top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 114 points 1 year ago (48 children)

There aren't too many OEMs that sell worldwide. So that would be one of Samsung, Sony, Moto, OnePlus.

  • source
  • hideshow 48 child comments
  • [–] 86 points 1 year ago (35 children)
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago (23 children)

    I agree, Motorola is owned by Lenovo. They have found middling success with the return of their Razr line and with phones in the lower to mid tier range. But they really want something super flagship. Something like the Think Phone would have probably sold really well with a Graphene option.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Device hardware, firmware, and software are integrated to protect your most sensitive data from mobile threats. With Moto KeySafe, PINs, passwords, and cryptographic keys are isolated from other device data for an added layer of high-level security.

    Yeah this sounds like what Graphene insists on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That sounds like a fancy speak for a Trusted Platform Module. Isn't some kind of TPM mandatory to obtain a google certification for a new device?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Yeah, a TPM or secure element. I don't think it's required.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    It (unfortunately) isn't required. Most current Android devices on the market have serious security issues (most notably, full disk encryption can easily be bypassed due to a lack of effective unlock attempt rate limiting) due to their lack of a secure element.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Are you sure there's no rate limiting? My phone definitely does rate limit the on-boot disk decryption prompt. Do you mean there's no rate limiting if someone detaches the NAND and brute-forces it off-device?

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

    That rate limiting can easily be bypassed by an attacker. In order to be effective, the rate limit needs to be enforced by tamper-resistant hardware, i.e. a secure element. Here are some of the requirements for a secure element: https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/keystore#StrongBoxKeyMint

    An implementation of StrongBox KeyMint must contain the following:

    Its own CPU
    Secure storage
    A true random-number generator
    Additional mechanisms to resist package tampering and unauthorized sideloading of apps
    A secure timer
    A reboot notification pin (or equivalent), like general-purpose input/output (GPIO)

    For details, I recommend reading:

    Only devices with a proper implementation of a secure element (Titan M2, i.e. Pixel 6 or later, or the Apple SEP, i.e. iPhone 12 or later) are actually resistant to brute-force attacks by forensic data extraction tools, such as Cellebrite or GrayKey. GrapheneOS has obtained some internal documents from multiple forensics companies. They published the Cellebrite docs at https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14344-cellebrite-premium-july-2024-documentation

    Specifically, I recommend looking at this chart:

    It clearly shows that data cannot be extracted from iPhones with the SEP, unless the device is in the AFU state, meaning that the encryption keys are kept in memory.

    Those are the charts for Pixels:

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    It (unfortunately) isn't required. Most current Android devices on the market have serious security issues (most notably, full disk encryption can easily be bypassed due to a lack of effective unlock attempt rate limiting) due to their lack of a secure element.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    The only way a graphene is phone gets major adaptation is if you could use pay with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

    I can pay with NFC on my GrapheneOS phone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Where is this/ what app do you use?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    There are several supported apps, such as Curve Pay, PayPal, and banking apps that have their own tap-to-pay implementation.

    https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2025/06/contactless-payments-with-grapheneos/

    https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/115295538501760765

    You can also use the contactless payments supported tag when searching the GrapheneOS banking app compatibility list on GitHub. https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/banking-apps-compat-report/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3A%22contactless+payments+supported%22

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I think people overestimate that feature. Where I live you still have to hand your card to the teller most of the time and nobody is handing their phone over for tap to pay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago*

    I pay with a normal card but I'd say the majority of people around me pay with their phone.

    Also, I need to use my bank app to pay for things online. I scan a QR code and confirm the payment with a pin or fingerprint. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think many bank apps also don't work properly with graphene.

    Edit: maybe I'm getting confused, I thought bank apps normally needed google play services and that because of that they don't work on grapheneOS, but I don't know if that's correct

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    hmm how bout round the world?

    Like Germans prefer cash but tons go all digital—yuge in China for example, Apple Pay’s big stateside (USA)…

    Curious your region btw to expand my knowledge on this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    I live in the US and I also just got back from a 10 day trip that had me in 6 different airports around the US and saw basically nobody using their phones to pay. I saw a bunch of people using the translate app, the camera, FaceTime, Apple wallet for boarding passes, but no tap to pay.

    I think it’s because the places that use it also have their own apps, like Starbucks. You can order and pay in the app and if you are likely to setup Apple Pay you are probably fine going all the way with the app too. The same is true of Walmart and other major retailers who also specifically don’t take Apple or Google pay because they want you to use their app.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    It’s heavily used everywhere else in the world, the US is well-known to lag behind on payment technology. It’s like travelling back in time when you go there.

    I pay with my phone literally everywhere in Canada, haven’t opened my wallet in months. I was in the US last year and they didn’t have mobile payment terminals at restaurants so you always had to pay for sit down service at a counter, always wanted me to sign for tap, kept calling it Apple Pay instead of tap or contactless, had places that would only swipe a physical card which isn’t even allowed in other countries anymore, it’s crazy.

    Walmart takes tap in Canada, they were one of the last holdouts. The “individual app for each service” thing is very American, even American companies abroad don’t do it because they’ll lose business. It’s the same thing with cash transfers. There are 100 different private ways to send money in the US. PayPal, CashApp, Facebook Pay, Apple Pay, Venmo, etc.

    None of those exist in Canada because we just have Interac e-transfers. Hard to compete with free & automatic support by every bank account in the country. Other countries have similar systems. The US has Zelle but as far as I know that was implemented way later and doesn’t have the mindshare.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It's not going to be a Chinese company.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    How come? I'd bet they'd be the most easiest "oem" to get started with.

    All western ones will be on the mercy of google licencing, so I'd guess no one wants to burn bridges.

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

    I'm quite sure no one would consider Chinese company as safe option for privacy and clearly security focused phone.

    Also as Sony already has the Sailfish support the company is likely going to be Sony.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I hope Sony simply because I want a headphone jack and an MicroSD card reader. Their phones are already pretty bloat free and their custom apps, usually focused on the camera system, would mesh very well with GrapheneOS. Would be a great way for them to become relevant again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Samsung doesn't really rely on Snapdragon too much, so that might be out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Samsung is also a synonym for useless bloat, locked boatloaders, intrusive ads, and every other hostile feature ever. They are the last one to open up their phones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 86 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    According to details shared on Reddit, the partnered manufacturer will offer GrapheneOS support on future versions of their existing models, priced similarly to Pixels. These initial devices will feature flagship Snapdragon processors, which GrapheneOS notes provide significantly better CPU and GPU performance compared to Google’s Tensor chips. The Snapdragon platform also bundles high-quality wireless connectivity, eSIM support, and decent image processing capabilities directly into the system-on-chip.

    Oh thank you. Let's hope for something nice for a change.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago

    About fucking time.

  • source
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago* (14 children)

    So who do we think? It's not Fair phone and it sounds like it's not oneplus. I'll be needing a new phone within the next couple of years, if they roll it out soonish

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I mean those are the first two I'd suspect too. Maybe Sony or Pico? They're both pretty dev friendly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Sony is sooooo expensive though…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They said it'd be on par with a Pixel, so either a reasonable Sony or not Sony..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    The Sony xperia 10 VII has a micro SD slot and a 3.5mm port so I'm hoping Sony too.

    Edit: looks like the OEM selected doesn't have compatible phones today but would in 26'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    I’ve completely forgotten that Sony makes phones also, but this phone is great on paper. So much so that, next year, when I will be switching back to Android from an unfortunate ios hiatus, I will definitely consider one (maybe viii? ). Thanks for reminding me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I actually think this could be it. Nokia has always been a little adventurous with their operating systems, and I think they are eager to claw back their old reputation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's not.

    Have a friend who works at a decently high position here in Finland and they actually are considering exiting the smartphone market all together because the margins are too small and they make easy more money on other things, like 5G equipment. They kind of want to move past being associated with phones basically.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago

    I can't wait to hear more. Please just make a phone that I'll want to buy. My phone is 4 years old and there's just nothing I want to replace it with yet.

    It has become less and less of an issue over time though. Not only have I gotten used to using my phone FAR less with positive health results, but I have set myself up to have access to my Linux PC during the "chill with the family on the couch" times in the evening when one might zone out on their phone for a bit. That's what I'm using right now!

  • source
  • [+] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'll hold off on a new phone to watch for this. Android could be great without Google's nonsense. An OS that has high end hardware support and continues to work on convergence with desktop Linux both by the communities development and Google's

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 55 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I'm skeptical. Even knowing how paranoid Daniel is about, well....everything.

    Who remembers the last time a custom ROM got an OEM deal? It is the reason Lineage OS exists today...

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    With everything Google is doing with Android, they might not have a choice. It's either this or possibly one day no longer being able to work on Graphene.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Google will forever control Android. I would prefer if he just worked on Linux (phone & desktop) to the benefit of all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I think that sounds like a damn solid plan, personally. Not sure if the GrapheneOS devs would go for it. The lead dev (who I think stepped down, so may not be a factor now) had some strongly negative opinions towards a Linux phone due to all of its security holes compared to Android, but like... It's not as if those things couldn't be addressed like you describe. It would just take time.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    I dearly remember my OnePlus One with CyanogenMod, if that answers your question?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    But do you remember the clusterfuck that was Cyanogen Inc?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Nope, only from what I've read about it more recently. Back then I was just hyped about getting an even smarter smartphone with a better OS and all the new possibilities it brought to me. It was by no means my first smartphone, and I had already explored using my phones in interesting, useful or smart ways, but the OnePlus One felt like a very big upgrade in my daily life, especially since things were moving pretty fast on that area 10-15 years ago. CyanogenMod was definitely an important part of that improved Android experience, and I don't think the corporation clusterfuck affected that, really, as I did not at all notice what was going on over there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago* (10 children)

    I wonder if this will have a significant negative impact on Pixel sales.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I would assume it will, if the SoC performance is in the same ballpark. Pixels have good NPU specs but their CPU, GPU and RAM feel like mid range options compared to snapdragons. So I don't think that's a high bar to hit. I don't run graphene because I'm not buying a google phone, but I would consider running it on something else.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    I can't see how it would. Techies are the only people who know what GrapheneOS is, and even then it's a small percentage of us. The average person still asks if you have an iPhone or a Samsung.

    I hope it takes off, but even if it does the dent will be small.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I want to try GrapheneOS. But my current Samsung phone still works. If I ever do switch, I would be looking for a Pixel on the local resale market so as to avoid giving Google money, anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Used Pixels are cheap.

    I have three, paid about $120 for each one.

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

    Using current phone rather than buying a different one to replace it is a lot less ewaste.

    I am also going to see what happens with Graphene's new partnership. I don't really like the idea of being locked down to specific hardware.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's what I did. I bought a used pixel 8 and only regretted it after the recent strong of Google shenanigans. I'm still looking for a proper Linux phone solution in the meantime. I'd rather not have to be reliant on anything Google does in the future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    19 comments in c/graphene_os@lemmy.sdf.org view that post