standpoint? Will I have to use a separate account, reboot my phone, etc, or is it a quick process to use the app?

  2. Is there a list of apps that I could browse to find equivalents to the above? Recommendations here are also ok.

  3. I saw that Firefox isn’t exactly private(?) and that Vanadium is better in that aspect but I don’t understand why. Can someone ELI5, and help me see if this is a relevant concern for me?

Thank you! 😁

  • Charger8232@lemmy.ml
    0·
    6 months ago

    Preface: I haven’t used GrapheneOS personally, but I’ve learned as much as I can over the past year. I’ll try my best.

    If I installed these exact apps “sandboxed”, what exactly does that mean from a user standpoint? Will I have to use a separate account, reboot my phone, etc, or is it a quick process to use the app?

    Sandboxed only means apps don’t communicate with each other* and that if one got breached your entire system remains untouched, only the app gets affected. Installing and using apps is the same as normal Android, no extra steps involved. If you want, you can create a separate profile for “unsafe apps”, but this is by no means a requirement and only ensures that if that profile gets breached the other profiles are untouched (profile sandboxing). Rebooting your phone is good practice after installing any software on any device, because some apps need a restart to complete the installation. It is not a requirement. To summarize: Just install the app, open it, and you’re done. Apps are sandboxed by default.

    Edit: The only thing you have to do before installing apps that rely on Google Play Services is to install Google Play Services in Settings (somewhere). This only has to be done once per profile.

    *There are some exceptions, but for simplicity we’ll stick with the textbook definition.

    Is there a list of apps that I could browse to find equivalents to the above? Recommendations here are also ok.

    AlternativeTo is a good place to find alternatives for certain apps.

    I saw that Firefox isn’t exactly private(?) and that Vanadium is better in that aspect but I don’t understand why. Can someone ELI5, and help me see if this is a relevant concern for me?

    This goes back to sandboxing. Basically, Firefox doesn’t play nice with sandboxing. That means if Firefox gets hacked there is a greater risk of infecting the entire phone (which wouldn’t happen with proper sandboxing). Vanadium has proper sandboxing, since Chromium (what Vanadium is based off of) was made for Android.

    Think of Firefox as a metal crate with a few small holes poked in it. Those holes aren’t a huge concern, since it would take a very skilled person to climb out of the crate through those small holes, but having holes in the first place is not great since it risks letting a person out of the crate. Chromium is a metal crate without holes, no risk of anyone getting out of that box, no worries.

    Cheers!

    • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
      0·
      6 months ago

      This goes back to sandboxing. Basically, Firefox doesn’t play nice with sandboxing. That means if Firefox gets hacked there is a greater risk of infecting the entire phone (which wouldn’t happen with proper sandboxing). Vanadium has proper sandboxing, since Chromium (what Vanadium is based off of) was made for Android.

      Think of Firefox as a metal crate with a few small holes poked in it. Those holes aren’t a huge concern, since it would take a very skilled person to climb out of the crate through those small holes, but having holes in the first place is not great since it risks letting a person out of the crate. Chromium is a metal crate without holes, no risk of anyone getting out of that box, no worries.

      Then why does the Tor Project choose Firefox over Chromium as its browser base? Chromium is incredibly insecure and full of holes. Post this wishy washy bullshit on reddit, not on Lemmy.

      • scratchandgame@lemmy.mlTiếng Việt
        0·
        6 months ago

        Then why does the Tor Project choose Firefox over Chromium as its browser base? Chromium is incredibly insecure and full of holes. Post this wishy washy bullshit on reddit, not on Lemmy.

        Because Tor browser’s goal is maximum anonymity and onion service. Firefox might be lag behind in security, but its code and features met the privacy requirements. Tor browser try to achieve some security by using noscript and block some web feature.

        • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
          0·
          6 months ago

          Firefox lagging in security is complete nonsense. Also, security means nothing if privacy and anonymity are worse. Chromium browsers are at best second opinion browsers for regular usage. Forget them for privacy and anonymity, and therefore security as well. Because you are trying to gain security against the people you want your data/metadata to be private from.

          • scratchandgame@lemmy.mlTiếng Việt
            0·
            6 months ago

            Also, security means nothing if privacy and anonymity are worse.

            Security here is protection from exploits, bugs,…

            • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
              0·
              6 months ago

              And those exploits are features in Chromium browsers. Stop posting your delusional takes here, you do not have a good history anyway with BSD elitism, weird notions on security, shitting on Linux users etc.

          • scratchandgame@lemmy.mlTiếng Việt
            0·
            6 months ago

            Chromium is inadequate and bad.

            For a anonymous browser, but not for a secure browser. The paper is purely about privacy and anonymity. No security (sandboxing, mitigations) here.

              • scratchandgame@lemmy.mlTiếng Việt
                0·
                6 months ago

                Chromium sandboxing means nothing when it leaks so much data.

                The attacker can’t gain access to the host with javascript.

                A browser that support javascript but doesn’t have sandboxing might not leak these data but when their are bug in their js implementation, the attacker can gain more access to the host.

                • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
                  0·
                  6 months ago

                  browser that support javascript but doesn’t have sandboxing

                  Pretty sure that both Firefox and Chromium have sandboxing. What browser are you talking about? Also the only form of attack is not a direct browser script attack. It can also be used to extract metadata, which is used to attack someone in other ways or through other software or OS.

                  I think you need to learn to debate coherently on internet, and work on weird ideas you have formed in your head around security.