Apple and Google both provide support for offline speech-to-text using local models. Users can configure it to be fully offline.
The Murena Voice to Text service in /e/OS sends the user's audio to OpenAI which is hidden away in their terms of service:
community.e.foundation/t/voice…
Voice to Text feature using Open AI
As I was reading the Murena’s terms of use I discovered that the voice to text feature introduced with e/OS/ 3.0 is using the Open AI API. That means our voice is sent to Open AI so they can translate it to text./e/OS community
Questa voce è stata modificata (3 mesi fa)
reshared this
Okuna
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •The answer by Gael to all the comments is interesting:
"What we have learned from our experimentations with STT models that run locally on the smartphone for speech recognition:
they work quite poorly, they make a lot of mistakes in voice recognition"
Nope. I use futo And it works really great in most cases
"they are not able to mix languages (i.e. you have to preset one language before use and parts of what you say that is not in this language - that happens all the time - are not recognized)"
Nope. The version I use distinguishes, the text has to be long enough though.
"they take a huge amount of memory to run (in the magnitude of hundreds of MB) + CPU overhead"
Didn't notice this.
So all the reasons he gives a crap
Okuna
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •"The proxy source code is under cleaning and will be published soon."
How often have I read or heard this and then it didn't happen for various reasons.
And I wonder how you can anonymize my voice.
Marcial 🇨🇷🇻🇪
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Till Kleisli
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Till Kleisli • • •Till Kleisli
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •oxidand
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Devices lacking standard privacy/security patches and protections aren't private - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
GrapheneOS Discussion ForumSteve reshared this.
milkytwix
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Tuxicoman
in reply to milkytwix • • •@milkytwix
At some point companies bullshit should be made public. This is what #grapheneos is doing.
I'm french, I used Mandrake. But when Gael makes advertisement for his /e/ project telling it's not Android and other bullshit. I'm not happy. I loose trust.
We had Qwant bullshit and /e/ is on the same road.
They have to reach a critical mass to exist. I feel Tesla is their marketing model.
GrapheneOS
in reply to Tuxicoman • • •@tuxicoman @milkytwix
> I feel Tesla is their marketing model.
web-cdn.bsky.app/profile/gaeld…
Gaël Duval 🐧💻📱 (@gaelduval.bsky.social)
Bluesky SocialAcidePoulain
in reply to milkytwix • • •@milkytwix
I disagree. I am an /e/OS user and investor, and think they do not take security seriously enough.
Someone has to talk about it.
milkytwix
in reply to AcidePoulain • • •AcidePoulain
in reply to milkytwix • • •@milkytwix
I do not think talking to them is sufficient. I will never be taken seriously enough, especially compared to experts on the matter.
matchboxbananasynergy
in reply to AcidePoulain • • •@AcidePoulain @milkytwix When /e/OS users on their own forum criticize /e/OS for its many issues, their strategy has become to start insinuating that we're sending people there to criticize their OS, so yes, you wouldn't be taken seriously.
community.e.foundation/t/voice…
>So either those people are coming from people in ordered service from the toxic community we know too well.
They are unable to respond to criticism, so they'd rather lie and say that we're brigading their forum while calling our community toxic and our project members crazy/delusional. It's quite sad.
Voice to Text feature using Open AI
/e/OS communityAcidePoulain
in reply to matchboxbananasynergy • • •@matchboxbananasynergy @milkytwix
I've rarely been on the forums tbh. But I know privacy and security concerns are not taken that seriously.
The default install still communicates with google and contains closed-source software that communicates with third-parties.
/e/OS is still better than nothing mind you, but I get the impression they're not doing enough, as if marketing to non-technical users willing to avoid Google products for ideological reasons was their primary objective.
AcidePoulain
in reply to AcidePoulain • • •@matchboxbananasynergy @milkytwix
I'd like to add it's entirely possible they are brigaded by some of the GrapheneOS community, but that tend to happen with all software projects and is not a good reason to dismiss the security concerns (in an entirely different area, linux gaming discussion boards are frequently spammed by Bazzite fanboys - it should not be used as a reason to stop innovating and taking ideas from the project)
matchboxbananasynergy
in reply to AcidePoulain • • •@AcidePoulain @milkytwix They aren't, though, and note that their insinuation is that **we're** sending them there.
