I didn’t say that they should be thrown away? I’m not sure where that came from.
I said that I would rather use something else that was designed without the hardware security features in mind. It’s all about your personal threat model, and mine does not align with this fork of Graphene. I’m either going to use something like Lineage which has at least been tested from a security standpoint (and does not have possible zero days because of patch working a ROM designed with specific hardware features not available on my device) or I’m going to get a used pixel and run Graphene. Even Calyx would be preferred to this once they start up development again.
I think they are frustrated at repeating themselves, as I’m sure you are.
I tend to agree that, even though the hardware security isn’t there, GrapheneOS has some good features that would make it an alternative for these devices. If your threat model doesn’t include eg: physical access to the device then it still has benefits.
Sorry that I interpreted your comment as suggesting that anything less than a Pixel is not worth trying to improve the security of.
What’s with the hostility?
No hostility intended. But I still don’t understand why you think that omitting Graphene’s Pixel-requiring hardening features would cause Graphite to be less secure than other Android distributions which also lack those features.
I didn’t say that they should be thrown away? I’m not sure where that came from.
I said that I would rather use something else that was designed without the hardware security features in mind. It’s all about your personal threat model, and mine does not align with this fork of Graphene. I’m either going to use something like Lineage which has at least been tested from a security standpoint (and does not have possible zero days because of patch working a ROM designed with specific hardware features not available on my device) or I’m going to get a used pixel and run Graphene. Even Calyx would be preferred to this once they start up development again.
What’s with the hostility?
I think they are frustrated at repeating themselves, as I’m sure you are.
I tend to agree that, even though the hardware security isn’t there, GrapheneOS has some good features that would make it an alternative for these devices. If your threat model doesn’t include eg: physical access to the device then it still has benefits.
Sorry that I interpreted your comment as suggesting that anything less than a Pixel is not worth trying to improve the security of.
No hostility intended. But I still don’t understand why you think that omitting Graphene’s Pixel-requiring hardening features would cause Graphite to be less secure than other Android distributions which also lack those features.