I've set up GrapheneOS on my Pixel with 2FA fingerprint + PIN unlock. No way will anyone be getting into it without my cooperation.
My only issue was less compatibility with my local emergency services, since they can't see me on a map for some reason if I call from a GOS phone.
My solution to that was a second Pixel as an emergency phone - one with the stock OS, that I'll swap sims with and take with me when hiking, stand up paddle bording and doing other activities that carry risk. This phone has no sensitive information in it. I also have a PLB for added protection.
> My solution to that was a second Pixel as an emergency phone
Picking a Pixel specifically as an emergency phone is quite the choice, given years of on and off 911 issues.
...with the Google software.
Don't know if/how this works in the US, but the EU emergency number can always be called without a simcard/subscription, so no need to swap simcards. (And sometimes even from a locked phone)
US is the same. I dialed 911 once as a child from an American phone in Indonesia without a SIM card in it. Freaked out and hung up.
First I’m hearing Graphene causes issues with E911 - is this a setting?
Is it E911 or an A-GPS issue?
GrapheneOS provides PSDS, SUPL (which are enabled by default IIRC) and an optional Wi-Fi based location provider, so there shouldn't be any positioning issues with E911
Thought so.
I do wonder what this guy’s on about, hope he comes back.
Is there anything actually preventing Samsung or another vendor from adopting GrapheneOS's security innovations?
GrapheneOS is seemingly working with an OEM to make a GrapheneOS smartphone. Its probably not samsung, but would still be an established vendor
It better not be Samsung...
It isn't Samsung
I'd love this for a Fairphone.
They are not making a "GrapheneOS smartphone", they are just helping providers make their new devices compatible with the security requirements, so GrapheneOS can be installed on it. But GrapheneOS will not come by default AFAIK.
Willingness to pay great developers and engineers to build secure hardware,
understanding sec,
them observing actual demand for security.
History says don't hold your breath.
We get lucky once in a while, like with Google's hardware (without their software).
The hardware Samsung provides is not up to spec.
Probably their legal obligation to comply with secret government orders (FISA, NSL etc - the government probably already said don't make unhackable phones or else) and their informal wish to remain on the regime's good side.
Obligatory https://xkcd.com/538
https://grapheneos.org/features#duress :D
Use that and you'll get charged with destruction of evidence
if you're relying on such feature, you'll probably serve less time being charged with destruction of evidence...
If the Duress PIN is an obvious one, it may be one of the first ones your adversaries try. Like 1111 for example. So you may not even have to tell them the Duress PIN for them to attempt it.
Surely that's better than being charged with whatever crime they're trying to pin on you?
It depends, often the cover up is worse than the crime. See: Enron, Watergate, Trevor Jacob
How would they know? Genuine question, I don't run GOS.
They'll have to prove it.
Cooperation under duress is still cooperation.