# Android Recommendations Should Reflect Real Life, Not Just Worst-Case Threat Models **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/android-recommendations-should-reflect-real-life-not-just-worst-case-threat-models/34840 **Category:** General **Created:** 2026-01-21T12:04:47Z **Posts:** 161 ## Post 1 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-21T12:04:47Z I really appreciate the work PrivacyGuides does. That said, I think the mobile recommendations have an extremity that doesn’t match how we approach recommending laptop/desktop hardware/software— and that mismatch deserves a rethink. On laptops and desktops we make no recommendations at all in terms of hardware, and there are a number of correct answers in terms of software. We don´t expect everyone to use coreboot or TPM or Qubes. But on Android, there’s only one “correct” answer: Google Pixel + GrapheneOS — and everything else is treated as fundamentally flawed. That’s not realistic for many people. There are many valid reasons someone might want something other than a Pixel, even if they care deeply about privacy: - They don’t want to give Google money but want to buy a new device - Pixels aren’t sold in their country - Pixels are out of their price range - Graphene doesn´t offer parental control options and pixels are a bad choice for a child’s first device if they are likely to get robbed for having one. - They need an SD card. (Pixels don’t have one.) - They need two physical SIM slots. (Pixels don’t offer that.) - They need a headphone jack. (Pixels don’t have one.) - They need a tablet with 4G/5G. (Pixels don’t offer that either.) - They need a rugged device - They need a very small form factor - They don´t want to shell out 140€ for a screen repair. - They want to buy hardware that is modular, ecological, fair-trade, or has hardware killswtiches - They care more about privacy than security We can’t brush all of these off as fringe needs. These are common, everyday use cases — and yet the Android guidance in PG doesn’t reflect them at all. But lets reflect for a minute on the last use case: our Android recommendations seem built almost exclusively around **high-end threat models** : nation-state adversaries, mercenary spyware, and physical device compromise. That matters — but for most people, the **actual risk** is not Pegasus or Israeli spyware firms, but surveillance capitalism: surveillance, tracking, data aggregation, ads, behavioural profiling, and the long-term social consequences of the destruction of our democracies from silicon valley technofascism. That doesn’t mean security doesn’t matter; it means that **security absolutism isn’t a substitute for meaningful privacy improvements people can make on a much wider variety of hardware**. The PG recommendation framework should acknowledge other custom ROMs, GSIs, and [UADNG](https://github.com/Universal-Debloater-Alliance/universal-android-debloater-next-generation/) while pointing out the security advantages of pixels. I fully expect Graphene fanboys to trash me in this thread. I love GOS and use it myself, and work at a weekly lab open to the public where we strongly recommend it for those most vulnerable to mercenary spyware: activists, lawyers, politicians, human rights defenders, antizionists, or a family member of any of these people. But that is not the reality of a huge part of the population affected by the privacy crisis. But this conversation matters — because the real privacy crisis isn’t just about individual digital security, it’s also about collective security and human security: preventing the slow, normalized collapse of democracy due to surveillance capitalism requires addressing not just the most extreme threat model, but also helping people make _better_, not _perfect_, choices about privacy in the real world. --- ## Post 2 by @jerm — 2026-01-21T12:17:56Z You will be soon able to run GrapheneOS on another device than Google Pixel [GrapheneOS: "We have a serious OEM partnership with a large co…" - GrapheneOS Mastodon](https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/115567906368050627) > - They need an SD card. (Pixels don’t have one.) which device have it other than fairphone which is non-secure device? > They need a headphone jack … This is PrivacyGuides not some other website like PTIO or brax, recommendations need to make sense and not just features that devices have, if so, chinese phones are getting a lot better than your average OEM that is lacking so far in battery tech etc. --- ## Post 3 by @Bumbashirovich — 2026-01-21T13:39:12Z The users here are very lazy: they’re content with security best practices and don’t want to test alternative products that focus on comfort. Don’t expect them to brainstorm and develop a new recommendation after the Graphene. --- ## Post 4 by @anon51983832 — 2026-01-21T13:46:54Z Enlighten us please. --- ## Post 5 by @notwithstanding — 2026-01-21T14:02:47Z I certainly agree with this. Often when someone posts about privacy or their concerns regarding it, there’s mention made of threat model. To carefully assess what you’re realistically vulnerable to, because at the extreme, every 1% of extra privacy is about 20% more daily annoyance to maintain. Most folks will just give up if they put that kind of burden on themselves, being overall worse. A harm reduction approach seems fit here. Potentially, we could develop or cooperatively promote guides on securing devices other than a Google Pixel + GrapheneOS. I personally use a Z Flip, and have gone to great extents to lock it down as much as I can, remove unnecessary services, and disable as much advertising & data collection as I can. Interested to see others’ thoughts on this. Great post. --- ## Post 6 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-21T14:03:08Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > PG recommendation framework should acknowledge other custom ROMs, GSIs, and [UADNG](https://github.com/Universal-Debloater-Alliance/universal-android-debloater-next-generation/) I