It's just deflection, and it's not deflection of criticism coming from us. They're trying to use as to deflect criticism from their own community and users. It's wild.
milkytwix
in reply to matchboxbananasynergy • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to milkytwix • • •@milkytwix @matchboxbananasynergy @AcidePoulain
> When I dared to speak critic the last time towards gOS
No, what you did is misrepresenting our statements and actions. You did it in a context where you were supporting attacks on GrapheneOS and our team with misinformation and harassment.
> I was threatend by Daniel
No, you were told your behavior would result in a ban if it continued. You're now personally targeting someone on our team based on that in a highly inappropriate way.
milkytwix
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Proletarian Rage reshared this.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •s94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •s94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •@s94 No, Murena is scamming people at a large scale for profit. They're pretending to provide a private OS which is in reality not at all private. We've explained how it lacks the most basic privacy and security. It even sends sensitive user data to OpenAI without informing users, which is far worse than how Apple and Google are handling speech-to-text from a privacy perspective.
Contrary to their marketing, it gives extensive privileged access to Google services and always connects to them.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@s94 Murena do not have good intentions. They're a for-profit company selling people fake privacy products and services. What they care about is money. They've set things up in a way that they can get a bunch of government funding to build the product as if it's a non-profit in order to sell that from their for-profit company.
What they're providing is much worse than people simply using an iPhone. It's worse than using stock Android on a device receiving monthly backports or OS updates...
richarddebruin
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to richarddebruin • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •deFraid
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to deFraid • • •@defred @richarddebruin /e/OS and Murena are scammers causing substantial harm to people through selling them extraordinarily insecure and non-private devices. It's a blatant grift for profit, not a serious attempt to provide people with better privacy or security. They do the opposite of that.
We currently support every device meeting the very reasonable requirements listed at grapheneos.org/faq#future-devi…. The purpose of GrapheneOS is providing people with privacy, not scamming them like /e/OS.
GrapheneOS Frequently Asked Questions
GrapheneOSGrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •deFraid
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to deFraid • • •imnobody
in reply to deFraid • • •deFraid
in reply to imnobody • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to deFraid • • •@defred @imnobody @richarddebruin /e/OS is streaming user's microphone audio to OpenAI without telling them when they use speech-to-text. Meanwhile, Apple and Google at least support doing it locally.
/e/OS is misleading users about the many missing privacy and security patches including setting a false Android security patch level and changing the user interface to downplay it. What's that if not having backdoors?
/e/OS has repeatedly covered up their security weaknesses and vulnerabilities.
richarddebruin
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to richarddebruin • • •@richarddebruin It leads to /e/OS and Murena having less ability to mislead people since a far greater number of people will realize they're scammers. It protects us against their attacks. A few people getting annoyed with us on Mastodon (no one on Bluesky or X) compared to most people reading it supporting it doesn't really mean much.
How many people knew /e/OS sends user voice data to OpenAI for speech-to-text and that both Apple and Google have offline support for it available?
Gaunter de Meuré
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •I was on the verge to buy a murena phone, studied the subject and learned that e/os is not at all a secure os.
Gaunter de Meuré
in reply to Gaunter de Meuré • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Gaunter de Meuré • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@LordPatraxX @richarddebruin Apple has an Advanced Data Protection mode for iCloud where it uses end-to-end encryption for nearly everything. Users can handle syncing contacts and calendars with another service like Proton. Apple is a whole lot closer to providing full E2EE for those services than Murena, and Murena's services are very lacking in many aspects of basic privacy / security.
iPhones are mainstream, so devices with atrocious privacy and security compared to them are hardly progress.
s94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •/e/: Datenschutzfreundlich bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig sicher – Custom-ROMs Teil6
www.kuketz-blog.des94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •s94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •Comparison of Android-based Operating Systems
eylenburg.github.ios94
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •s94
in reply to s94 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to s94 • • •Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Xtreix
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd
Evoking “jealousy” is a common response when one lacks relevant arguments whereas GrapheneOS does an excellent job of communicating to inform the public about ongoing scams, they are extremely dedicated, and very often respond with answers of several detailed paragraphs, they often respond with more answers than the person asking the question expects in the first place, but I'm sure you do better.
