[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/tech/ - Technology

"Technology reveals the active relation of man to nature" - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1752600034757.png (516.82 KB, 720x934, GooglepheneOS.png)

 

GrapheneOS cannot be fully trusted because it runs on Google's proprietary hardware stack, which remains a critical vulnerability. While GrapheneOS markets itself as a privacy-focused alternative, its security is undermined by the fact that it operates on devices like Google's Pixel smartphones—hardware designed and controlled entirely by Google. Unlike other OEMs, Google does not merely integrate off-the-shelf components; it designs its own processors (e.g., Tensor chips) and develops the closed-source firmware and software that power them. Other manufacturers receive binary blobs from chipmakers, which they cannot modify, but Google retains unilateral authority to embed hidden functionalities or surveillance mechanisms directly into the hardware-software ecosystem.

This means Google could inject malicious code into the processor’s firmware—code that operates independently of Android (and thus independently of GrapheneOS itself). Such malware would run at the hardware level, bypassing the operating system entirely and evading detection. If Google exploits this capability in its proprietary GApps, the same logic applies to the foundational software controlling its processors. Since GrapheneOS cannot audit or modify these closed-source components, users are left exposed to potential backdoors.

If you trust GrapheneOS on Pixel devices, you must also trust Google’s closed-source hardware stack—the very same infrastructure that could enable pervasive surveillance. In that case, there is no meaningful distinction between GrapheneOS and stock Android; both rely on Google’s opaque technology. Conversely, if you reject GApps and Google’s data harvesting, you cannot reconcile that distrust with reliance on Google’s hardware. To truly deGoogle, you must abandon devices where the manufacturer controls the silicon itself.

t. person who doesnt understand how hardware OR software works

Optimally one would use different hardware like a pinephone or something, but stuff like Graphene lets you keep using what you have in a harm-reduced manner.

People that buy a new pixel to put graphene on it baffle me though.

>>30546
The critique isn’t about misunderstanding hardware/software; it’s about Google’s total control over closed-source firmware for its own chips (e.g., Tensor), which no one can audit. Even if firmware is technically software, if Google writes the code running directly on its hardware (e.g., bootloaders, DSPs, Secure Enclaves) and keeps it secret, a critical security gap remains,one that no operating system, including GrapheneOS, can close.

GrapheneOS may harden Android, but it has zero control over Google’s proprietary firmware powering components like sensors, modems, or AI cores. These modules can operate independently of the OS, collecting or transmitting data without Android’s knowledge. For example: A closed-source firmware module could silently route microphone data to Google, bypassing the OS entirely.

Dismissing this as a ‘hardware/software misunderstanding’ misses the core issue: Trust requires transparency and control across all technology layers. Google provides neither. If you use Pixel devices, you’re not just trusting GrapheneOS, you’re trusting Google’s firmware, the same company that embeds tracking mechanisms in GApps. This isn’t a technical flaw in reasoning; it’s a logical conclusion. If you distrust Google at the software level, you MUST distrust the hardware it controls. There’s no firewall between the two.

>>30549
>which no one can audit
its 2025 and nobodys got busted by glowies because of these so called backdoors yet

File: 1752602618925.png (45.52 KB, 1136x246, ClipboardImage.png)

>it designs its own processors (e.g., Tensor chips)
>Other manufacturers receive binary blobs from chipmakers, which they cannot modify,
This is not true. The Tensor chips are put together from "off-the-shelf" designs from Arm where they can fiddle with the parameters a little but can't significantly modify, like most other manufacturers:
https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/google#Models

Few companies make their own Arm processors from scratch. For that they need to buy an "architecture license": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family#Architectural_licence

>>30549
ChatGPT post

>>30550
>nobodys got busted by glowies because of these so called backdoors yet

Yet. The Glowies invested so much into Glowphene OS, you think they will bust every small drug dealer? The glowies created this reputation around Glowphene just like they did with Tor. They let the small fish run, because they have bigger fish to catch.

>>30550
The precedent is set by other operating systems.

>>30553
>The glowies created this reputation around Glowphene just like they did with Tor.
is that why it took them years to catch the silk road guy when he stupidly used an email that could be traced back to his real identity or something

>>30555
I like to think there's two wings of the CIA, the serious wing, and the three stooges wing, and they flip a coin to see who gets assigned it.

