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