/e/OS are not colleagues of GrapheneOS, and the competitor is iOS that GrapheneOS respects.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to Xtreix • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd @Xtreix Governments shouldn't fund building products for companies to sell for profit. We wouldn't want to be beholden to governments, particularly ones moving towards making end-to-end encryption and secure devices illegal.
/e/OS and Murena are not colleagues or competitors. /e/OS massively rolls back privacy and security rather than improving them. They heavily misrepresent what they're providing and through that are scamming people. /e/OS is nearly the direct opposite of GrapheneOS.
GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd Governments shouldn't fund building products for companies to sell for profit. We wouldn't want to be beholden to governments, particularly ones moving towards making end-to-end encryption and secure devices illegal.
/e/OS and Murena are not colleagues or competitors. /e/OS massively rolls back privacy and security rather than improving them. They heavily misrepresent what they're providing and through that are scamming people. /e/OS is nearly the direct opposite of GrapheneOS.
CyberFrog
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to CyberFrog • • •@froge @djoerd iPhones provide dramatically higher privacy and security than /e/OS. /e/OS is not remotely in the same space as GrapheneOS.
/e/OS handling speech-to-text by sending the audio to OpenAI without telling users vs. Apple doing the processing locally is representative of an overall comparison between them.
/e/OS fails to keep up with basic privacy/security patches for drivers, firmware, AOSP and the browser engine.
/e/OS thinks privacy only means avoiding Google services...
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd @froge
> It does block trackers that are inside Android apps
All it provides is a terrible implementation of DNS-based filtering. Contrary to the false marketing, it cannot stop privacy invasive behavior by apps It blocks a small portion of client side connections to domains not used for actual functionality. Vast majority of privacy invasive behavior remains and it's trivially bypassed. RethinkDNS is a better implementation usable everywhere, but DNS-based filtering is very limited.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @froge
> allows you to use a fake location
This is a standard Android feature called Mock Location.
> you can hide your IP address using the tor network
Nothing about using a VPN or Tor is specific to /e/OS.
> and if you insist on using cloud storage it seamlessly intgrates with nextcloud.
Not in any way specific to /e/OS.
> My Fairphone 3 with e/OS
You're using a device vulnerable to serious known remote exploits including in the cellular radio, GPS, GPU and much more.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Here's information from the founder of DivestOS:
Issues with /e/OS: codeberg.org/divested-mobile/d…
ASB update history: web.archive.org/web/2024123100…
Chromium update history: web.archive.org/web/2025011921…
Chromium update summary: infosec.exchange/@divested/112…
Here's an article from a privacy and security expert (Mike Kuketz) which touches on various issues including severely delayed patches, user tracking in the update client and privacy invasive default connections:
kuketz-blog.de/e-datenschutzfr
/e/: Datenschutzfreundlich bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig sicher – Custom-ROMs Teil6
kuketz-blog.deDjoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@froge idf.social/@djoerd/11489854196…
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
2025-07-22 19:30:15
GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd @froge Your claims are objectively false. /e/OS is absolutely engaging in extremely false marketing about privacy, security, updates, usability and compatibility. They've repeatedly spread misinformation about GrapheneOS and it's why we started posting about it.
/e/OS is not a safe option for anyone to use and does not offer a reasonable alternative to Apple or Google products. It is not more focused on regular people than GrapheneOS, contrary to their misleading claims about us.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @froge /e/OS is certainly not on our side. They aren't in the same space as GrapheneOS in the first place but rather only pretend to be as part of their marketing. They've repeatedly engaged in attacks on GrapheneOS through spreading misinformation about it and making personal attacks on our team.
> Happy to try Graphene once it runs on ethical hardware like the Fairphone.
Fairphone devices do not meet our basic hardware security and update requirements. False marketing is not ethical.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @froge Fairphone is directly participating in the false marketing by Murena for /e/OS. They present it as being far more private than it is and lead people to believe it isn't going to be using Google services and giving highly privileged access to them when it does.
