Why we no longer sell phones with GrapheneOS – Private Phone Shop \ stacker news ~privacy

Why we no longer sell phones with GrapheneOS – Private Phone Shop privatephoneshop.com/why-we-no-longer-sell-phones-with-grapheneos/

2123 sats \ 19 comments \ @kepford 22 Dec 2023 privacy

view all related items

1011 sats \ 2 replies \ @chairman_pretense 22 Dec 2023

Bit of a rambling post for a fairly weak argument. The Graphene devs are right to call out people selling devices which are end of life or imminently about to be -- these devices won't receive security updates from AOSP or Graphene.

More generally they're correct to call out sellers of pre-flashed devices, as the integrity can never be as trusted.

The addendum about whether or not Daniel Micay is still involved in the project is just idle speculation and unrelated to their core grievance. Had Daniel not called them out, they would have no issue with his involvement either way.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @geisterde 22 Dec 2023

Yea, for all the references to "no true Scotsman" we have some no-shit scotsman in the graphene devs; everyone has a personality problem, and the point they are making is totally valid. If someone has to have graphene installed for them at an upcharge, it can be assumed they arent aware of the risks of buying a phone that isnt receiving regular updates, so it seems a bit scummy. Even taking someone needing a secure burner, they wouldnt be spending extra money to have graphene preinstalled.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @faithandcredit 22 Dec 2023

it would be nice if the hardware would ossify one day?

123 sats \ 2 replies \ @itsrealfake 22 Dec 2023

imo, selling GrapheneOS is a scam. it's incredibly easy to install.

anybody who expects to benefit from GrapheneOS without having the bare-minimum ability to install GrapheneOS is (in my humble-as-can-be opinion) being silly.

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @Eobard 22 Dec 2023

deleted by author

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 22 Dec 2023

deleted by author

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 22 Dec 2023

The Graphene project really seems to try to make enemies out of allies. Its sad.

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Spiralnebel 22 Dec 2023

People who use out of service devices miss the part that a smartphone do not need only a rom aka operating system but also drivers. The modem is a not flashable and if it do not receive updates anymore its potentially vulnerable for exploits. Those devices should NOT be used as an online devices! Installing GrapheneOS on such devices give the falls believe that they are secure but thats NOT the case! Don‘t put the blame on GrapheneOS - Its Goole police that do not support updates over a bigger period. Google promises to support their newest devices for 8 years, so think about spending some money for a new device and donate to GrapheneOS for their great work all of us benefit from.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @m00ninite 22 Dec 2023

If Google would make phones for people with human-sized hands, I'd upgrade from my pixel 5. Until they do that, I'm not budging. I'm more concerned about privacy from big tech than I am about security anyways.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 22 Dec 2023

If you spend any time in the Graphene issue queue you will see the kind of immature childish behavior. It honestly is the main reservation I have about their OS.

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @ryu 22 Dec 2023

>graphene makes a reasonable take pertaining to sellers that sell older phones being worse than traditional scammers, getting you and your company in your feelings >when reached out directly to stop selling soon-to-be EOL devices with graphene preinstalled, block them not thinking they'd insist further on an alt account >once called out publicly in one of the few instances where micay didn't initiate the bridge burning, make up bullshit excuses about why your scummy practices aren't scummy when you partake in them

I very much dislike Micay, and the fact his bullshit (including essentially lying about resigning, as highlighted by the sole valid point PPS made about that) heavily affects Graphene and its standing with those who want a private Android OS. This is one of the few times Graphene had a legitimate right to go on the attack.

21 sats \ 5 replies \ @kepford OP 22 Dec 2023

Honestly this whole thing is ridiculous. Your OS is OSS you have no standing to say someone is profiting off your work as a negative. They are giving their work away.

I shouldn't be surprised but people acting like it is easy to install Graphene are out of touch with the average person and their time commitments. Sure, its easy for someone with some tech savy and time. For the average person it is not. There are tradeoffs with buying a preflashed phone but these people are likely coming from Google phones.

The Graphene folks come off as cry babies to me. Its clear that they need some help with communication. Many see their behavior and will say nope. Never gonna trust their code.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @ryu 22 Dec 2023

In regards to installing Graphene, it's far easier than Calyx or any other custom OS (this comes from someone who's installed both) since it's the only project with a web-based installer.

I've seen posts on Nostr of people installing GrapheneOS on a Pixel 8/8 Pro from an older Pixel or another Android phone, you can't say that for any other OS derivative.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford OP 22 Dec 2023

It has gotten much better. Agree with you on that. Still, its a hurdle many will never even try to overcome. People like us are the exception.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford OP 22 Dec 2023

I even offer to do it for friends and family and so far no one is interested. Being able to buy a phone that is set up out of to box ready to go is not an unreasonable thing. Few people even install an OS on a computer.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ryu 22 Dec 2023

I'd say Graphene itself should take the Calyx approach, while encouraging usage of Auditor to ensure there was no tampering (at least at the software level).