Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

discuss.grapheneos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 653 posts

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#511

Post by qingcharles »

subscribed wrote: post #463
edwcross wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it affect the photo quality? It used to require letting go of the default photo app and thus a downgrade in photo processing.

I mean...... Google Camera has slightly different approach to low light photos and much better panorama mode, which means you can just install it and use with network access denied. I mainly use native camera (good in most cases, can be brought up immediately with double power button press, from locked), Google camera (rarely), BlackMagic for when I need control over videos and ProShot when I need control over images…

That really pissed me off when I found the only app that can access the full output of the sensor on Samsung is their own shitty app. WTF.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#512

Post by port11 »

teekert wrote: post #293
sivers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha! Me too! Exact same. Bought a Pixel 10. Intended to do the default Android for a while. But it was filled with ads for “Wicked” which had me looking at my phone with a sneer on my face I couldn't erase - as if someone had smeared feces all over it and threw it on my bed. So I jumped straight to GrapheneOS, which was way easier and less extreme than I had been warned. So beautifully minimal, with no crap. Now my ph…

iOS is also going into this direction, just open the AppStore, it’s all the cheapest most horrible apps. Temu (shop like you don't give a s* about the planet), addictive AI Waifu’s (who needs human interaction anyway), clean your stuff but fake-time-wasting style (it's free dopamine!), search option’s first hit is often scammy (ie search for MS Authenticator). I feel that Steve ("If you want pr0n get an Android") wou…

The AppStore has been like that for eons, but then again I don’t know a single person that uses it or checks the “content” posted there. It’s an utter waste of time.

I don’t think it will leak. After the U2 debacle, Apple might have learned not to push too hard on this front.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#513

Post by HybridStatAnim8 »

tcfhgj wrote: post #473
flexagoon wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They list their exact criteria for supporting a device. So far, only Pixels fit all of them (and I guess the Motorolas will soon) https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

> So far, only Pixels fit all of them might as well list all features of pixel phones

GrapheneOS does not depend on all of the features of pixel phones. The baseline requirements GrapheneOS has are generic, they are not built upon or tied to what pixel phones provide. Pixels actually exceed the baseline rather than barely meeting them.

Other OEMs can make devices that meet the requirements, and Motorola is doing just that. We should get Motorola devices with official GrapheneOS support next year.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#514

Post by HybridStatAnim8 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #161
dakolli wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still boggles my mind that the most popular privacy OS requires Google manufactured hardware, that fact alone makes me not trust it at all.

It's ridiculous is what it is. It makes me deeply distrustful of the organisation behind Graphene that they would make such a crazy choice.

It is not ridiculous at all. GrapheneOS is not going to compromise the privacy and security of their users for the sake of spite for one specific company. It would be immature and irresponsible to make important choices based on spite rather than objectivity.

Motorola has stepped up to meet the baseline requirements for GrapheneOS support, and we should get Motorola devices with official GrapheneOS support next year.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#515

Post by port11 »

microtonal wrote: post #275
NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a thing now https://volla.online/en/operating-systems/volla-os/

Posting about Volla in a GrapheneOS thread is... I guess courageous? They are kind of the opposite of GrapheneOS. Ancient kernel trees, ancient firmware bundles, etc. And since downstreams like /e/OS just take their kernels/firmware, they are ancient as well. Using Volla phones opens you up to a lot of known vulnerabilities. Besides that, Volla is basically a marketing company (with some external contractors) that do…

Wow, good to know. Sounds like the kind of company that Worse On Purpose would love! The shenanigans people go through to make money…

For the curious: https://marbit.substack.com/p/worse-on-purpose

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#516

Post by Cider9986 »

ebbi wrote: post #282
Cider9986 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that looks nice. I don't think you can get that. You can change any apps to different apps meaning the keyboard, homescreen/launcher, messaging app. The launcher is a primary UI thing which is different from iOS and is totally customizable by just installing a new app. So you can change the look of anything that depends on an app, but stuff like the control center, lock screen, volume sliders, connectivity icons,…

Thanks! I've been contemplating trying out Graphene, but I really enjoy the user experience of iOS. But I feel like I should at least get acquainted with Graphene as the inevitable enshittification of iOS will occur.

