Yeah, its the "well, legally, we have to provide the source code, but we make it as painful and slow for you as we can without it becoming a blatant violation of the GPL."
I've never really understood why we chase Android-alikes on mobile platforms instead of trying to build on mainstream Linux. I know some folks in the nix community (nix-on-droid and other projects) have tried to bring us closer to this, but projects like Graphene seem to have a lot of traction.
All the existing apps are on Android and iOS. Graphene lets you run them. You can't have a bank account on a Linux phone* because they won't let you, but you can on Android including on Graphene.
* before replying snarkily that Android is Linux, please take a long walk off a short pier, thanks
yeah, people suggesting Android is Linux are as annoying as people saying Digital Unix/Tru64 was OSF/1, or MacOS/OSX is now Darwin or OSF/1 or Gnu Hurd itself.
What's stopping me from using a browser to log in to my bank? Assuming my bank is one of the ones that requires you to lock down sideloading (they aren't, but i know many are).
I had to replace a credit card yesterday. Part of the default flow involves the call center sending a notification to your app.
When I told them my android version was too old, it took them twenty minutes to find out they could instead send a text message. That text message sends you to a photo-and-id verification service, but that's another issue.
Soon, there won't even be an alternative flow. There are a lot of places where there already isn't.
GOS is broadly compatible with most phone use cases out of the box--chat, mail, browsing. A Google Play profile lets me use almost all apps (including my bank apps, but I understand that's not true for everyone).
In principle I agree about a Linux phone, but the gaps are much greater. I am also sympathetic to the GOS team's arguments that sandboxing on Android is better, and important on a device that allows control of essentially my whole life (2FA apps etc.)
What about running the whole Android infrastructure, but on top of a non-Android Linux distro? And this, on top of a Android kernel (otherwise you won't have the drivers yo uneed)
The advantage being, we can manage packages using a regular Linux distro
This is exactly where my head goes. There's nothing special about this hardware other than its small form factor. Sure, some desktop apps would likely want a different skin, but thats hardly limiting.
You mean Microsoft proactively kept shooting devs in the kneecaps?
Leaving phones behind on old incompatible OS versions 2 times in 3 years and switching app frameworks 3 times in 4 years does not a good app developer experience make.
Piled on top of that, Google became actively hostile to 3rd party developers building support for YouTube (and Gmail and Gmaps, but those had workarounds / alternatives).
I dont think app support is all that important. Most apps are garbage as they are ime, so rebuilding from scratch, or using existing software that runs fine on linux, would keep me happy.
Everyone else mentioned the app support which is true, but for graphene specifically, they do not like desktop Linux at all because they don't like its security. They would much rather build on AOSP than desktop linux.
I don't either. Don't we have free market capitalism? Why don't I have a Linux phone? And why do I need to worry that my government and banking apps won't work if I get a Linux phone?
Because in a free market you can't compel someone to support your niche platform, nor even compel someone to create the niche platform you want. The market for a Linux phone is tiny because there's almost no reason for the average phone user to prefer it over android.
If by "mainstream" Linux you mean something like postmarketOS, I'd suggest you look up reviews or give it a try yourself. A few months ago, people were reporting a hard time placing a call, taking a photo, etc.
>At the time of writing, within ~12 months, in 2027, the 2027 Signature, Razr fold, and Razr flip will meet the hardware security requirements and should have official GrapheneOS support.
Motorola is currently porting GrapheneOS to their devices.
A year ago or so, the ThinkPhone 23 (Snapdragon 8, 2023, a weird "flagship") was available for 229€ new on various retail stores. The phone also supports Mobian/PostmarketOS and the bootloader is unlockable with no adverse effects.
Out of nowhere, it received (along with other older phones) updates up to Android 16.
I wouldn't be surprised if the "sudden" update was just a side effect of Motorola preparing for Graphene to be released on these older phones.
Anyone has any idea if this changes current situation with nfc payments? Currently many banking apps do not work, and google pay is just unavailable, to my understanding it was related to secure chip on phone - as graphene wasnt "stocked" android os approved by google, i dearly hope this chnages with motorola
I bought the Moto signature a month ago , I already assumed it prolly won't support graphene, since some of the previous replies on X indicate that the graphene team requires full hardware compliance with their requirements, and the Signature apparently is not compliant yet.
Anyway I ended up buying a really good smartphone.. just not a graphene supported haha :(
Also this is really great collab from moto & graphene as more vendors will officially recognize Graphene as legit OS (legel/OEM is different concept). I heard month ago Volkswagen banned graphene, hopefully we we will see moving things in opposite direction...