wonder what exactly advantage these options provides. If you are trying to bandaid your device, it is totally fine cause you are trying to control the damage. However, if you are shopping a new device, your aeguments are a very tough sell. PG could provide a matrix to list out and briefly compare the options, but its not gonna look nice. --- ## Post 7 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-21T15:32:41Z Pixels not being widely available or too expensive is common though. --- ## Post 8 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-21T15:33:02Z > [@jerm](#): > > fairphone which is non-secure device? This dualism of pixel = secure vs. everything else = insecure is what I’m arguing against. I don’t think it’s that simple, otherwise there would be headlines about every person who has a (insert some phone brand here) getting their bank account emptied. > [@jerm](#): > > recommendations need to make sense and not just features that devices have I’m not recommending we select hardware based on the feature set, but instead recognize that by narrowing our criteria to only include the most secure software, we miss entire swaths of the population who may have other needs but still want the privacy advantages a custom ROM (or even debloating) will give. --- ## Post 9 by @Shampoo — 2026-01-21T15:39:41Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > The PG recommendation framework should acknowledge other custom ROMs, GSIs, and [UADNG](https://github.com/Universal-Debloater-Alliance/universal-android-debloater-next-generation/) while pointing out the security advantages of pixels. Other Android based OSes (they aren’t ROMs) have been recommended when they met criteria. DivestOS was listed until they discontinued it in Dec. 2024. If you know of any other that meet the (fairly basic) criteria I suggest you open a PR or link them in your thread. --- ## Post 10 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-01-21T15:40:19Z The issue is moreso with Android, not PG imo. Google Play Services is built into the OS with elevated permissions, constantly broadcasting your data in a fashion you have no control over. It cant be turned off while retaining basic functionality I sympathize & agree that Google Pixel & GOS is not a universal solution, and many will want or need stock Android. But stock Android is just really, really, really bad for privacy. Recommending it as an acceptable privacy solution feels incredibly misguided I think Lineage is the only surviving, serious alternative ROM. I dont think it meets our minimum criteria. I would need to double check that for certainty --- ## Post 11 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-21T15:40:33Z I believe PG have recommended other Android custom OS before such as Calyx or Lineage, or both. I think the argument against them now is there are more security trade-offs for little privacy gain, and they don’t have predictable roadmaps compared to GrapheneOS (Calyx halting development is a recent example). DivestOS was also recommended until it was discontinued. PG has catered to different Android users before, and I think the general recommendation now is to get the best Android device you can get with your budget that continues to receive security updates, and stick with stock Android instead of custom OS (debloating using ABD, but you have to know what you’re doing). EDIT: LineageOS doesn’t support bootloader locking apparently, which is one of the criterias. --- ## Post 12 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-21T15:52:35Z > [@ImTooPhaT](#): > > there are more security trade-offs for little privacy gain How anyone can call getting rid of pervasive system-wide spyware and bloatware in every stock android device (even pixels) “little privacy gain” is beyond me. it’s an enormous step forward for reclaiming user privacy. --- ## Post 13 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-21T15:58:11Z > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > I think Lineage is the only surviving, serious alternative ROM. I dont think it meets our minimum criteria. I would need to double check that for certainty The [custom ROM hardware wiki](https://customromhardware.miraheze.org/) lists more than a dozen custom Android OSs, many of which like iodé, crdroid, bliss, and lineage are very well alive and kicking. --- ## Post 14 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-21T16:04:38Z > [@Shampoo](#): > > If you know of any other that meet the (fairly basic) criteria I suggest you open a PR The problem is, the criteria are far too narrow, they exclude 99% of the hardware for security reasons, not for privacy reasons. That’s the central point of the argument I’m putting forward. It’s akin to telling people to only buy the few laptops that have secureboot, and then only install Qubes - that ignores that even if you install linux without FDE, you still get enormous privacy advantages. And since privacy is a group phenomenon, not an individual one, any step forward on anyone’s part is step forward for anyone they communicate with. --- ## Post 15 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-21T16:30:23Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > How anyone can call getting rid of pervasive system-wide spyware and bloatware in every stock android device (even pixels) “little privacy gain” is beyond me. it’s an enormous step forward for reclaiming user privacy. With LineageOS for example, it doesn’t support bootloader locking, which is a huge security trade-off. It means any apps installed within LineageOS could potentially modify your OS. Is it worth it for better privacy? It would be far safer to debloat your Android device using ABD. This option also doesn’t narrow down your phone choices either. iodéOS doesn’t support Verified Boot on every device, so that’s another difficult option to recommend. --- ## Post 16 by @Shampoo — 2026-01-21T16:41:41Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > The problem is, the criteria