The drama and accusations the GrapheneOS developers are spewing and engaging in are giving me a bad taste in the mouth and make me doubt the OS’s reliability am I the only one?
The drama and accusations the GrapheneOS developers are spewing and engaging in are giving me a bad taste in the mouth and make me doubt the OS’s reliability am I the only one?
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
Not being familiar with the controveries referenced in this thread…
All of this reminds me very much of OpenBSD and Theo de Radt (?) back in the 98-02 era.
OpenBSD is certainly not the most popular *nix today, but it’s probably the most secure.
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.
Has fairphone 6 foss firmware? and foss drivers?
No, there is no modern smartphone like that, yet AFAIK.
sry but which parts are then FOSS about it, compared to pixel?
or do you just mean google itself? (which i would understand i guess)
Google itself. GrapheneOS bridgea the gap but still…