The drama and accusations the GrapheneOS developers are spewing and engaging in are giving me a bad taste in the mouth and make me doubt the OS’s reliability am I the only one?

  • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    -> make most secure os in the world

    -> call others out for not keeping up with the security updates like e/os

    -> french goverment decides to make security illegal and specifically targets graphene

    -> e/os fanboys keep shitting on graphene

    “This guy is way too dramatic”

    yall the reason we cant have anything good.

  • azuth@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    In my opinion both the evident ego of of the project lead as well as his naivety (tethering the project to Google) are huge red flags despite any assumed technical superiority.

    • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      it is not their fault that google makes the only smartphone with secure hardware that can be used nor that you are incapable of understanding that.

    • FG_3479@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They chose Google because they are the only major OEM to allow you to relock the bootloader after installing a custom ROM. Samsung, Motarola, Huawei, Xiaomi etc all don’t.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        In addition to this, they are working with an OEM to produce their own Graphene phones. It sounds like they’ve made significant progress on that front so I’m hopeful.

    • TheOneCurly@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They’re literally working with a manufacturer to make non-google phones. Tethered to google is a wild mischaracterization.

      • azuth@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        No it’s not. This is a recent development that has not yet actually come to fruition. It may exist in 2026.

        Before that GrapheneOS dismissed any idea of targeting other phones than the ones build by one of the most anti-privacy companies on earth, that seeks to consolidate control of Android.

        • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Before that GrapheneOS dismissed any idea of targeting other phones than the ones build by one of the most anti-privacy companies on earth, that seeks to consolidate control of Android.

          Litteraly saya on the website the requirements that a phone has to meet. Go make the phone that meets them instead of only complaining.

          • azuth@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I don’t need a phone, GrapheneOS needs one now that Google is trying to force them out. I wonder if their new phone will actually meet all the requirements, if it comes out.

            As for complaining, GrapheneOS is the one bitching about other Android versions existing since forever. Now, they 've started making unsubstantiated claims of them attacking them somehow.

            • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I think if it does not meet the requierments then they wont support new phones at all, but who knows

              GrapheneOs is calling them out for their lack of security. Like this one: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private

              i think this is a good thing, users should be aware of it. And they should fix it.

              I wish someone would find flaws in grapheneOs, and complain so thex can fix it too. Instead of complaining about the personality of one of the directors.

              • azuth@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                No GrapheneOS is not just calling them out on lack of security.

                It’s apparently from their discord, so it took me a while to find it again.

                It’s not about the personality of it’s directors, it’s about it’s effect on the (alternative) Android ecosystem as a whole, which is not just about security but also privacy and user control.

                Even with regards to security, their choice of limiting devices apparently makes their users targets for extra scrutiny and harassment. That does have actual implications for people whose threat model includes authorities unless they already are guaranteed to be targets.

                • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  thank you, i think i saw that somwhere before. is it really true that the haressment is made up? like i honestly dont know

                  and does it really has an impact on the eco system? i never really thought abou it…

                  but i think it is also for privacy top. user control not tho

                  And i guess fair point that this is a security flaw considering the phone users beeing targeted… But like i still kinda think hardware backed security is important and also very crucial is, that the more devices they supporty the less recourses they have… I think considering how long it is since pixel 10 released and it is still not supported, would make me guess that they dont have like any free time really to do it at all ^^

                  and like there are also no relevant projects i think that fork it to other devices, so i dont know, i mean somebody could start doing that but i guess that shows how hard it is to do

        • NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          This isn’t true, they’ve supported other devices in the past. They’ve been Pixel-focused for the security features that other manufacturers haven’t offered

          • azuth@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes, before Google made phone on it’s own they supported some Nexus devices (google-partnered) and the Samsung Galaxy S4.

  • CoyoteFacts@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It mainly makes me pine for linux phones. I think Graphene is the best we have at the moment in the mobile space, but that’s far more of a testament to our lack of options than how valuable Graphene is. I have no doubts that we’ll eventually kick Graphene to the curb when it stops being useful, so I’m not overly concerned with its future. Worst-case, I think many of us would be just fine on any other AOSP rom for a few extra years until linux phones can come save us all.

