_vere

They said on Twitter that future devices in the Razr (foldable) and signature line will be supported. The current devices by Motorola do not fulfill their hardware requirements, so no need to buy one yet. This is speculation on my part, but its not unthinkable that non-flagship support could happen eventually, although mid tier SoCs generally don't have the hardware required to support graphene (hardware memory tagging, sufficiently open secure element, etc), so in the medium term, it's unlikely that anything but the flagships will be supported by graphene.

Their hardware requirements do not say this, where'd you get that idea? Graphene has stated they'll work with the Motorola team on supporting their devices, starting with the successors of the Razr foldable and the signature line, but there really hasn't been any talk about how additional peripherals like aux would be a no-go. USB is also a security concern, which is why they give you the option to disable it outright, disable data or disable until after-first-unlock. I don't see what would keep them from implementing this for aux, although since it's unidirectional I'm not sure if it even makes sense to compare aux to USB. They've supported pixels with aux ports in the past, and I don't think it's inclusion would be a blocking criteria. The comment about the camera is also kinda misguided. They zero out the camera input if you disable it, unlike traditional android. You can have a camera toggle in your quick settings and keep it disabled literally all the time. Enabling it when you bring up any camera related app takes either pin or biometrics, having the hardware here really shouldn't be a concern since you can look at how the code handling it works yourself. I'm not trying to convince you to use a pixel or a Motorola phone, do what you want, but at least be informed about stuff like this when you state things as if they are facts.

Treating Linux as a monolith here is kind of missing the point. Desktop Linux and Android have an entirely different application model, a solution for Android would have to be applied in a significantly different manner to desktop Linux. It'd likely be folded in to play services, as was the case with the exposure notification framework during covid for example.

Move fast and break things unless they are the things owned by billionaires and gigacorps instead of stuff owned by normal people

To a degree. You have the duress pin, so you can wipe your phone quickly if need be. But I wouldn't call that guarding, your phone won't get searched but if TSA or ice saw you wipe your phone in front of them with a, to them, unknown feature, I doubt they'll let you enter the country.

Interesting they'd chose to move to germany with their infra after the whole "gov sued Tutanota into providing a backdoor into e2ee email and won" thing happened. I've been with proton specifically because they are one of the few privacy focused email providers that isnt based in germany. Maybe it's time to say screw it and host my own, even if deliverability is gonna be an issue. I don't feel like my email is safe if it's hosted in germany.

This is just conspiratorial fearmongering based on vibes. If pixels somehow phoned home on a hardware level, do you think we wouldn't be able to tell? Do you think we wouldn't see it in our network logs? GrapheneOS supports pixels because they are currently the only devices that fulfill their list of requirements, like an actually usable secure element, hardware memory tagging, etc. They have said and continue to reiterate that they would support other devices that fulfill their requirements and seem to be currently looking into working with OEMs to move away from pixels in the long term. Just saying "you claim to degoogle phones yet the phone you use is a GOOGLE pixel, suspicious" is baseless nonsense.

Actually insane that this isn't patched in AOSP yet, literally the only android devices that aren't vulnerable are those running graphene. For companies as big as google, there really ought to be just disgusting financial penalties if they leave something like this unfixed for this amount of time.

Its not really about if you mind, they create derivative works in direct violation of the gpl.

It's also notable that these companies often dont respect the terms of foss software at all. Anyone worth their salt can tell you that training your LLM on gpl3 code would make it a derivative product, as it is able to reproduce large parts of that code. LLMs that are currently earning Google, Facebook, Openai, etc, billions, while they obviously dont make "their" products available under gpl3.

Stuff like this will just keep happening unless a major jurisdiction goes after these digital mercinaries. The fact that we ignore all laws for no reason other than "our agencies really like spying on people" is laughable. Literally crime as a service, sanctioned by most governments. Should not be surprising that such criminal organizations use their tools to spy on people who don't deserve it.

I wish they weren't sued into providing a backdoor for the German government, I vastly prefer their corporate structure to proton, but I cant really trust to use a "encrypted" service with a government backdoor.