And just as trustworthy as devices that are equivalent to desktop Hardware with UEFI, IntelME, etc.
But of course, an even worse data octopus is bringing a backdoor-free cell phone to market… how naive can you be…
Uhh, now they’re moving away from pixels… Suddenly there are campaigns against the security of graphene… That there was nothing there before is absolutely not surprising and trustworthy…
And just as trustworthy as devices that are equivalent to desktop Hardware with UEFI, IntelME, etc.
So you mean like…99% of all hardware in the world? Lol
If you’re that hardcore into privacy or your threat model justifies it, then grapheneos isn’t for you because you’re already well prepared to make significant compromise and/or expense to pursue that goal.
GrapheneOS is more about leveling up more common people’s privacy
No, what I’m saying is that it’s bullshit to argue that Pixel was used for security reasons. It should have been created from the outset not just for Pixel…
As soon as that’s the case, or planned, suddenly people are demanding backdoors…
With Pixel, the question probably didn’t arise… Because Google would NEVER release a phone that is secure for the user.
What I’m saying is that graphene offers more security outside of Pixel. (Refers to US backdoors. Not to others.)
Pixels are one of the very few remaining, well speced, easily accessible and decently popular, brands that allow the BL to be unlocked
And just as trustworthy as devices that are equivalent to desktop Hardware with UEFI, IntelME, etc.
But of course, an even worse data octopus is bringing a backdoor-free cell phone to market… how naive can you be… Uhh, now they’re moving away from pixels… Suddenly there are campaigns against the security of graphene… That there was nothing there before is absolutely not surprising and trustworthy…
So you mean like…99% of all hardware in the world? Lol
If you’re that hardcore into privacy or your threat model justifies it, then grapheneos isn’t for you because you’re already well prepared to make significant compromise and/or expense to pursue that goal.
GrapheneOS is more about leveling up more common people’s privacy
Don’t let perfection be the enemy of good
No, what I’m saying is that it’s bullshit to argue that Pixel was used for security reasons. It should have been created from the outset not just for Pixel… As soon as that’s the case, or planned, suddenly people are demanding backdoors… With Pixel, the question probably didn’t arise… Because Google would NEVER release a phone that is secure for the user. What I’m saying is that graphene offers more security outside of Pixel. (Refers to US backdoors. Not to others.)