They didn't "ban" them, but they did enable some attestation feature that effectively "bans" anything that isn't Google Android.
Which still makes you wonder why Volkswagen is so keen on alienating what little is left of their customer base with completely stupid security theater.
Because the EU is run by lawyers and lawsuits. They probably decided there was a risk of being sued for insufficient security if they didn't enable every security feature, and they considered it as zero impact to customers because nobody uses graphene.
Yes, but that is still very confusing to me, because you're not paying other people money so that they just follow incentives without thinking, vision or backbone.
The whole idea of buying something is giving people money for their (assumed correct) judgement, which then leads to desired artifacts downstream.
"The initial devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027. The initial devices will be flagships so they'll be higher end hardware than Pixels at a higher price. Lower end devices will take more time to meet our requirements since the updates and security features aren't as good. It's mostly due to how Qualcomm handles it. The latest Snapdragon flagships have the best security features. We'll also need Motorola to start paying them for longer updates below flagships."
I don't doubt they will cost more than the Pixel line, but I'm somewhat skeptical that the hardware will be higher quality. Perhaps my idea of what Motorola is capable of is outdated.
Google’s Tensor chipset is weak by modern standards, and Motorola is taking the strongest off the shelf processors from the best mobile chip designer (Qualcomm).
Realistically, most smartphones are made by the same ODMs. Since they don't make their own screens, shells, CPUs or modems, the only thing being set apart is the software.
I'm not selecting which phone I buy on whether the stock OS comes with lockscreen shortcuts. At best, a software requirement someone might use as a deciding factor is OS support and bootloader unlock. The real differences are in hardware: size, battery life, chipset speed, RAM or other local model enablers, picture quality (this part also depends on good software to be fair), included accessories, satellite connectivity hardware, headphone jack, gimmicks like UWB or FM radio support, whether it's a flip/fold phone, storage space / sdcard support... all hardware differences
Iirc they said they will be able to release Android updates like Android 17, for example, at the time it's released. This year it was a few weeks until it came to stable.
This somewhat indicates to me it will be available when the Motorolas release which should be on their regular release patterns. That's been May for the 2025 and 2026 Razrs.
Security-through-obscurity (i.e. using a custom ROM on a lesser-known device) does have some upsides, since you're less likely to be compatible with off-the-shelf exploits. But this is much less true now that LLMs exist, and anyone who can afford the tokens can port any exploit to any and all vulnerable devices.
Who maintains the kernel+driver trees used by the LineageOS port you're using? And what's the modem's security like?
This is a known adversary and highly skilled opponent org who has even attacked senators in charge of their appropriations. I find anything they say or do to be highly suspect and default guilt until cleared.
And backdoor isn't the same as mathematical vulnerabilities. I can easily see them pushing an encryption that would give them 10 or 20 bits complexity reduction.
Since we're speculating here, I hope whatever phone you have allows you to lock the bootloader (My oneplus doesn't after installing LineageOS). And certainly NSA has no way of infiltrating AOSP or less hardened chipsets.
I found the promotion of GrapheneOS by Richard Medhurst on X after his phone was snatched and then allegedly rebooted (within 18 hours?!) very weird.
He is adamant that the state could not read his phone but all he has is their assurance that they could not read his phone. Of course they'll say they couldn't read it if they are after his contacts and network rather than after him.
(You could equally say that I am a deep state shill who is trying to discourage people from GrapheneOS. That is also possible, but I'd really prefer something like LinuxFromScratch for phones.)
>Of course they'll say they couldn't read it if they are after his contacts and network rather than after him.
From what a friend working in a state police cyber crime office says, "Cellebrite can't currently, unless its a Graphene OS user that's far behind on updates"
They also said iOS is equally safe unless you're an update or two behind.
GrapheneOS seems to do better than anything else at preventing AFU exploitation based on the leaks.
iOS will be quite good BFU but on iOS the auto reboot (brings phone to BFU after 72 hours without unlocking) is, well, 72 hours. On GrapheneOS it's 18 by default and can be as low as 10 minutes.
I ran Graphene without a Sim card for 2 months and as soon as I added a Sim card (with of course, difficult to vet networking) the phone is always hot and the battery life reduced by half. Might be a coincidence but also made me rethink how I feel about Graphene
How many apps have network permission? Did you install anything from the play store at all? As a rule of thumb, the play store and everything on it is spyware.
I had the opposite experience. I was pleasantly surprised by the battery life you can get when your phone isn't full of shitware apps and even when you do install shitware, the OS helps you confine it.
