LineageOS 23

You have it backwards. It's smartphones other than iPhones and Pixels with the front door open due to lack of basic security patches and protections. You're making unsubstantiated claims about backdoors not backed by any evidence. Those claims can be made about ANY available hardware. Using devices without basic privacy/security patches for firmware/drivers, an end-of-life Linux kernel and lack of important hardware-based security features is the opposite of being serious about security.

The reason GrapheneOS has an OEM partner we're working with towards their at least one of their upcoming devices meeting our requirements is because Pixels are the only currently viable options. If other OEMs were making reasonably secure devices with support for using another OS on their own, we wouldn't need OEM partnerships. The currently available devices from our OEM partner don't meet our security features or update requirements, but a subset of their future devices will. GrapheneOS will be officially supported so it will be easier to provide a fully production quality OS and we'll be able to do lower level privacy and security improvements at a hardware, firmware and driver level.

Most banking apps work on GrapheneOS. Around 10% ban using any alternate OS, but a small subset of those specifically permit GrapheneOS now in addition to Google certified devices with the stock OS.

It's nearly the same permission model as Android 16 beyond having Storage Scopes and Contact Scopes as easy to use alternatives with fine-grained control along with Sensors and Network toggles. It's otherwise the same.

If you're talking about the exploit protection features with toggles, that's not part of the permission model and the defaults don't break any apps without serious bugs. Apps with memory corruption bugs can be broken by the defaults, which only requires turning on the compatibility toggle for the app. People don't need to understand the finer grained settings.

The default 4x5 icon grid has the same icon sizes as the stock Pixel OS, which can't be adjusted there either.

The vast majority of issues people have with GrapheneOS are issues with Android and Android apps which are not specific to GrapheneOS.

> LineageOS can have that, at the owner's preference. Graphene explicitly forbids it.

That's not true.

You can use apps like RethinkDNS providing local monitoring and filtering of connections while still supporting using a VPN on either LineageOS or GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS fixes 5 different kinds of outbound VPN leaks which are still present on LineageOS, which is quite relevant to this. There are no known outbound VPN leaks remaining for GrapheneOS as long as Private DNS is set to Off.

The reason GrapheneOS doesn't include the finer grained network toggles LineageOS does is because they're leaky and do not work correctly. Our Network toggle doesn't have those kinds of leaks. We do plan to split up the Network toggle a bit but doing that correctly is much harder and comes with some limitations since it still has to block generic INTERNET permission access if anything is disabled and only permit cases which are specially handled.

GrapheneOS has Storage Scopes, Contact Scopes, a Network toggle and a Sensors toggle not available on LineageOS along with other app sandbox and permission model improvements. Users have much more control of their apps and data on GrapheneOS.

LineageOS provides privileged access for Google apps while we take a different approach.

> It would be "more secure" to allow backing up apps and all their data. This would mitigate the damage of ransomware. Graphene, again, forbids it (following google guidelines prioritizing the wishes of an app's developer over the device owner).

That's also not true. LineageOS has the same limitations and backup system.

Both GrapheneOS and LineageOS use Seedvault with the same kind of integration. Since the Android 12 API level, apps can only opt-out of cloud backups and existing exclusion files only apply to cloud backups. There's a new exclusion system which can be used to explicitly omit files from device-to-device backups such as Google's device transfer system, but that's rarely used and it exists for good reason due to device-specific data that's not portable.

> There are many such examples. Lineage is philosophically owned by the person who installed it onto the phone. Graphene is owned by the Graphene devs, NOT the phone owner. Sometimes the Graphene devs purposefully choose to let software on the device restrict the valid owner of that device.

You haven't raised any examples of GrapheneOS restricting what can be done in a way that's not done by LineageOS. All you did is bring up a feature approached differently by both operating systems where the most flexible solutions such as RethinkDNS are available for both. If people want to modify either GrapheneOS or LineageOS, they can do it for each. We provide very good build documentation for production releases with proper signing. We strongly recommend against using Magisk but people do modify GrapheneOS with that projects and use it. Our recommendations are not restrictions on what people can do.

GrapheneOS never had a stance against implementing RCS and has supported RCS at an OS level for years. The issue was that the only available RCS app in practice is Google Messages and it requires privileged access for Google Play services, which goes against the sandboxed Google Play approach. We worked around it by making it so that the access granted to Google Messages when it's set as the SMS/MMS/RCS app also applies to Google Play services where part of the implementation is done.

iOS does not currently implement end-to-end encryption for RCS. End-to-end encryption for RCS is exclusive to conversations between Google Messages users. Apple has said they'll implement the new MLS end-to-end encryption for RCS but has not done it and has provided no timeline for doing it. It took them a very long time to implement basic RCS support and this will likely take a long time too. Google Messages has not yet moved to the new MLS encryption, but it will need to do that too in order for iOS implementing it to provide end-to-end encryption across them.

The reason GrapheneOS doesn't support these additional devices is because they don't provide proper privacy/security patches or security features. Pixels are currently the only devices with proper alternate OS support with a reasonable level of security. That's why we have an OEM partner we're working with towards their future devices meeting our requirements. The hardware requirements are listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. Pixels provide 7 years of proper updates while other devices do not.

Fairphone 4 and Pixel 6 were released in October 2021. Fairphone 4 is on the soon to be end-of-life Android 13 and already end-of-life Linux 4.19 kernel branch. Pixel 6 is on Android 16 QPR1 and the Linux 6.1 kernel branch since it moved to it from Linux 5.10. Fairphone has 1-2 month delays for partial security backports to older releases and years of delays for major OS updates. This does impact another OS supporting the hardware. Fairphone 5 is using the Linux 5.4 kernel that's end-of-life in December 2025 with no plans to migrate to a new kernel. Fairphone devices are missing the security features required by GrapheneOS too including but not limited to MTE (hardware memory tagging) which is the basis for Apple's recent launch of Memory Integrity Enforcement but has been more heavily used by GrapheneOS since October 2023.

GrapheneOS is a much different kind of project than LineageOS and other AOSP-based operating systems. The privacy and security focused comparison table at https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm shows that quite clearly.