Comment by phoronixrly
6 hours ago
I was just wondering that... GrapheneOS team consider Fairphone to be infosec plebs, but instead partner with a company that intentionally harms users' privacy for profit?
6 hours ago
I was just wondering that... GrapheneOS team consider Fairphone to be infosec plebs, but instead partner with a company that intentionally harms users' privacy for profit?
It may be worth noting that GrapheneOS in most cases to date are not the initiators for conversations around extra device support. They do not control which mobile divisions and engineering teams can come to them and back genuine interest with the resources needed to reach an acceptable privacy/security standard for support.
The question is really why are Motorola the only ones that have gone that extra mile so far and what does it say about the rest of the Android OEMs (including Fairphone, which unlike most is actually a younger project than GrapheneOS).
I don't see how the former has anything to do with the latter.
You don't see how it doesn't make sense for Graphene to reject a company because it doesn't handle security according to their standards, but be OK with a company that is actively malicious?
What matters is whether or not a particular device meets the GOS hardware requirements, anything else is secondary. It's not that complicated
3 replies →