undefined

points

[-]

> Also some people (me) value independence from Google more than the highest degree of security (which relies on Google hardware).

The requirements are indeed minimal. I have no problem with your valuing independence from Google, but please don't misrepresent GrapheneOS' requirements as the highest degree of security because not even they have said that. They have actually mentioned wanting to be more involved in the hardware/firmware side to implement more pro-user changes.

They are mostly basic requirements that Android OEMs should be embarrassed not to meet in 2026.

by palata3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> This is a contradiction. There is nothing "minimal" about a requirement that excludes every device but one.

I don't get your logic. Requirements are a choice. It's very easy to create requirements that exclude every device but one.

Example: "It has to be the Samsung Galaxy S23". Done.

Now you can disagree with those requirements, but that's completely different from saying that the requirements are wrong.

by fsflover2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I disagree that such requirements are minimal. Nothing prevents running GrapheneOS on a device with lower requirements. It's a questionable choice by the developers restricting the choice for users.

by palata2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Aren't requirements defined as the set of minimal constraints that are needed for something to be deemed acceptable by those who define that set?

Again, requirements are not laws of physics. As the author of a project, I am free to make up my own requirements, and when something doesn't meet them, then I am free to reject it because it does not meet my requirements...

If you go to a bank and they refuse to lend you money because you don't meet their requirement, you will have a hard time convincing them that their requirement are wrong and that they should instead replace it with yours :-).

by ysnp1 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

It is not the job of GrapheneOS to lower their standards and deplete their resources supporting every phone under the sun. We already have LineageOS for that. I would rather not be snarky but I don't understand why people keep blaming GrapheneOS instead of the OEMs. Almost every single time.

by Itoldmyselfso5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

You are not independent from Google if you purchase an android device from another manufacturer. You're then having your data sent to both Google and that manufacturer, resulting in far worse privacy overall than with just Google, not to mention worse security at hardware level. If you don't want to "support" Google, just buy any used Pixel 6 to 10 series.

by fsflover4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I use Librem 5 as a daily driver. It has no dependence on Google.

by palata3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Sure, you're free to use whatever you want. So am I. I want GrapheneOS :-).