Found this article, I think it's am interesting comparison

My source: https://mastodon.nz/@leighelse/115572223821306554

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

Here's the founder of Murena claiming he never claimed it was about security, it's for privacy via blocking all mass surveillance.
https://community.e.foundation/t/some-clarification-regarding-security-vs-privacy-in-e-os/51839

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    This is a great example of their BS.

    While this isn’t a major security concern and doesn’t impact privacy, it still needs to be addressed. Meanwhile, those not confortable with this situation can download an alternative web browser from App Lounge.

    How can he say this about the web browser? The one app that is used all the time to display pretty much everything by almost every other app.

    And, of course, there's all the crying because they are being called out on their lies.

    Out there you will find, easily, analysis of technical documentation, developer communications, independent security audits, and user reports revealing a systemic pattern of misinformation, technical obfuscation, and marketing fabrication emanating from Murena's for years. This has been a problem from the start, for example, this article from 2020:

    https://itsfoss.community/t/eos-e-os-e-foundation-disastrous-security-warning-2/4726?hl=en-US

    Another thing to keep in mind is that Murena’s marketing strategy relies heavily on the concept of "Sovereignty." They promise users a "Googless" experience where the user owns their data. This narrative is compelling to a public weary of surveillance capitalism. However, as has been demonstrated in may deep dives into their so-called "OS", Murena’s definition of sovereignty is superficial, relying on replacing one centralized provider (Google) with another (Murena Cloud/Qwant), rather than empowering the user with autonomous, secure technology. This marketing strategy only works (barely) by demonizing alternatives like GrapheneOS, which offer proven sovereignty through structural security instead of simple service substitution. Smearing is all they have against something of GrapheneOS's level.

    The worst part is that this leaves less savvy individuals open to being exploited by the likes of Murena and Rob Braxman, potentially making them even more vulnerable to having their data extracted because they believe their systems are actually private. It's just disgusting.

    As I said before, the GrapheneOS community is very passionate about the security and privacy we all need, more so now that everything is a data grab, which explains why they fight tooth and nail when their wonderful and unique work is being attacked. Granted, it's not a justification, but this is a war we're in right now, and if we keep doing everything with silk gloves instead of displaying the harsh and dangerous reality, we will lose, and I for one don't want to lose this fight.

  • source
  • parent