Live data from Hacker News

Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

grapheneos.social

441–444 of 444 posts

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can strongly disagree but it doesn’t change the fact that the comment by the OP is objectively true. Especially in this political climate it’s insane to recommend people switch to a phone OS that can be pwned via hardware or software means in virtually zero time versus something like GOS + a Pixel or an iPhone.

Can all the Linux servers also be pwned in no time? This is a huge exaggeration. This requires the users to know what they are doing and running -- with this I agree. But it's doable today.

No.

The hardware and software security of Android/iOS/iPadOS/GOS devices are leagues ahead of Linux servers in all aspects and it’s not even close (but they also serve different purposes so to some extent I’m not sure how 1:1 this comparison is). However, this discussion focuses on desktop style Linux distros which is what these phones are running which have inadequate security. Desktop Linux is inferior security-wise to a server environment where each process/app is running as it’s own user etc. Desktop-style Linux phones also have virtually zero hardware security versus the alternatives.

It doesn’t matter if a user knows what they are doing. For example installing so-called “trusted” apps means they’re only trustworthy at that moment in time and not forward-looking. All it takes is one supply chain or runtime security exploit. Software security is also extremely poor with a lack of comprehensive sandboxing and so on, I would just read the grapheneos accounts replies on here since they’re writing entire novels on this.

I mean even GrapheneOS shows how relevant this is with Samuel Tunick, on the front page today. If he’d had a desktop Linux phone that was seized from him while in AFU, sure it would be “private” but there would be virtually nothing stopping officials from running through his entire phone since so many of these desktop Linux distros rely on poor security elements if any on top of FDE with LUKS so your entire device is basically exposed and unencrypted after the first unlock.

This whole comment was borderline stream of consciousness so I apologize if anything is unclear here.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#442
post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? This seems like a forum with a lot of early adopters and a lot of late adopters still use browsers, email, text messages. Like, let me guess that your credit cars isn't capitol one. Not that it should be, but that would be more "normie".

In Europe at least, most banks require IOS or Android. Even to login into the web Frontend.

"Most" seems quite inaccurate. There is a Graphene OS banking app compatibility database [here](https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/banking-apps-compat-report); it is not easy to filter for European banks, but the [incompatible](https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/banking-apps-compat-report/is...) ones are less than 10% of the total [reports](https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/banking-apps-compat-report/is...).

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#443
post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Traditional desktop Linux heavily involves big tech companies including IBM (Red Hat). AOSP has a massive amount of non-Google companies and individuals working on operating systems based on it. It would survive without Google. You're misinformed about security preview patches. It has nothing to do with Google being hostile. Additionally, our security preview releases have regularly included patches for components no…

> AOSP has a massive amount of non-Google companies and individuals working on operating systems based on it.

based on is the important part here. Yes, AOSP would survive without Google. But as long as Google is in control of AOSP, it controls the direction in which AOSP and all downstream projects are headed. Because of breaking changes in AOSP, there is a cost in maintaining downstream changes. So downstream projects cannot veer off too far, short of a hard fork.

> You're misinformed about security preview patches. It has nothing to do with Google being hostile.

Does it not? From the 2025092500 GrapheneOS release notes: "We strongly disagree with broadly distributing patches to OEMs 3-4 months before the official publication date. It further delays getting patches to users and sophisticated attackers will have no issue getting the patches from one of many people at Android OEMs with early access."

Sounds pretty hostile to me.

Re: Devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027

#444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorola's flagships are going to be their first devices providing the updates and hardware-based security features required by GrapheneOS. It will come to lower end devices but it will take longer. Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 is the first Qualcomm SoC with hardware memory tagging (MTE). MTE isn't even available on the slightly lower end Snapdragon 8 Gen 5. A lot of the SoC security features are segmented based on price…

Replying to you here in hopes you see this question. I'm one of those people who is affected by PWM on OLED screens. I tried a Pixel 9 Pro XL and it didn't work for me. Have a Razr 2024 which mostly works and that's thanks to some custom PWM settings from Motorola. Will Graphene OS have these custom PWM mitigation settings on 2027 Motorolas?

If anyone runs across this comment in the future, the answer is: YES. On Mastodon, they told me they will have full support for Motorola's custom PWM settings.
Post reply on HN