>>30555
bro you are arguing with a glowie in their ChatGPT generated FUD thread

File: 1752609815369.jpg (49.59 KB, 507x492, a09s78.jpg)

It's insane, how pixel users have been brainwashed by disingenuous and/or incompetent developers, and by Google itself.

Pixels are the least secure devices precisely because hardware there is controlled by Google, unlike with other OEMs, who get binaries only from chip manufacturers. At least, one can uninstall Gapps, but you can't uninstall software supporting CPUs/GPUs and Titan. That software is neither dependent nor even visible to Android, which makes it a perfect repository for tools that destroy privacy and security.

Degoogle by buying a $1000+ Google device. You can't make this stuff up.

>>30557
>FUD thread
Facts don't care about your feelimgs. Graphene is deeply flawed. You can't deny that.

Has nobody wondered, why Glowphene is being shilled so hard everywhere?

Try this: You can't find ANY critical videos on GrapheneOS on Youtube! Type in something like "criticism of GrapheneOS". You will get no results.

The problems and risks of GrapheneOS are based on FACTS. Yet, nobody is talking about these severe flaws. Or rather, it seems this information is being intentionally surpressed.

>>30548 (me)
>>30558
tbh even the line of thought that "it's the hardware I already have" falls flat with how thouroughly insecure the hardware is. It's hard to tell where harm is reduced and where harm is hidden. I think graphene just extinguishes the sense of urgency.

tbh I dunno what's the point of grapheneOS when glowies can easily triangulate your position with your IMEI and sim card alone. This info is already cross-referenced and centralized with every ISP and phone carrier, you'd need to buy your pixel off the streets with cash and then keep it away from every network and phone in your home for it to be actually useful. If you connected your cool grapheneOS phone to your home WiFi, or you had your gfs phone turned on in the vicinity of your own phone, you're fucked. I get wanting to degoogle your phone, the other anon is right, it's hard to tell what have you reduced harm-wise. might as well not use a phone at all, if that's even feasible at all.

>>30558
> hardware there is controlled by Google, unlike with other OEMs, who get binaries only from chip manufacturers
But this is not true. Google's control of hardware is not any different from Samsung or Apple or whatever. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and ignored my post where I already pointed this out: >>30551

File: 1752611864155.mp4 (1.69 MB, 640x640, feds vs protonmail.mp4)

>>30559
>>30561
There's no "non-proprietary" hardware. It simply does not exist today.

>>30562

>>30562
>>30564
this vid is a half truth. uyghas acting like glowies are omniscient yet all those organizations deemed terrorists are still running rampant

>inb4 its intentional

lol sure

>>30566
It's a matter of friction really. Sure, the panopticon can be pointed at one person specifically, and they could use all resources available to them to track them, but at scale they're limited, and resistance is both possible and somewhat easy.

>>30566
Are they technologically held back, or is ist just the flimsiest of legal protections still remaining in place and general public scrutiny what stops them from doing so in a wide scale?

>>30568
Obviously the former, what are legal protections to the CIA?

>>30567
thats the thing, for >>30564 to happen to you youd have to in the fbi's top 5 or some shit, its not data thats passively tracked about everyone 24/7, and where it is, it can be somewhat easily circumvented (chances are youd still be painting a target on your back by doing this but its still not something absolutely impossible yknow)

im now reminded of the 2022 new york subway shooter
>Investigation efforts were hampered by the lack of working security cameras in three subway stations.
lmao. im not telling you to not be careful about this shit but lets not pretend theyre godlike omniscient either

BTW this guy made a huge advertisement video for Google Pixels. But in our era of guerilla marketing, he camouflaged his Pixel advertisement as a "pro privacy" video.

IF YOU SHILL GRAPHENE OS, YOU ARE SHILLING GOOGLE PIXEL.

IF YOU SHILL GRAPHENE, YOU ARE THE TOOL OF THE CORPOS.

>>30575
>THE CORPOS
Can you talk like a normal person instead of just using buzzwords? Everything is part of an industry so get better arguments.

>>30545
buy a pinephone pro and install mobian on it and run android in waydroid containers

>>30576
I'm sorry, I mean THE CAPITALISTS

>>30575
Pixels with graphene on them aren't terrible

>>30583
Says who?

>>30584
Says your AI chat bot if you want it to. Fuck off.

>>30585
Debunk it. I am waiting.

File: 1752722173046.jpg (22.4 KB, 819x377, c8ffc6f63820c6c1.jpg)


>>30550
You dont know that. People do get busted and then sentenced without seeing the evidence. They are doing it to Luigi right now.