Making baseless personal attacks on our team claiming we're delusional, paranoid, etc. has been repeatedly done by the founder of /e/OS and Murena. You're demonstrating how their community follows this lead.
richarddebruin
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to richarddebruin • • •Our communication about this has been quite easy to understand. Information we've provided is accurate and verifiable.
Here's information from the founder of DivestOS:
Issues with /e/OS: codeberg.org/divested-mobile/d…
ASB update history: web.archive.org/web/2024123100…
Chromium update history: web.archive.org/web/2025011921…
Chromium update summary: infosec.exchange/@divested/112…
Here's an article from a privacy and security expert (Mike Kuketz) which touches on various issues:
kuketz-blog.de/e-datenschutzfr
/e/: Datenschutzfreundlich bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig sicher – Custom-ROMs Teil6
kuketz-blog.deGrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@richarddebruin
> It does block trackers that are inside Android apps
All it provides is a terrible implementation of DNS-based filtering. Contrary to the false marketing, it cannot stop privacy invasive behavior by apps It blocks a small portion of client side connections to domains not used for actual functionality. Vast majority of privacy invasive behavior remains and it's trivially bypassed. RethinkDNS is a better implementation usable everywhere, but DNS-based filtering is very limited.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@richarddebruin
> allows you to use a fake location
This is a standard Android feature called Mock Location.
> you can hide your IP address using the tor network
Nothing about using a VPN or Tor is specific to /e/OS.
> and if you insist on using cloud storage it seamlessly intgrates with nextcloud.
Not in any way specific to /e/OS.
> My Fairphone 3 with e/OS
You're using a device vulnerable to serious known remote exploits including in the cellular radio, GPS, GPU and much more.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •richarddebruin
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd iPhones have far more substance behind their privacy and security marketing than /e/OS where users don't get basic privacy/security patches without huge delays or at all.
You've brought up 3 features in /e/OS which aren't in any way exclusive to /e/OS and which are poorly implemented in it. Not clear how that's meant to address the huge privacy and security flaws. Enumerating badness for DNS filtering also doesn't work nearly as well as they portray it, especially their take on it.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •idf.social/@djoerd/11489854196…
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
2025-07-22 19:30:15
GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd Your claims are objectively false. /e/OS is absolutely engaging in extremely false marketing about privacy, security, updates, usability and compatibility. They've repeatedly spread misinformation about GrapheneOS and it's why we started posting about it.
/e/OS is not a safe option for anyone to use and does not offer a reasonable alternative to Apple or Google products. It is not more focused on regular people than GrapheneOS, contrary to their misleading claims about us.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd /e/OS is certainly not on our side. They aren't in the same space as GrapheneOS in the first place but rather only pretend to be as part of their marketing. They've repeatedly engaged in attacks on GrapheneOS through spreading misinformation about it and making personal attacks on our team.
> Happy to try Graphene once it runs on ethical hardware like the Fairphone.
Fairphone devices do not meet our basic hardware security and update requirements. False marketing is not ethical.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •idf.social/@djoerd/11490363881…
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
2025-07-23 17:06:27
GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd Fairphone is directly participating in the false marketing by Murena for /e/OS. They present it as being far more private than it is and lead people to believe it isn't going to be using Google services and giving highly privileged access to them when it does.
Making baseless personal attacks on our team claiming we're delusional, paranoid, etc. has been repeatedly done by the founder of /e/OS and Murena. You're demonstrating how their community follows this lead.
Monew
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to Monew • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd @monew
> Did you know it block trackers inside Android apps
All it provides is a terrible implementation of DNS-based filtering. Contrary to the false marketing, it cannot stop privacy invasive behavior by apps It blocks a small portion of client side connections to domains not used for actual functionality. Vast majority of privacy invasive behavior remains and it's trivially bypassed. RethinkDNS is a better implementation usable everywhere, but DNS-based filtering is very limited.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @monew
> and allows you to use a fake location
This is a standard Android feature called Mock Location.
> I can recommend a Fairphone with e/OS to prevent such events in the future.