Definitely try it out! The key to good UX on Graphene is choosing the right apps.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#517

Post by HybridStatAnim8 »

d3Xt3r wrote: post #242
lucb1e wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything they offer for security that's not also in AOSP/LineageOS/eOS/stock/etc. Which is not to say that's not enough for most people, but why highlight them? It doesn't seem comparable to the laser-focus GrapheneOS has on security

Not GP, but Volla phones are cool in that they officially support running proper Linux[1], so you could just use Linux instead of Android if that's enough for your needs. And you can still boot into their de-Googled Android if you need to run Android apps. [1] https://volla.online/en/operating-systems/ubuntu-touch/

Android similarly supports, and in fact uses, "proper" Linux. Android and its forks are Linux distributions. You can use a mainline kernel in Android just fine.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#519

Post by Cider9986 »

flexagoon wrote: post #208
tasty_freeze wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your thoughts. I use FUTO voice usually, but there are situations where typing out a short message is better -- eg, in a restaurant or doctor's office or someplace where voice input might bother other people. I've found graphene's keyboard far more error-prone than the stock android keyboard, but I also don't care to learn swipe to type. The feature I'm missing is simply that rubbing my finger left or righ…

> I've found graphene's keyboard far more error-prone than the stock android keyboard, but I also don't care to learn swipe to type. Graphene's keyboard is the stock AOSP keyboard. Most Android systems ship with their own one instead of it, but that's the one that is built into the system by default.

They are referring to Gboard and Pixel UI or the stock OS shipped on Pixels.

Re: GrapheneOS has been ported to Android 17

#520

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

dns_snek wrote: post #283
Cider9986 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, if you install the Google camera there is no difference in quality and by revoking network you don't lose privacy.

> by revoking network you don't lose privacy Be careful, apps can still communicate with other apps, e.g. revoking the network permission doesn't stop apps from fetching and displaying ads over the network. I don't know enough about Android internals to understand the mechanisms behind it, but clearly there are ways for apps to exfiltrate data. > Trying to use Network as a complete data exfiltration toggle isn't the…

"Be careful, apps can still communicate with other apps, e.g. revoking the network permission doesn't stop apps from fetching and displaying ads over the network."

Another example relating to tracking ad targets, also known as "users":

"Around September 2024, Meta developed a creative solution to evade Androids sandboxing restrictions. (Id. 4849, 52.) Devices have localhost ports, which simulate a communications channel by allowing applications or services running on the device to communicate with each other... without those communications leaving the device. (Id. 53.) Meta modified its Pixel code (the Modified Pixel) so that it would send the _fbp cookies contents to a designated localhost port. (Id. 55.) In turn, Meta modified its Facebook and Instagram apps to listen to that localhost port for incoming data. (Id.) The Facebook and Instagram apps combined any incoming localhost data with personal information and identifiers, and subsequently shipped that combined data from the users Android device to its own servers. (Id.) As a result, even though Meta would typically have a harder time identifying Android users, Meta was now able to perfectly deanonymize Android users browsing activity if they used its apps. (Id.)

Meta's conduct was unknown until a group of internet security researchers disclosed it on June 3, 2025. (Id. 4; Dkt. No. 104-3.)

Shortly after the researchers public disclosure, Meta announced that it decided to pause use of this tracking method. (Id. 69; Dkt. No. 104-4 at 5.)

In this consolidated action, Plaintiffs assert nine claims against Meta: ... (3) violation of the Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. 2511(1); (4) violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Acts (CIPA) wiretapping provisions, Cal. Penal Code 631; (5) violation of CIPAs eavesdropping provisions, Cal. Penal Code 632; (6) violation of CIPAs eavesdropping device provisions, Cal. Penal Code 635; ... Plaintiffs assert an additional two claims against Google: negligence and negligent misrepresentation.

Plaintiffs CIPA pen register, unjust enrichment, and negligent misrepresentation claims are DISMISSED. Dismissal is with LEAVE TO AMEND because the Court cannot conclude on the current record that amendment would be futile. All other claims survive dismissal."

The above is an excerpt from In re Meta Android Privacy Litigation (3:25-cv-04674, N.D. Cal., June 3, 2025)

https://dn711508.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.45...

https://dn711508.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.45...

Of course Meta will eventually settle, like Google did in Brown v Google, in Google's case on the eve of trial. The wiretapping claims would be catastrophic for these companies

But the Court's observations are interesting

"At this early stage in the case, and given the undeniably significant portion of mobile phones using Apples iOS, it is reasonable to infer an industry custom of placing tight controls on communications between apps based on Apples restrictions."

Post reply on HN