File: 1752751871869.png (156.9 KB, 500x504, graphgoose.png)


>>30584
>>30586
> possible
> could
> no evidence
< deboonk this xD
genuinely ngmi

File: 1752769444431.jpg (67.1 KB, 533x518, image (1).jpg)

>>30591
You are right. We should just blindly trust the influencers. We shouldn't think one step ahead.

>>30590
That arguement was already in the thread, you're dodging the fact that you're hiding behind AI to make an arguement you were too lazy to substantiate yourself, as well as too lazy to ensure it hadn't already been brought up by someone else.

My take on the matter was "just get a pinephone, if google hardware is all you have for some reason then graphene is a bandaid on an amputated limb." I didn't need to ask Grok to come up with that like you did.

File: 1752769772983.jpg (81.01 KB, 500x833, info2.jpg)

>>30596
Then who is spreading these fake news, that Graphene is supposed to be the best and most private phone OS ever?

>>30597
If you'd link to things you're posting screenshots that would answer itself, assuming this isn't more AIshit.
A lot of privacy frontend shit tends to get maintainers with megalomania. Perhaps the graphene devs literally believe that and don't understand the hardware issue.

>>30597
You have to be shilling this for some reason or another. No skeptic of anything would use AI screenshots, making people distrust criticism of the object of skepticism. You saw that people were critical of the hardware and swooped in to make the same arguement with AI to tardjacket the conversation.

>>30597
>Then who is spreading these fake news
Some retard starving for attention. GrapheneOS is an open project with multiple organizations and developers raising potential issues and submitting fixes, you can fucking look up things yourself instead of relying on chinese chatbots and meme images, unless you're retarded, in which case your phone OS is the least of your concerns

(e.g. From the FAQs https://github.com/GrapheneOS/hardened_malloc/issues/133)

File: 1752791763803.jpg (62.24 KB, 707x500, a0f4gl.jpg)

Well, I guess I will buy a new Google Pixel and install Graphene OS now.

>>30606
Nice racist meme.

>>30607
Racism against a rich white man?

>>30545
>GrapheneOS cannot be fully trusted because it runs on Google's proprietary hardware stack, which remains a critical vulnerability.
Yeah whats up with that? and LineageOS only works on a handful of phones.

Are there other alternatives? Back in my day I think they had ones that worked for most of the phones but maybe I just got lucky and they worked on all my hardware.

>>30608
Indians.

>>30609
>Yeah whats up with that? and LineageOS only works on a handful of phones.
It's the fault of third party OEMs that have proprietary firmware and/or locked bootloaders, back in the day most phones would have some means to root and unlock your bootloader and put AOSP on it, or at least some flavor of AOSP.

> Are there other alternatives?

Pretty sure Huawei comes ungoogled by default lmfao but not for security reasons. Also there's a somewhat booming scene of custom ROMs for xiaomi because indians and ruskies want to extract every drop of juice out of their shitphones (and also xiaomi offers some convoluted means to "officially" unlock the bootloader), but that scene is fucking sketchy as hell lol and only exists in telegram. Forget about places like xda developers, that shit is dead. There's also pinephones, and fairphones but I believe they lack shit like IOMMU on their SoCs, which makes them incompatible with GrapheneOS, but their bootloader can be unlocked. Fairphones also ship degoogled on their latest versions I believe.

tl;dr grapheneOS works on pixel devices because 1) can have their bootloaders unlocked with simple ADB commands 2) are fully compatible with AOSP because they're first party devices 3) have all the hardware security bells and whistles because they don't have shitty SoCs


>>30615
https://nicholasjohnson.ch/2023/10/26/join-extinction-rebellion-now/
>unambiguously and transparently a CIA agent
https://nicholasjohnson.ch/2022/03/27/on-transgender-athletes/
https://nicholasjohnson.ch/2023/11/26/re-on-transgender-athletes/
>That makes slop articles about heritage foundation talking points
You have to be a google shill trying to muddy how people view critique of it.

>>30616
Let me guess: He is also a nazbol?

>>30617
> Let me guess: He is also a nazbol?
how should anyone know, he's literally just some guy with a blog, i really tried to dig into him to find if he's anywhere close to relevant

File: 1752872623264.png (9.04 KB, 353x65, ClipboardImage.png)


a better argument is that pixel's hardware fucking sucks and idek why the graphene moron decided to only develop for it


Unique IPs: 21

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]