Privacy

3105 readers

414 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

danielintempesta@programming.dev

GraphineOS being targeted by France (infosec.pub)

submitted 2 weeks ago by cm0002@suppo.fi to c/privacy@programming.dev

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://grapheneos.org/donate

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I like and use GrapheneOS but this is sounds like the founders persecution complex acting up again. This isn't the first time this has happened. The second you ask them for proof of any attack they will claim you are part of the attack. Apparently, they were triggered by some shitty french tabloid articles this time. I would wait for some more substantial info before rushing for the pitchforks.

[–] JustARegularNerd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Agreed - I have no real background knowledge of GOS but this message, as someone who loves daily driving it, this message just looks unprofessional at best, with accusations and drawn conclusions.

Edit (to expand): I expect better of GrapheneOS's team, in that this statement should just lay out factually what's happening with GrapheneOS, the type of legal request from French authorities, and let the audience connect any dots like any possible connection between iodeOS or /e/OS and that situation.

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

Aren't they moving their servers to the USA?

They are literally going from bad to worse if it is true.

[+] IceFoxX@lemmy.world -17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Good luck. I would have supported it if the team hadn't limited itself to fucking Google. Google has already made enough money from them to continue spreading that piece of shit Pixel... Now that people are slowly realizing how shitty Google is, they're switching over, but they're still extremely limited in their choices...

The team didn't care about most people... Most people don't care about the team.

[–] cm0002@suppo.fi 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Pixels are one of the very few remaining, well speced, easily accessible and decently popular, brands that allow the BL to be unlocked

[–] IceFoxX@lemmy.world -5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

And just as trustworthy as devices that are equivalent to desktop Hardware with UEFI, IntelME, etc.

But of course, an even worse data octopus is bringing a backdoor-free cell phone to market... how naive can you be... Uhh, now they're moving away from pixels... Suddenly there are campaigns against the security of graphene... That there was nothing there before is absolutely not surprising and trustworthy...

[–] cm0002@suppo.fi 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

And just as trustworthy as devices that are equivalent to desktop Hardware with UEFI, IntelME, etc.

So you mean like.....99% of all hardware in the world? Lol

If you're that hardcore into privacy or your threat model justifies it, then grapheneos isn't for you because you're already well prepared to make significant compromise and/or expense to pursue that goal.

GrapheneOS is more about leveling up more common people's privacy

Don't let perfection be the enemy of good

[–] IceFoxX@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

Especially lol... With Huawei, who knows what kind of uproar there was until they were completely banned and attempts were made to destroy them... Were they banned because they didn't have the backdoors installed as specified by the US? Couldn't the security vulnerabilities be mentioned because it was about the lack of their own US government backdoors? China also engages in espionage, but it is less able to use it directly against its citizens.

[–] IceFoxX@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

No, what I'm saying is that it's bullshit to argue that Pixel was used for security reasons. It should have been created from the outset not just for Pixel... As soon as that's the case, or planned, suddenly people are demanding backdoors... With Pixel, the question probably didn't arise... Because Google would NEVER release a phone that is secure for the user. What I'm saying is that graphene offers more security outside of Pixel. (Refers to US backdoors. Not to others.)

[–] Scoopta@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago

Look, I love FOSS and open platforms, to the point that I will only run proprietary software if it is sufficiently sandboxed AND there is no alternative. Unfortunately, hardware just isn't there right now. You basically cannot have a modern computing experience on fully open hardware. At some point you have to make a compromise with it, it's unfortunate but it's the world we live in. Typically that compromise is either all open software with closed hardware and firmware, or all open software and firmware, with incredibly old or restricted hardware (which is still closed). I have yet to see any solution that involves truly, fully open hardware and so you basically have to just draw an arbitrary line and say "this is good enough."