What Pixel do you have? Modem quality varies and signal strength could play a role. My 9a gets hot in areas with poor reception but is fine at work where I get over a gigabit down.
> .. obtaining source code via Google Drive ...
Let this sink in. Google, this small tech company (correct me if I'm wrong), is peddling source code via tarballs on google drive.
Something the head of the Android ecosystem, Sameer Samat could be proud of on his CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sameersamat
Yeah, its the "well, legally, we have to provide the source code, but we make it as painful and slow for you as we can without it becoming a blatant violation of the GPL."
Do you really feel the need to start a witch-hunt? Shaming is one thing, but linking to personal profiles is simply unacceptable.
Why not, his linkedin profile is public and easily findable. This is not doxxing.
I've never really understood why we chase Android-alikes on mobile platforms instead of trying to build on mainstream Linux. I know some folks in the nix community (nix-on-droid and other projects) have tried to bring us closer to this, but projects like Graphene seem to have a lot of traction.
All the existing apps are on Android and iOS. Graphene lets you run them. You can't have a bank account on a Linux phone* because they won't let you, but you can on Android including on Graphene.
* before replying snarkily that Android is Linux, please take a long walk off a short pier, thanks
> All the existing apps are on Android and iOS. Graphene lets you run them.
We have waydroid for that.
> You can't have a bank account on a Linux phone* because they won't let you, but you can on Android including on Graphene.
Unless of course it uses those stupid integrity apis to block anything that isn't stock.
yeah, people suggesting Android is Linux are as annoying as people saying Digital Unix/Tru64 was OSF/1, or MacOS/OSX is now Darwin or OSF/1 or Gnu Hurd itself.
What's stopping me from using a browser to log in to my bank? Assuming my bank is one of the ones that requires you to lock down sideloading (they aren't, but i know many are).
The websites don't have feature parity with the apps these days. Things like being able to deposit a cheque aren't available among other things.
I had to replace a credit card yesterday. Part of the default flow involves the call center sending a notification to your app. When I told them my android version was too old, it took them twenty minutes to find out they could instead send a text message. That text message sends you to a photo-and-id verification service, but that's another issue.
Soon, there won't even be an alternative flow. There are a lot of places where there already isn't.
The 2FA code you need to get from the phone app to log in on a desktop. It isn't 2005 any more.
Apparently I live in 2005 then? I do 2FA with the same chip+pin method that I use to pay in the store. Works in any browser
Highly location dependent. This is more true in Europe than in America.
Right, 2FA. My bank wants me to log in to my phone app and then sends an SMS to the same phone to confirm the app transaction. It's super-secure.
Some banks are app only and/or build MFA functionality into their apps.
The bank website typically needs the app to enable two factor authentication in a lot of places.
For eg. There's no browser based alternative to make UPI payments that i know of.
Some (European) banks/healthcare apps block GOS and require stock android. Just saying
once Huawei was forbidden from using Android - that's when people ie western markets & the world at large should've shifted. look at HarmonyOS.
in China - there's no google apps available on their 'android' versions.
their platforms are already performant and fluid - so people should build on that.
GOS is broadly compatible with most phone use cases out of the box--chat, mail, browsing. A Google Play profile lets me use almost all apps (including my bank apps, but I understand that's not true for everyone).
In principle I agree about a Linux phone, but the gaps are much greater. I am also sympathetic to the GOS team's arguments that sandboxing on Android is better, and important on a device that allows control of essentially my whole life (2FA apps etc.)
Because you need app support. Not even Microsoft could pull that off.
What about running the whole Android infrastructure, but on top of a non-Android Linux distro? And this, on top of a Android kernel (otherwise you won't have the drivers yo uneed)
The advantage being, we can manage packages using a regular Linux distro
A lot of "non Android Linux distributions" like sailfish os actually use a lot of Android infrastructure to keep working.
Drivers doesn't just mean the kernel. It's the user space binary blobs and services that need to talk to the kernel to enable the hardware.
Other than that there's waydroid, alien dalvik etc.. that run another Android instance in a container.
The thing is a lot of Android applications use safety net/other methods to make sure they only run on. "Approved"/stock hardware.
This is exactly where my head goes. There's nothing special about this hardware other than its small form factor. Sure, some desktop apps would likely want a different skin, but thats hardly limiting.
App support, stable ABI, uniform UI/UX, hardware vendor cooperation...
You mean Microsoft proactively kept shooting devs in the kneecaps?
Leaving phones behind on old incompatible OS versions 2 times in 3 years and switching app frameworks 3 times in 4 years does not a good app developer experience make.
