this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
1285 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

86304 readers
3483 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
1285
GrapheneOS says Google is making life harder for rival operating systems and devices (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 2 months ago by throws_lemy@reddthat.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
142 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 50 points 2 months ago (25 children)

I'm sure if other phones met GrapheneOS' security standards, they'd have already ported it to those phones.

Motorola may just be the dam finally breaking on that.

[–] neo2478@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago (19 children)

To be honest, I think for the average user most ROMs are more than secure enough. And from a privacy perspective a lot of the de googled ones are very good.

Grapheme has almost a cult following in a way that its all or nothing.

I'd rather give up a bit on security while preserving privacy, if it means my money does not support terrible companies.

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

But "give up a bit on security" doesnt preserve privacy that's the whole thing.

Also them being hypocritical for suggesting pixels isn't really true, its the only unlockable device where you can relock the bootloader afterwards which is necessary for the asbolute maximum security of the OS. *and also has secure element, among other important requirements for security.

Motorola will change this.

I personally don't cut corners when it comes to security and I don't think anyone should honestly.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

But “give up a bit on security” doesnt preserve privacy that’s the whole thing.

I gotta disagree with this. GrapheneOS has bought into the crappy smart phone threat model, but the most obvious way to preserve my privacy is to give me complete control over my device and let me tailor it as I see fit. This means root. GrapheneOS doesn't allow root access and that's horrible for privacy.

Sent from my GrapheneOS phone

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Root access is tricky because it can be less secure overall but I guess this is dependent on your use case.

I think you can still do it but you have to edit the rom beforehand so yeah not out of the box.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I once again cannot disagree more strongly. This is the BS that has been pushed by the mobile phone world. It couldn't be more wrong. Well designed root access to your own device would dramatically increase its security for those who chose to use it.

Here are a few things you simply cannot do on a phone and would be considered terrible in any other context:

  • Control system, root level services running on your device. The idea that you can't do this is a security nightmare. It is the single most basic security tenant I can think of that is grossly violated. You have no control over your device's attack surface
  • Control privileged non-root applications
  • Control network traffic. You have no low level control over your device's firewall without root. You want egress rules? Sorry.
  • Linux namespaces. You literally are banned from accessing the single greatest Linux security feature since UIDs and GIDs. Network namespace isolation? You can't do it. UID remapping? Nah. Mount namespaces? Nope.
  • SELinux policy. Android relies heavily on SELinux and you have no control over it at all.
  • Device handling. There was a great root exploit a long time ago with just a plugged in USB that would have never existed on devices that sanely disabled automounting.

There is so much more. I can't even imagine calling a device I had no root access to "secure" in a personal threat model. Business? Sure. Personal? God no. Not even close.

This is in addition to the privacy benefits.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)