The reality is that /e/OS is an extraordinarily insecure and non-private OS being marketed as something it's not. It does not provide people with the basic Android privacy/security patches and doesn't keep the basic security model intact. Murena even sells people already end-of-life devices.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Here's information from the founder of DivestOS:
Issues with /e/OS: codeberg.org/divested-mobile/d…
ASB update history: web.archive.org/web/2024123100…
Chromium update history: web.archive.org/web/2025011921…
Chromium update summary: infosec.exchange/@divested/112…
Here's an article from a privacy and security expert (Mike Kuketz) which touches on various issues including severely delayed patches, user tracking in the update client and privacy invasive default connections:
kuketz-blog.de/e-datenschutzfr
/e/: Datenschutzfreundlich bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig sicher – Custom-ROMs Teil6
kuketz-blog.deDjoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •@djoerd @monew Your claims are objectively false. /e/OS is absolutely engaging in extremely false marketing about privacy, security, updates, usability and compatibility. They've repeatedly spread misinformation about GrapheneOS and it's why we started posting about it.
/e/OS is not a safe option for anyone to use and does not offer a reasonable alternative to Apple or Google products. It is not more focused on regular people than GrapheneOS, contrary to their misleading claims about us.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @monew /e/OS is certainly not on our side. They aren't in the same space as GrapheneOS in the first place but rather only pretend to be as part of their marketing. They've repeatedly engaged in attacks on GrapheneOS through spreading misinformation about it and making personal attacks on our team.
> Happy to try Graphene once it runs on ethical hardware like the Fairphone.
Fairphone devices do not meet our basic hardware security and update requirements. False marketing is not ethical.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@monew idf.social/@djoerd/11490363881…
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
2025-07-23 17:06:27
GrapheneOS
in reply to Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉 • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@djoerd @monew Fairphone is directly participating in the false marketing by Murena for /e/OS. They present it as being far more private than it is and lead people to believe it isn't going to be using Google services and giving highly privileged access to them when it does.
Making baseless personal attacks on our team claiming we're delusional, paranoid, etc. has been repeatedly done by the founder of /e/OS and Murena. You're demonstrating how their community follows this lead.
Djoerd Hiemstra 🍉
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •richarddebruin
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to richarddebruin • • •@richarddebruin @djoerd @monew You won't be following us for much longer so you'll be spared reading the accurate information we provide on these topics.
> First of all @djoerd is not attacking anyone.
They're promoting products in response to us with inaccurate marketing claims. They've repeatedly misrepresented our statements and made attacks on us, contrary to your claim here.
> And I understand that he say paranoid.
Part of ongoing personal targeting and harassment from /e/OS supporters.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@richarddebruin @djoerd @monew
> Look at all the messages he gets back?
They're choosing to repeatedly reply to the posts we make on our timeline, as you are. If you don't want to have a discussion, why start a discussion? Our instance has a limit of 500 characters and that's not enough to write detailed responses so we make multiple posts. In this thread, we've made 2-3 posts (below 1500 characters) for several responses. It's quite strange to imply that somehow makes us insane or paranoid.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@richarddebruin @djoerd @monew
> And Fairphone is a Dutch company that creating fair phones. I think you know their story. And their phones are more fair then Pixel phones.
We know for a fact that the claims about privacy, security, updates and long-term support are not accurate. Therefore, we're skeptical about other claims.
> And they are not really an OS company.
They make their own OS and are closely partnered with Murena, a company attacking GrapheneOS with misinformation for years.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@richarddebruin @djoerd @monew
> Maybe graphenos should work together with Fairphone so the next phone is fair and safe?
Fairphone doesn't need help from us to ship Android OS updates with less delay, to avoid delays for backports to older OS versions or to provide better overall security features.
Fairphone joined in to support Murena in their attacks on GrapheneOS by misleading people with a corporate speak response not addressing what we said in response to us debunking misinformation.
richarddebruin
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •oxidand
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •It's some #European thing that I just can't understand. There's a lot of that going on here - "buy European!". When I ask why European is somehow better by default, I get a lot of criticism in return. I've started to think of it as a cult. 😅
#buyeuropean
Sunshine
in reply to oxidand • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Sunshine • • •thereisnoanderson
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •unexpectedteapot
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Sun Thief // Adam
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Grapheme sets really high standards for security, setting thresholds that other OSes can't provide.
