293
Switched to GrapheneOS today
(grapheneos.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
293 points (95.9% liked)
Privacy
31866 readers
321 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
If they can get it to work on non-Google devices, I will consider it. Right now Graphene compatibility is extremely limited. Besides, I basically have to give Google money to avoid Google.
🤪
Yeah, it's kind of wild and ironic that one of the most private OSes requires a Google phone.
Not only that but it relies on the Pixel's black box "Titan" security chip, that google pinky-promised to open source but never did...
The Titan security chip is not a black box. The Titan M1 gas been scrutinazed by blackhat: https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3503921.3503922
Just because something is not open source does not mean you can't verify it (no, i'm not shilling closed slurce; no i don't think closed > open; no i don't think closed source is more secure)
'Just reverse engineer it bro'
That work was not available when GrapheneOS was developed, and is not necessarily applicable to devices released after those findings... I still consider it a black box.
What do you mean ? This has nothing to do with GrapheneOS in the first place (which by the way has been created in 2014. The article i linked refers to 2021).
Reverse engineering is a thing. It always has been. If every piece of closed source was a blackbox how can you explain exploitation ? How can bad actors exploit Windows, MacOS, CPU firmware and so on ? Your argument here is not practical. Also, why should Google put a backdoor inside a chip ? They already get every information they what directly from the people agreeing to use their software. So, why bother ? Moreover, every phone on the market has closed source firmware.