    • sobchak@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I could be wrong, but I think Linux would be horrible for the kind of security you’d want in a smartphone. At least that’s what I read from the GrapheneOS folks…

      • CoyoteFacts@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        As far as I’m aware this is true (same with a lot of desktop linux distros), but I’m more interested in freeing myself from Android at the moment. I’m sure we can get there eventually w/r/t security, but it takes time, and we’ll never get there if we don’t start moving.

      • gtr@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Depends on what your threat model is. Sure a fully locked down mobile OS is more secure, but I also care about freedom and privacy. It’s not all black and white.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I wouldn’t trust a sane person to do a ultra private phone OS.

    You need the paranoia, you need to see the shadows move to do it right.

  • erebion@news.erebion.eu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I also feel concerned about GrapheneOS. Here’s why.

    I got banned from the GrapheneOS Matrix chat simply for asking a question, it was worded similar to this:

    “Hey there! GrapheneOS is cool. I noticed CalyxOS added support for eSIM, are you planning to add that as well?”

    The post got deleted, I thought I had not sent it and posted it again. It was deleted again. I asked something along the lines of “Wait, where has my question regading eSIM support and doing the same as CalyxOS gone? Seems to have disappeared, lol”.

    THAT was also deleted.

    Then I posted something along the lines of “Huh, my questions seem to be disappearing”.

    That was NOT deleted.

    Then I asked something like “Anyway, are there plans to add eSIM support just like CalyxOS? :)”.

    That was ALSO deleted.

    I got a private message from a mod saying I was banned.

    That was alle the interaction I ever had with the GrapheneOS project. I might have started contributing, but I could not even ask a simple question. It seems that they don’t like it if you mention any other custom ROM, I guess.

    (This has been a while ago, so I don’t remember my precise wording)

    • Jay🚩@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Which channel on Matrix ? They seems to have many ones so mods in general if questions get asked in wrong channels ban which is weird I would expect them to reply that go to #relevant room and ask there

  • exu@feditown.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    You’re not the only one. It’s one of my biggest reasons for staying away from it

  • Matt@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t care about the community, I just care about the experience of using it.

  • stupud@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Honesty, I think graphene is a honeypot. Glowies usually dont moan that much when they can’t breack into things

  • ganymede@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    some of it is kind of inevitable when you see how far ahead from everyone else they are technically and when people shitting on their work just aren’t at their (technical) level it seems to be very draining. and eventually lead to dramas.

  • ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Too be fair (not French but aware of their culture and government) the French are pretty smart, for people and don’t fuck around with serious issues. I bet you if they got access, it wouldn’t be long till issue a long warning before a ban if it were to cause harm to others.

  • upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Not as bad a taste as the French government is giving me.

    If its do I trust GOS or a confirmed pro chat control governments side of the story, its an easy choice.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There are many more sides than those 2. GOS is screaming about a new “harrassment” campaign every week.

            • artyom@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Look at their social accounts. Half their posts are complaining about some sort of “harrassment”. They claim their branding was being used to sell these devices without any evidence. They claim this is a “state-sponsored attack” without any evidence.

      • upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Their past dramas are irrelevant to this issue.

        Giving into a straw man argument such as their other dramas somehow devalue what’s going on now, only plays into the French propaganda campaign.

        • artyom@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          They’re not irrelevant, they’re both symptoms of the same problem. The Developer Who Cried Wolf.

      • pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Knowing nothing of the situations details, when you’re a thorn in the side of the most powerful interests on the planet,it seems reasonable that a small group would face deliberate, concentrated pressure from business to legal and the state and any other mechanism. That’s generally what power does, assuming the little guy isn’t subsumed.

        What is the evidence of foul play by GOS, or why would they not have a pretty extreme bias of support?

        • PiraHxCx@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I think everyone would love some evidence here, but so far it was one journalist from one newspaper talking to one cop that said criminals are using GrapheneOS because it destroys evidence. Afaik Daniel didn’t post any notification, inquiry or general communication he received from any government official or agency…

        • artyom@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          from business to legal and the state and any other mechanism.

          I’m not referring to any of those “mechanisms”, I’m referring to basically the entirety of the privacy/security/sovereign communities. They disparage other Android “privacy” platforms and communities on a regular basis, then claim to be victims of “targeted attacks” from those communities. Louis Rossman and Techlore are also 2 people who have also been accused of “harassment” without evidence. Just for starters.

  • Libb@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The main reason why I decided not to use it, despite it being an obvious choice. But I’m also that kind of old dude that is not very receptive to drama… this may explain ;)