zlacker

>>joseph+(OP)
This story with restricting users is a similar one to Manifest V3 in Chromium.

But we don't have anything like FF as an alternative to go from Android. Especially considering banks require "certified OS".

>>zx8080+E7
I switched to a Linux smartphone because I've had enough of the duopoly.

I also switched banks so I can use my bank card as the 2FA device, similar to CAP. [0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_Authentication_Program

>>Hackbr+Wd
Which one?

>>russne+7h
It’s a Librem 5. I’m looking for a more powerful model that can also run mainline(-ish) Linux.

>>Hackbr+si
Seeing as GrapheneOS appear to be recommended on the newest Pixel models, I wonder if it shouldn't be too difficult to get Arch Linux running on them with the AUR plasma-mobile?

>>russne+9k
Run away from Graphene, it is suspicious at best scenario and dangerous at worst.

Just observe that the key factor is to be independent from Google and then the only recommended devices from their side are exactly google devices where nobody here can have an idea of what is modified inside them.

You'd be better off supporting other distributions like Calyx, which have no problems in supporting other devices like the fairphone and so on.

>>nunobr+gl
I was very interested in Graphene, do you have other grounds for your suspicions?

>>duesab+Ml
I agree with the parent. GrapheneOS puts security above freedom, which is wrong. It forces you to give your money to Google and rely on Google hardware, which is questionable in the long term. They refuse to support different hardware "for your security". Their developers are constantly attacking GNU/Linux phones, which are the actual long-term solution for both freedom and security.

>>44680624

>>43675380

>>fsflov+1y
> It forces you to give your money to Google and rely on Google hardware

These are the only reasonably secure mobile devices with proper alternate OS support. It's not GrapheneOS forcing people to use these devices if they want a device to run it but rather other OEMs not providing what is required. The hardware requirements are listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. GrapheneOS has been working with a major Android OEM since June 2025 towards their future devices meeting these requirements and providing official GrapheneOS support.

> Their developers are constantly attacking GNU/Linux phones, which are the actual long-term solution for both freedom and security.

These devices provide objectively far less privacy and security at a hardware, firmware and software level. Linux itself is not a long term approach to privacy and security due to being a massive monolithic kernel written in C with very poor security. A long term approach will involve moving over current software onto a reasonably secure base. Moving to a dramatically less private and secure desktop operating system stack would be a huge regression in both the short and long term. It's not advancing as quickly in those areas, would not the usability/functionality people expect and is definitely not the future of secure devices. Android's current incarnation based around the Linux kernel is not the future of secure devices either, but it's far more private and secure today with a clearer path to moving forward.