I really didn't want to buy a Pixel initially but the features Grapheme provides over the other OSes ultimately became worth it to me.
A couple months into the plunge and it works like a charm. I can't really imagine running Lineage, e, or Calyx because it feels like only going part of the way.
javensbukan
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •These are valid concerns.
And I would try Graphene, but its hardware support is kind of a joke.
I will never buy a Google device, so the fact that that's their main hardware focus is a huge issue for me.
GrapheneOS
in reply to javensbukan • • •@javensbukan GrapheneOS has very reasonable hardware security and update requirements:
grapheneos.org/faq#future-devi…
Currently, Pixels are the only devices meeting the security and update requirements while providing proper support for using another OS.
You cannot simply take any hardware, put another OS on it and have a private and secure device. Hardware, firmware and driver security matters a lot. Broad device support goes against privacy and security, which means it's an explicit non-goal.
GrapheneOS Frequently Asked Questions
GrapheneOSGrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •avg_joe
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to avg_joe • • •Stephan Paternotte
in reply to javensbukan • • •GOS' hardware support isn't the joke. They hold strict hardware requirements for a reason: security. The joke is on all the other phone manufacturers leaving out relevant hardware components, I assume to reduce costs.
Feel free to invest some time in learning more about #GrapheneOS before judging. grapheneos.org/faq
GrapheneOS Frequently Asked Questions
GrapheneOSjavensbukan
in reply to Stephan Paternotte • • •@S_Paternotte People have competing priorities. 📊
Security is one of them.
Not giving money to Google and the USA is another.
I miss when mobile OSes weren't a duopoly.
GrapheneOS
in reply to javensbukan • • •/e/OS isn't only highly insecure but also not a private OS at all. Sending off sensitive user data to OpenAI without informing users but rather only having it covered in their Terms of Use is the tip of the iceberg for how they handle privacy for /e/OS and Murena services.
There's nothing ethical about providing funding to scammers who are attacking real privacy and security projects to promote their products. Our posts about it are a response to years of attacks.
javensbukan
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@S_Paternotte
I'm not sure why everyone thinks I'm a shill for /e/OS. I'm simply stating the lack of hardware support sucks.
That's literally *all*.
GrapheneOS
in reply to javensbukan • • •@javensbukan @S_Paternotte GrapheneOS has support for every single device meeting the hardware security requirements listed at grapheneos.org/faq#future-devi… which permits a non-stock OS to use them. These requirements are very reasonable as they're simply industry standard security features and updates.
We're working with an OEM towards their some of their future devices meeting our requirements and having official GrapheneOS support. We aren't going to have insecure GrapheneOS devices as a shortcut.
GrapheneOS Frequently Asked Questions
GrapheneOSOmega
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Omega • • •Xtreix
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Xtreix
in reply to Omega • • •@purplerabbit
This has nothing to do with liking or disliking /e/OS, are you pretending not to understand in order to feed a false narrative ? Murena is a for-profit company that misleads all its users, they receive millions of dollars in subsidies from the EU to maintain their invasive and insecure operating system that contributes to mass surveillance, users data are not protected on the devices sold by Murena, the statements of freedom, privacy and security on their website are bullshit, pushing the limits of longevity is incompatible with providing a private and secure mobile device, someone has to say something and GrapheneOS and the community do, and we're clearly not the first to have done so.
Want a Fairphone ? Fine, use a Fairphone, I'd like Pixels and iPhones to have a similar level of repairability, but never expect to get good security and privacy in that case, it's a choice, and using /e/OS on your Fairphone will make the device even less secure and private than with the original operating system.
Omega
in reply to Xtreix • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to Omega • • •GrapheneOS
Unknown parent • • •Ichthyx
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •>Apple and Google both provide support for offline speech-to-text using local models. Users can configure it to be fully offline.
Is it supposed to work on GrapheneOS cause it infinite spine "load" for me.
