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?

  • erebion@news.erebion.eu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours 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)

  • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours 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.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours 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.

  • stupud@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

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

  • majster@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Its nutjobs like them that are pushing progress further. State security apparatus doesn’t want to work by law. That can be observed worldwide.

    French went after Telegram even though it doesn’t market itself primarily for security. It was just that some public channels went against their strategic objectives and they felt the need to bruteforce their way.

    So GrapheneOS is very right to be nervous and pack their bags before they come knocking at the door.

    • FG_3479@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 hours ago

      They literally said that French police are being told to treat Pixel phones as suspicious, which if true, shows why they’re concerned.

      • leftascenter@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Having a secure phone / secure messaging has been seen as suspicious by the police in france for several years now.

        This has already been used against eco activists to detain them preemptively and a few times to increase charges towards terrorism / organized crime when possible.

  • Catalyst@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    12 hours ago

    They’re being threatened by the entire French government. Its not drama. This is a very real situation.

    • leftascenter@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      All secured OSes and messaging systems are threatened by European governments / EU institutions at the moment, and the French government has been doing so for a few years.

      This is not a grapheneOS only issue and it is not new.

        • leftascenter@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Being French, I am not knowledgeable enough beyond Europe 😁.

          For context, Germany recently did a last minute blockage of a European move towards mass surveillance of messaging (called chat control), and a v2 is already being prepared for another attack on privacy at European level.

          We are living in interesting times.

  • PrivacyDingus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Two things can simultaneously be true, Daniel can be an individual who engages in very problematic behaviours and GrapheneOS can still be the most-secure and reliable OS out there.

    • jherazob@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Basically this. The project head might be a bit too paranoid, bellicose and problematic, but at this time a phone with GrapheneOS seems to be by far the safest way to have a smartphone, and the project head’s personality might be a part on this as their stated objective is to be able to resist state-level actors, you likely need someone who’s more than a bit “out there” to have the right mind for this

  • azuth@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    15 hours 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.

    • FG_3479@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 hours 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
        3
        ·
        5 hours 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
      9
      ·
      11 hours 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
        9
        ·
        11 hours 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
          2
          ·
          5 hours 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
            1
            ·
            4 hours 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
              2
              ·
              4 hours 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
                2
                ·
                4 hours 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
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours 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
          5
          ·
          7 hours 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
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

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

  • Matt@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    16 hours ago

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

  • upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours 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
      8
      ·
      9 hours ago

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

      • pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours 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
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours 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
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours 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.

  • ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours 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.

  • N.E.P.T.R@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    While I do find GOS drama a bit annoying, they aren’t wrong about the lacking security of many AOSP forks. iode and /e/OS have a history late patches for security vulnerabilities in both the OS (https://web.archive.org/web/20241231003546/https://divestos.org/pages/patch_history) and for the forked apps they bundle with it. Each Android monthly and Chromium patches usually contains dozens High Risk CVEs, so taking a month or 2 is unacceptable. Neither are good for privacy or security.

    See a comparison between some Android ROMs here, especially noting the update speed section: https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

    • majster@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I understand security implications but I’ll be getting Fairphone 6 with /e/OS over Pixel with GrapheneOS. For me FOSS ranks higher than HW security features, and buying Google device goes against FOSS principles.

  • exu@feditown.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    17 hours ago

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

  • warm@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    19 hours ago

    GrapheneOS has always had a massive PR problem and crazy leadership unfortunately.

    • pdxfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Unlike say Google? Why is there an expectation that a group working completely against some of the most powerful actors on the planet, openly, against the grain of mainstream society often and having to bear that responsibility would be charming, at ease?

      I cannot even begin to imagine the mental stress from constantly having to think ahead, in a global David and Goliath, in a maze designed to get you to give up. I probably have half the issues the GOS team does and I can’t claim it’s for doing anything on the scale of what they are.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        You are mistaking what I am saying. I have nothing against the project as whole and the mission is fantastic.

        They just have zero PR skills, don’t know when to keep their mouth shut or how to communicate properly when they need to. A little bit of consultation would go a long way for them. Obviously I am not expecting Google levels of PR/marketing, but it’s not great to see just ranting Discord/matrix messages. If it wasn’t an issue, these posts wouldn’t exist at all.