Piled on top of that, Google became actively hostile to 3rd party developers building support for YouTube (and Gmail and Gmaps, but those had workarounds / alternatives).
I dont think app support is all that important. Most apps are garbage as they are ime, so rebuilding from scratch, or using existing software that runs fine on linux, would keep me happy.
Doesn't windows run android apps natively now?
It doesn't. There was a plan, but Microsoft abandoned it.
Everyone else mentioned the app support which is true, but for graphene specifically, they do not like desktop Linux at all because they don't like its security. They would much rather build on AOSP than desktop linux.
AOSP has way better security and therefore privacy than desktop linux.
Because Android is miles ahead in terms of security, permission management, app separation, power management, privacy...
Linux crowd can not even agree on compositor, and if systemd or sudo is a good idea.
All we had to do was build PWAs instead of native apps and instead all we did was build PWAs into bad browser wrappers.
I don't either. Don't we have free market capitalism? Why don't I have a Linux phone? And why do I need to worry that my government and banking apps won't work if I get a Linux phone?
Because in a free market you can't compel someone to support your niche platform, nor even compel someone to create the niche platform you want. The market for a Linux phone is tiny because there's almost no reason for the average phone user to prefer it over android.
no, we don't, far from it.
(which doesn't mean there's not a lot farther from here).
Because you don't have capital.
AOSP is Linux.
If by "mainstream" Linux you mean something like postmarketOS, I'd suggest you look up reviews or give it a try yourself. A few months ago, people were reporting a hard time placing a call, taking a photo, etc.
Specific devices:
>At the time of writing, within ~12 months, in 2027, the 2027 Signature, Razr fold, and Razr flip will meet the hardware security requirements and should have official GrapheneOS support. Motorola is currently porting GrapheneOS to their devices.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49038982
A year ago or so, the ThinkPhone 23 (Snapdragon 8, 2023, a weird "flagship") was available for 229€ new on various retail stores. The phone also supports Mobian/PostmarketOS and the bootloader is unlockable with no adverse effects.
Out of nowhere, it received (along with other older phones) updates up to Android 16.
I wouldn't be surprised if the "sudden" update was just a side effect of Motorola preparing for Graphene to be released on these older phones.
No current Motorola phones meet their hardware requirements. 2027 flagship models will be the first to be supported.
https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/2058730195041812839
https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/2064124713501163912
Not sure about other phones, but ThinkPhone 23 was supposed to get Android 16 anyway
https://www.androidauthority.com/lenovo-thinkphone-hands-on-...
Anyone has any idea if this changes current situation with nfc payments? Currently many banking apps do not work, and google pay is just unavailable, to my understanding it was related to secure chip on phone - as graphene wasnt "stocked" android os approved by google, i dearly hope this chnages with motorola
I have a GrapheneOS phone and I pay with Curve.
I bought the Moto signature a month ago , I already assumed it prolly won't support graphene, since some of the previous replies on X indicate that the graphene team requires full hardware compliance with their requirements, and the Signature apparently is not compliant yet.
Anyway I ended up buying a really good smartphone.. just not a graphene supported haha :(
Also this is really great collab from moto & graphene as more vendors will officially recognize Graphene as legit OS (legel/OEM is different concept). I heard month ago Volkswagen banned graphene, hopefully we we will see moving things in opposite direction...
They didn't "ban" them, but they did enable some attestation feature that effectively "bans" anything that isn't Google Android.
Which still makes you wonder why Volkswagen is so keen on alienating what little is left of their customer base with completely stupid security theater.
Because the EU is run by lawyers and lawsuits. They probably decided there was a risk of being sued for insufficient security if they didn't enable every security feature, and they considered it as zero impact to customers because nobody uses graphene.
Yes, but that is still very confusing to me, because you're not paying other people money so that they just follow incentives without thinking, vision or backbone.
The whole idea of buying something is giving people money for their (assumed correct) judgement, which then leads to desired artifacts downstream.
No, the idea of buying is that you get something in exchange for money.
Yes, but not any something, but a specific something shaped by taste.
I don't doubt they will cost more than the Pixel line, but I'm somewhat skeptical that the hardware will be higher quality. Perhaps my idea of what Motorola is capable of is outdated.
Google’s Tensor chipset is weak by modern standards, and Motorola is taking the strongest off the shelf processors from the best mobile chip designer (Qualcomm).
Plus the Samsung Exynos modems that they were using from Pixel 6-10 (11 switched to Mediatek) had worse power efficiency and performance vs Qualcomm.
So...what's your comment? Opposing Motorola's comment, in that they already buy the best? Supporting, in that their standards haven't dropped?