(stateofresearch) HAS MOVED
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to (stateofresearch) HAS MOVED • • •@venisewurith Yes, it's still insecure. They've failed to ship High and Critical severity patches for the cellular radio and drivers across nearly all devices, even Pixels. Aside from that, carrier-based calls/texts lack decent privacy and security. You should use Signal or other options whenever possible and avoid carrier-based calls/texts. Google Messages has end-to-end encryption over RCS similar to iMessage between iOS users.
Carriers calls/texts use the internet for 4G and above anyway.
Harm
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
Unknown parent • • •GrapheneOS
Unknown parent • • •@martin
> Also believe that e/OS/ will help Graphene.
/e/OS are one of the main groups spreading misinformation about GrapheneOS. They mislead people into believing it's not usable or accessible to them. They mislead people into believing it's not a privacy project. They mislead people about app compatibility.
> promised with some level of support from a local company
There are multiple European companies selling phones with GrapheneOS with support including NitroKey.
Martin
Unknown parent • • •I personally know people that are too scared to make the jump to GOS, doesn't mean they're right about it, but we're humans and we're flawed. Fairphone with e/OS/ is promised with some level of support from a local company, it will help many make the jump to a privacy OS, a jump they wouldn't have made otherwise.
Some of that new population will later look for a better alternative, GOS, these would be users you wouldn't have had otherwise.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •@martin
> Some of that new population will later look for a better alternative, GOS, these would be users you wouldn't have had otherwise.
GrapheneOS would have more users and funding if /e/OS and other groups like them had not misled people about it with their substantial misinformation efforts. It would also have more users and funding if people were not being directed to use a scam with atrocious privacy and security instead.
GrapheneOS
Unknown parent • • •@4234223996ce6549720e66dd6bc4bb7efb9f25c60c4816d7bc47a65e1d80db24 @martin
From us:
discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134…
From Mike Kuketz:
kuketz-blog.de/e-datenschutzfr…
From the DivestOS founder:
issues with /e/OS: codeberg.org/divested-mobile/d…
asb update history: web.archive.org/web/2024123100…
chromium update history: web.archive.org/web/2025011921…
chromium update summary: infosec.exchange/@divested/112
Devices lacking standard privacy/security patches and protections aren't private - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum
GrapheneOS Discussion Forumenlund
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Martin
in reply to Martin • • •Without mentioning the fact that it will lead to more apps properly supporting security/privacy Android OS, the reason I believe it's a win for Graphene is because at the end of the day the truth is still out there, who's the king in the field (GOS) only requires a single Google search.
GrapheneOS
in reply to Martin • • •@martin /e/OS and Murena are harming the overall space, not only GrapheneOS. They're contributing to apps banning every alternate OS since what they provide is truly extraordinarily insecure. They're harming app compatibility, not helping it. They're providing a justification for the Play Integrity API existing.
> Without mentioning the fact that it will lead to more apps properly supporting security/privacy Android OS
No, the opposite. They have privileged Google services by default anyway.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Alexia
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •To be fair, whilst Google gives the option of doing it locally, GBoard also defaults to sending the data off to Google with no obvious way to disable it other than restricting network access AFAIK
Not to say that what /e/ is doing here is good or anything, though.
GrapheneOS
in reply to Alexia • • •@a
> To be fair, whilst Google gives the option of doing it locally, GBoard also defaults to sending the data off to Google with no obvious way to disable it other than restricting network access AFAIK
That's not true. Google explains how it works and has a toggle for offline processing called "Faster voice typing" where it downloads a model and does it locally. Apple does local processing by default and has a toggle to make sure no relevant data/metadata is sent. /e/OS quietly uses OpenAI.
GrapheneOS
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •Alexia
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •oh sorry, it's been a long time since I last used GBoard and when I did, it never prompted me with anything that implied there was any offline option at all, it just told me I couldn't transcribe whilst offline
That said, I was not trying to dispute anything about /e/ or murena
thanks for clearing it up!
GrapheneOS
in reply to Alexia • • •richarddebruin
Unknown parent • • •🏳️⚧️
in reply to GrapheneOS • • •