Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker • Hacker News Board

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#151

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

exceptione wrote: post #78

kennywinker wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly are you suggesting? If i go help out at the graphene os project, that won’t change their leadership. Should I make my own fork?

The GOS (GrapheneOS) lead had responded to criticisms like yours that he gladly retreats inside his tech role if others would take it upon them to refute the claims from rivals. So if you are that balanced, normal person, you could take that work out of his hands. Or help fund a full time PR person. «In 2018, matters between Micay and Donaldson came to a head over Donaldson’s desire to pursue business deals with crim…

[deleted]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#152

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

cf100clunk wrote: post #41

kennywinker wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Immature maybe Yeah, that’s the issue. I don’t want people who behave immaturely, impulsively, or vindictively, having a key role in something as important as my phone os. I want stability, maturity, and thoughtfulness.

Mental health and wellness issues in high tech research and development are everywhere. I would suggest that you focus on the product and what it can/cannot do for you.

[deleted]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#153

Post by Avamander » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #142

Avamander wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It wasnt intelligence agency compromise, it was a business partner compromise, who intended to violate the privacy and security of their users. Nothing about this is done out of spite. Im not sure where youre getting that from. You just seem to be attacking peoples character for making the right choice given the circumstances.

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#154

Post by microtonal » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

busterarm wrote: post #23

Georgelemental wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I like that they come across as a little paranoid. That's exactly the attitude I want in the people protecting my privacy and security. I hope the developers lie awake at night, unable to fall asleep because terrified that someone somewhere is plotting to attack and exploit them

There's healthy paranoia and there's treating even casual commentary/criticism from anyone as an existential threat & coordinated attack...and responding to that with sustained, coordinated attack campaigns online. That's what Micay's history is. That's not healthy for any project.

Well, they have had to deal with multiple swattings, constant misinformation from some competitors (e.g. Murena's CEO doing interviews with various media where they insinuate that security-hardened systems like GrapheneOS are only for criminals and secret agents, complete with 'think of the children'-style arguments), and some local/national governments boosting the narrative that GrapheneOS is for criminals.

So I can understand why they are as defensive as they are.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#155

Post by HybridStatAnim8 » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:57 PM UTC

kennywinker wrote: post #46

cf100clunk wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mental health and wellness issues in high tech research and development are everywhere. I would suggest that you focus on the product and what it can/cannot do for you.

Suggest away. It’s still a factor in my decision making, because if I can’t trust the developers to behave well, i can’t trust the product to continue to do what it says it can do for me.

Destroying the signing keys in the midst of a hostile takeover is the responsible thing to do. Its for the safety of their users. Thats a commendable trait to have.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#156

Post by Avamander » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:58 PM UTC

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #141

Avamander wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They were compromised. Greed overtook the principles on which the project was founded and put the project at risk. They agreed from the start that Micay would own the project and hold the keys. They explicitly accepted those terms. Despite this, they tried a hostile takeover anyway. Forking and building a separate build isnt dual signing, its just forking. You can do that right now with GrapheneOS and its build guide…

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#157

Post by HybridStatAnim8 » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 6:59 PM UTC

goodpoint wrote: post #119

cf100clunk wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mental health and wellness issues in high tech research and development are everywhere. I would suggest that you focus on the product and what it can/cannot do for you.

When you have to trust the OS images generated by the authors it becomes a massive issue.

You always trust the developers of software. The only way to stop that is to not use the software.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#158

Post by Avamander » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 7:02 PM UTC

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #147

Avamander wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Thats a characteristic all modern OSs and modern apps have. You need to trust the key holders, always. Some people make their own builds for this reason. Depends on the threat model.

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#159

Post by Avamander » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 7:03 PM UTC

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #140

Avamander wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The claims arent vague, they are quite specific in what happened. This wasnt spiteful and this wasnt disgruntled. It was the logical choice given the circumstances.

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#160

Post by HybridStatAnim8 » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 7:03 PM UTC

Cortex5936 wrote: post #14

I love GrapheneOS and I use it daily for more than 2 years. However, and as Louis Rossmann pointed out in one of his videos, they really need to work on the "defensiveness" and "rants" of their communication. Even when they are 99% right most of the time, they sometimes don't come as mature and professional.

Louis Rossmann caused a lot of harm to GOS and blasted them publicly for trying to raise issues privately. That is disgusting behaviour. He then lied to his own viewers about no longer using GrapheneOS, lied about fears of a targeted update despite that not being possible, among a lot of other things. Note he also has an identity verified kiwifarms account.

GOS only defends themselves from attacks. Its not that they are misinterpreting what is an attack, there are really just that many attacks. It leaves little room for much else than defense. Nobody should have to deal with the inhumane level of attacks.