Realistically, most smartphones are made by the same ODMs. Since they don't make their own screens, shells, CPUs or modems, the only thing being set apart is the software.
Except that it's all Android?
I'm not selecting which phone I buy on whether the stock OS comes with lockscreen shortcuts. At best, a software requirement someone might use as a deciding factor is OS support and bootloader unlock. The real differences are in hardware: size, battery life, chipset speed, RAM or other local model enablers, picture quality (this part also depends on good software to be fair), included accessories, satellite connectivity hardware, headphone jack, gimmicks like UWB or FM radio support, whether it's a flip/fold phone, storage space / sdcard support... all hardware differences
> the updates and security features aren't as good [on lower end Motorola devices]
Having looked at some low-end Motorolas recently, this is accurate (albeit an understatement!)
If they only "should" be available in 2027, that sounds like late 2027.
Iirc they said they will be able to release Android updates like Android 17, for example, at the time it's released. This year it was a few weeks until it came to stable.
This somewhat indicates to me it will be available when the Motorolas release which should be on their regular release patterns. That's been May for the 2025 and 2026 Razrs.
An Android distro with dubious funding that only runs on high-end hardware from NSA suppliers.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll keep using Lineage on any cheap smartphone under the sun.
Security-through-obscurity (i.e. using a custom ROM on a lesser-known device) does have some upsides, since you're less likely to be compatible with off-the-shelf exploits. But this is much less true now that LLMs exist, and anyone who can afford the tokens can port any exploit to any and all vulnerable devices.
Who maintains the kernel+driver trees used by the LineageOS port you're using? And what's the modem's security like?
Are you also one of those people who think AES is backdoored because the NSA recommends it?
A member of the NSA also provided the ECDSA P-256 curve seeds but totally can't remember why
Ridiculous comment.
This is a known adversary and highly skilled opponent org who has even attacked senators in charge of their appropriations. I find anything they say or do to be highly suspect and default guilt until cleared.
And backdoor isn't the same as mathematical vulnerabilities. I can easily see them pushing an encryption that would give them 10 or 20 bits complexity reduction.
So no, I don't trust AES either.
Hitler ate sugar so I don't.
Since we're speculating here, I hope whatever phone you have allows you to lock the bootloader (My oneplus doesn't after installing LineageOS). And certainly NSA has no way of infiltrating AOSP or less hardened chipsets.
so you think whole thing is a honeypot ? I mean you're not alone.
I found the promotion of GrapheneOS by Richard Medhurst on X after his phone was snatched and then allegedly rebooted (within 18 hours?!) very weird.
He is adamant that the state could not read his phone but all he has is their assurance that they could not read his phone. Of course they'll say they couldn't read it if they are after his contacts and network rather than after him.
(You could equally say that I am a deep state shill who is trying to discourage people from GrapheneOS. That is also possible, but I'd really prefer something like LinuxFromScratch for phones.)
>Of course they'll say they couldn't read it if they are after his contacts and network rather than after him.
From what a friend working in a state police cyber crime office says, "Cellebrite can't currently, unless its a Graphene OS user that's far behind on updates"
They also said iOS is equally safe unless you're an update or two behind.
GrapheneOS seems to do better than anything else at preventing AFU exploitation based on the leaks.
iOS will be quite good BFU but on iOS the auto reboot (brings phone to BFU after 72 hours without unlocking) is, well, 72 hours. On GrapheneOS it's 18 by default and can be as low as 10 minutes.
Good luck on that, Cellebrite :)
I ran Graphene without a Sim card for 2 months and as soon as I added a Sim card (with of course, difficult to vet networking) the phone is always hot and the battery life reduced by half. Might be a coincidence but also made me rethink how I feel about Graphene
You can ask on the forum for troubleshooting. Pixels just have bad performance unfortunately.
https://discuss.grapheneos.org
How many apps have network permission? Did you install anything from the play store at all? As a rule of thumb, the play store and everything on it is spyware.
I had the opposite experience. I was pleasantly surprised by the battery life you can get when your phone isn't full of shitware apps and even when you do install shitware, the OS helps you confine it.
What Pixel do you have? Modem quality varies and signal strength could play a role. My 9a gets hot in areas with poor reception but is fine at work where I get over a gigabit down.
9. I left it with 70% battery for 5 hours and came home and it was red hot and dead. In a city with no reception issues.
That's strange. Have you tried the stock OS and had the same problem?
Did you check the forums or research for any benign reason that could happen? I've run Graphene on Pixel 9 and 10 and never had such battery issues.