no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
10 comments in c/privacy@programming.dev view that post
[–] 18 points 1 month ago*

Sovereign OS is pointed out to be source available only in the comments.

GrapheneOS replies to many of the addressed points, and notes that SovereignOS is actually really just a fork that seems to charge for some bs features and preinstalled apps.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (6 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (5 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)
  • [+] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Ah yes I'm sure there's a better alternative /s

    These don't prove your point. They're not backdoors. If they were they would have never Bern assigned a CVE.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    If you say "GrapheneOS may be the best, but you should treat it as untrustworthy.", is it fair to single it out as the "BackdoorOS"? It seems more like your position is that no closed source hatdware can be trusted? On that level we also can't trust any software because of Ken Thompsons "Reflections on trusting trust". So is your point that phones/computers can't be trusted in general, or that GrapheneOS is especially unsafe compared to available alternatives?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    the fuck is a sovereignOS?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Judging by the name alone — some hype-exploiting crap, possibly with some backdoors in it, and certainly created for the sole purpose of milking either some public money or naïve users money, whichever would be easier.

  • source
  • parent
  • 6 comments in c/android@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 15 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    Oh boy, this will turn out well....

    We start from GrapheneOS, strip out Google and its tracking, lock down the bootloader and USB data paths, and pre-install a vetted set of secure tools. You get a hand-configured secure device without having to be the expert who set it up.

    Graphene, by default, already comes stripped of google and automatically locks the bootloader during the install process. This is nothing but FUD.

    This company is just using Graphene to boost sales of their preinstalled phones. Prime example: they're selling a 9 Pro XL ($500 phone today) with this fork installed for $1700. FFS.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    They say they are a fork of and are "built on" grapheneOS, which is open source, but don't offer any links to their own repo (that I can find) to see the changes they have made, which to me feels misleading.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 weeks ago

    In case you're curious, I reached out via their contact link and got this response:

    Graphene is licensed under the MIT license. I'm not entirely sure withholding the source code is allowed, but I could be wrong. Either way, this company clearly has ulterior motives.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    100% ai slop picture here.. 🤮

  • source