this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
35 points (62.6% liked)

Privacy

31951 readers
625 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

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.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I see quite a few people claiming that Graphene OS is the only way to stay private on Android or that anything but Graphene OS is insecure. In this post, I will describe why I personally do not care for Graphene OS and some alternatives I would suggest.

First off, let's address the security features of Graphene OS. A lot of the security of Graphene OS comes from AOSP itself. In fact, AOSP has a very good track record. If you get malware on your device, you most likely can just uninstall it. For reference, here is the Android security page: https://source.android.com/docs/security/features

There are some Graphene OS unique security features. For instance, it has a hardened kernel and restricts access. I think this is actually pretty useful but I haven't seen a need for it much in the real world. The tightened permissions are nice, and I think that is the main benefit of Graphene OS over AOSP. It is also nice that device identifiers are restricted from a privacy perspective. However, from my perspective, you should not run apps that are bad for privacy. Running it in the web browser will be more secure than bare metal could ever be.

One place I strongly disagree with Graphene OS is the sandboxed Google services framework. They say having Google in a sandbox is more secure. It may be more secure, but it isn't going to be as private as MicroG. The real benefit of MicroG is that it is community-built. It isn't a black box like Google framework, and any data sent back is randomized. I think it is a mistake for Graphene OS not to have support for it, even if it is also run in a sandbox.

Another thing I have noticed is that Graphene OS prioritizes security above all else. That doesn't mean it isn't private as it itself is great for privacy. However, if you start installing privacy-compromising applications such as Gmail and Instagram, your privacy is quickly lost. The apps may not be able to compromise the OS, but for them to be used, they need permissions. To be fair, this is a problem that is not unique to Graphene OS, but I think its attempts to be closer to Google Android make it more tempting for people to stick to poor privacy choices.

I think other ROMs such as Calyx OS take the ethical component much more seriously. Unlike Graphene, it promotes F-droid and FOSS software like MicroG. Graphene purely focuses on security while Calyx OS focuses on privacy and freedom. On first setup, it offers to install privacy-friendly FOSS applications such as F-droid and the like. I realize that MicroG is not perfectly compatible, and some people need apps, but I think alternatives are going to always be better.

One of the most annoying parts about Graphene OS is the development team and some of the community. They refuse to take criticism and have been known to delete any criticism of Graphene OS. Not only that, they have a history of trying to harm any project or person they don't like.

Here is a page that isn't written by me that sums it up: https://opinionplatform.org/grapheneos/index.html I think their take is fairly extreme, but I agree with them in many ways. I also understand how upsetting it can be to be censored.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Calyx doesn't have storage scopes or notification piped to my knowledge

[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Right, but which ones do it check?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)
[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I already explained to you that this is not true

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/12579929

But you don't seem to accept facts

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I disagree. Calyx gets security patches in a reasonable time. Nothing that you have showed me gives me any reason to doubt that.

[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago

A month is not a reasonable time for ASB, go talk to any AOSP engineer who designed this system. ASB patches specifically exist to quickly respond to emerging threats, in order to keep your system secure and free of vulnerabilites.

You linked to https://source.android.com/docs/security/features

Either you read the documentation, understand the Android security model and accept the fact that 1 month is not a reasonable time for ASB patches, or you continue to spread misinformation. I'm not quite sure if it's because of a lack of understanding, or simply because of ignorance. As Hanlon’s Razor goes:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity