←back to thread

402 points Bluestein | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.211s | source
Show context
exabrial ◴[] No.44357521[source]
ahhh I wish GrapheneOS was supported on these!
replies(1): >>44357566 #
onli ◴[] No.44357566[source]
CalyxOS support Fairphones. It is a better option anyway, also supports bootloader relocking etc.
replies(3): >>44359981 #>>44361786 #>>44363767 #
bramhaag ◴[] No.44361786[source]
In which ways is CalyxOS "better"?

This comparison is pretty damning: https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

Calyx is _not_ a hardened OS, and runs on devices with insecure hardware and firmware (like a Fairphone). Additionally, app compatibility suffers because they use microG instead of proper sandboxed Gapps, and also lacks many QoL features that guard against hostile apps (storage scopes, contact scopes, ...).

replies(2): >>44362927 #>>44363073 #
onli ◴[] No.44363073[source]
Why would you call the Fairphone an insecure device? It has long update support and can re-lock the bootloader, which is like the one criteria ROMs like that pick as the security feature. What is your attack scenario, what your security criteria here?

microG is not a drawback, it's a proper FOSS implementation, which I vastly prefer to running Gapps in a sandbox. App compatibility has been perfect for me.

The main criteria for it to be strictly better is that you do not give root to a dev that hallucinates enemies and then send their goons to attack them. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4To-F6W1NT0. It's nice that Graphene has a hardened kernel, that helps nothing if you can't trust the developer - different attack scenarios.

replies(2): >>44363603 #>>44363683 #
1. aniviacat ◴[] No.44363683[source]
The requirements are detailed on the GrapheneOS website [0].

I think the main issue with FairPhones was lacking a secure element and not receiving (anywhere near) timely firmware updates.

[0] https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices