HybridStatAnim8

6 ms·

61.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
> every app installed is known to the proxy since each app has a unqiue key GrapheneOSs proxies do not collect and send any "unique keys" from apps. That is made up. > They mention no proxy of RCS data, but in theory, an RCS
62.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
You seem to be greatly misunderstanding what is actually happening. You are conflating default OS domains with google play services. Google play services is not bundled or installed by default, and is not given any kind of privileged access
63.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
GrapheneOS does not run anything through google services. Nowhere in the "terms" is this stated. GrapheneOS uses first party servers for all default OS connections.
64.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
These devices fall far behind the industry standard hardware security requirements GrapheneOS has.
65.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
Root access takes agency away from you and gives it to 3rd party software. It doesnt expand freedom at all, it just allows other software to abuse the user. With a proper security model and verified boot, you can be certain you, the user, a
66.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
An objective and accurate assessment of the available options is not absurd, its the bare minimum. As the userspace improves, more attacks will be (and are) directed at the kernel, the linux kernel is already really bad for security, and it
67.
by HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
Linux security is quite bad. Android tries to improve this and GrapheneOS improves it even farther than that. Which device you need to be more secure depends on your needs and which device you put sensitive data on, but a mobile device is g
68.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
For context, GMSCompat is Google Mobile Services Compatibility. GrapheneOS installed the google play store and services as normal apps, and worked backwards to make it behave. There is no google specific sandbox, rather it uses the standard
69.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
Im not disputing the ability to use the device for many years. Using the device for a long time and the device being supported for a long time are different things. Fairphone doesnt make their own phones, its outsourced to an ODM and Fairph
70.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
You cant respond to any opinion because I have not provided any. Security is objective. What security someone may need can vary, yes, but that does not change how the security of a device works. You are downplaying serious issues and claimi
71.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
To start, all attestation is remote. It fundamentally has to be remote, be it a server or another device. GrapheneOS points out how its improved privacy and security should mean that it is accepted in a system like play integrity. But this
72.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
Most of this is not related to the claim and is more tangential discussion about things you like that run on the linux kernel, now, there is nothing wrong with that, but I must emphasise that none of what you describe is a part of the crite
73.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
MicroG requires privileged access. It also downloads and runs proprietary google code within this privileged context. MicroG additionally has very poor app compatibility and has had severe privacy issues in the past. Sandboxed google play d
74.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS has 99% app compatibility with sandboxed google play. Apps do not have issues with sandboxed google play at this time.
75.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
Note that I am a GrapheneOS supporter. You seem to have a few misconceptions. GrapheneOS is one of, if not the most vocal organization against the abuse of attestation mechanisms. GrapheneOS and its userbase feel the consequences of play in
76.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
Note that Fairphone does not provide software updates for anywhere near as long as they claim, and using a modern device with 7 years of support, such as a pixel or iphone, will be far better in the long term. Fairphone is basically e-waste
77.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
The legal definition of the OS does not matter at all when considering the difference between failing to support something, and using a tool that explicitly stops something from working that otherwise works without issue. Play integrity is
78.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS is designed for everyone, including average users. It does not require a high threat model, and the features it provides are not only useful to people with high threat models. Contrary to popular belief, exploitation of vulnerabl
79.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS requires a locked bootloader and supports using deveice attestation via the generic attestation functionality in the Android Open Source Project. Play integrity is an anticompetitive tool that ignores this, and artificially limit
80.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS is based on the Android Open Source Project and retains near perfect android app compatibility. It cannot call itself android for legal reasons, but the legal definition does not affect its app compatibility. Tools such as play i
81.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
The basis of your argument, that users want these developers to support another platform, does not make sense, because GrapheneOS does not require apps add explicit support for it. GrapheneOS has 99% android app compatibility. The issue is
82.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS maintains 99% android app compatibility. It does not require any additional funding or expenses to support GrapheneOS, and is actually more expensive to add these anticompetitive tools responsible for banning GrapheneOS. Graphene
83.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
The funny thing is, nothing needs to be done to support GOS. GOS has 99% android app compatibility. The issue isnt that GOS requires changes in the app to support it, rather, the tools they are using explicitly ban non-certified OSs. Dont l
84.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS has an official partnership with a large OEM (Motorola), has near perfect app compatibility, is constantly improving upon user experience, and has been well known and regarded in the privsec community and by many trusted security
85.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
It is far more likely that it is due to scams and grifts that pretend to be GrapheneOS, associated with GrapheneOS, or based on GrapheneOS, rather than GrapheneOS itself. Criminals tend to be not that bright.
86.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
No, them supporting e/OS corroborates the claim that their goal is not privacy or security.
87.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
Android similarly supports, and in fact uses, "proper" Linux. Android and its forks are Linux distributions. You can use a mainline kernel in Android just fine.
88.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
It is not ridiculous at all. GrapheneOS is not going to compromise the privacy and security of their users for the sake of spite for one specific company. It would be immature and irresponsible to make important choices based on spite rathe
89.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS does not depend on all of the features of pixel phones. The baseline requirements GrapheneOS has are generic, they are not built upon or tied to what pixel phones provide. Pixels actually exceed the baseline rather than barely me
90.
by HybridStatAnim8 4mo ago
GrapheneOS is not going to compromise on hardware security for the sake of spiting one specific company. GrapheneOS supports all viable platforms, and right now that is the pixel lineup. Additional device support requires OEMs step up their

More ›