-> 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.
Exactly. The lead dev can come across as frustrated or confrontational on his social media posts but really the amount of noobs criticising Graphene for nonsense reasons or repeatedly bringing up other 'secure' OSes to him that he's already thoroughly debunked again and again like e/OS would drive me insane
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.
They literally said that French police are being told to treat Pixel phones as suspicious, which if true, shows why they're concerned.
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.
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.
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.
There are many more sides than those 2. GOS is screaming about a new "harrassment" campaign every week.
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?
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...
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.
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
Can we get a tldr of the "problematic behaviours"?
As a casual who bought a pixel 9 specifically for Graphene, I not too embedded in the culture/dramas, and surely many others reading here are similarly unfamiliar
His «problematic behaviour» is simply callingäoutäthings for what they are, with no soft wording.
They're being threatened by the entire French government. Its not drama. This is a very real situation.
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.
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
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.
Buying a used Pixel lets you use the hardware without funding Google.
*Directly funding Google. You are certainly participating in a secondary market for their product you purchase used.
I would prefer my privacy software to be developed by people like this, rather than people who are calm and flexible
Its all fine until their approach of privacy or security differs with what's best for the project, then there's no reasoning with them to fix it because they're not calm and flexible. Then ya gotta fork it and get everyone to transition to the new fork, and get developers back onboard, etc.
A crazy, but pointed example of something like this could be: the dude could just claim grapheneos going forward will not have networking anymore because thats an attack vector, and at that point the project doesn't even suite anyone's needs to be used as a smartphone anymore. How are you gonna reason with someone like this that, while keeping networking in the project is an attack vector, its necessary to be able to use the project for it's intended use case? You probably aren't
Not sure why this completly made up hypothetical scenario has so many upvotes. There is litteraly no evidence of this happening.
Even the opposite is the case, just recently with the preview releases which are opt-in.
The guy being paranoid asshole is passable, what I thought a really shit move is calling the community to create alt accs to harass people from other projects and saying he will ban anyone that complains. The Rossmann video is quite shocking, you see the dev's complete disassociation with reality... yeah the code is open, but how many people outside the project are really auditing it? Even people inside the project, are they auditing each others' work? If the guy doesn't get treatment, how long until he decides his own userbase is after him?
I've accepted for a while that the lead developer is extremely paranoid and could probably genuinely do with healthcare intervention. Like in much open source development I think it isn't helped by overwork and burnout, so I hope that at some point Graphene gets a better governance structure which spreads responsibility and which hopefully will limit the incessant drama that only harms the project. I don't see him being willing to give up his grip, but I can always hope.
I'll continue to use Graphene unless things go entirely off the rails though, as it is a great OS and I don't really think there are many great alternatives.
Such drama has been going on for years. I wouldn't read too much into it.
GOS is a great project. This is a FUD campaign.
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)
GrapheneOS has always had a massive PR problem and crazy leadership unfortunately.
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.
pine for linux phones
I see what you did there.
Who benefits?
Who benefits from sowing a narrative around "drama", "accusation", and/or "paranoia". Seriously.
I think given the following circumspect; GrapheneOS's reaction, to move project pieces out of potential hostile environments/jurisdiction, is perfectly reasonable.
France's Support for EU “Chat Control”, scanning proposals. France has been one of the governments most supportive of EU‑level proposals that would require scanning of communications and devices for illegal content.
The general French framing and approach to cybercrime. As in other EU countries, French authorities are pushing for: Expanded powers to compel cooperation from service providers, and developers. Strong rhetoric against tools that are seen as systematically obstructing investigations.
Could you post what you are talking about to give some context?
Unless there’s drama in my updates I don’t particularly care too much about drama.
I don't care about the community, I just care about the experience of using it.
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.
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.
They're literally working with a manufacturer to make non-google phones. Tethered to google is a wild mischaracterization.
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.
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
Yes, before Google made phone on it's own they supported some Nexus devices (google-partnered) and the Samsung Galaxy S4.
You're not the only one. It's one of my biggest reasons for staying away from it
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.
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)