are far too narrow Five years of hardware support, a secure element, sold in stores, and supports a recommended custom OS are too narrow??? Pray tell what you think the criteria should be. --- ## Post 17 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-21T16:52:26Z I think OP is arguing the phone criteria in conjunction with alt distribution criteria makes device choices too narrow. Because one of the criteria is “Must support at least one of our recommended custom operating systems”, which is currently GrapheneOS only. Their argument is other OS are viable for privacy and PG are leaving out non-Pixel Android users with their recommendation. --- ## Post 18 by @notwithstanding — 2026-01-21T16:59:39Z Even more so, if we want privacy to become an expectation among people who aren’t willing to buy-in to the tune of acquiring an entirely new and very specific device, along with installing and using a far less accessible OS, we are going to ensure that most people never even dip their toes into thinking about and protecting their own privacy. --- ## Post 19 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-21T17:05:01Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > Pixel + GrapheneOS — and everything else is treated as fundamentally flawed That’s because everything else is. Should we deny reality just because only 1 thing fits the criteria? The situation with phones is probably the worst out there, second only to the browser situation. A phone hardening and opsec guide would be useful but I don’t think it should be recommended. --- ## Post 20 by @Shampoo — 2026-01-21T17:19:33Z > [@ImTooPhaT](#): > > Their argument is other OS are viable for privacy What other OS is viable? Are you talking about the stock OSes? That would fall under a harm reduction guide rather than a recommendation. --- ## Post 21 by @Menkork — 2026-01-21T17:32:18Z I think phone hardening / harm reduction guide should be one of the very very few places where a guide is kinda of needed. One of the main things that frustrates people is that when they get into privacy, they view it as an all or nothing game. And that’s where people quit. And I think smart phones, are one of those places that leads them to giving up. Then they start obsessing over it. You have to establish your own threat models, yada yada, but a lot of people start going down that rabbit hole, get overwhelmed, and just completely give up altogether, instead of just making better choices without having to necessarily be thrown into the deep end head first. There is nothing wrong with having one lonely single definitive best recommendation. But for a huge portion of the population, that recommendation is extremely impractical. At least it is in its current form. That may change someday. Take me for example. I would love nothing more than to deGoogle. But because of work, I can’t. I do use Workspace, which has a significantly better privacy policy than the consumer version, that I am the administrator over, but it’s still not ideal. It is, however, what I have to work with. I use Proton for person stuff, as it is not good at all for file on demand work. Plus, no Linux. As long as people are aware of the absolute best choice, that’s fine. But satan will be throwing snowballs before I ever use GrapheneOS. That is where I draw the line. It requires giving up far too much of what I need, for a bad threat model that I personally don’t have. Again, this is just me personally. In that case, I’d make the choice of an iPhone in lockdown mode. Going with harm reduction. I’m certainly not going to use something like a Samsung that just throws their own telemetry and bloat all over it, if I wanted Android without a custom ROM, I’d probably just go with a stock Pixel. The point is there is a correct answer for maximum privacy, and that answer is absolutely Graphene, but phone suggestions need to be practical. As long as the risks are made abundantly clear, I think that is fine. Usually, when it comes to making choices, we have a good handful of things to choose from. This is one area where the choices are virtually nonexistent. And a lot of people don’t like having to go with some outdated device, to get a benefit they might not even necessarily need. --- ## Post 22 by @anon36227541 — 2026-01-21T17:53:11Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > The problem is, the criteria are far too narrow, they exclude 99% of the hardware for security reasons, not for privacy reasons. I also see the disrepancy you bring up. The [smartphone OS criteria](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/android/distributions/#criteria) is a lot more security-focused compared to the [desktop/laptop OS criteria](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/desktop/#criteria). Even though there are security-focused criteria for desktop/laptop OSes—(like “Receives regular software and kernel updates” and “Avoids X11, as its last major release was more than a decade ago”—it is outright admitted in the [Linux overview article](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/os/linux-overview/#security-notes) that there are **security downsides**. This implies that we give leeway to desktops/laptops OSes (e.g., in order to have people “[a]void telemetry that often comes with proprietary operating systems”[[1]](#footnote-134643-1)) yet **no leeway** for smartphone OSes. However, my gripe with this post is that disrepancies are not a bad thing. I would not, for example, want an open source requirement for [file sharing and sync](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/file-sharing/#criteria_1) **on the basis that it should match** with the open source requirement for [pastebins](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/pastebins/#criteria). The open source requirement for these tools were chosen to be included in the criteria **not for consistency** , but because it was concluded to be **a good criteria** by those who were discussing it. Consequently, the point of this post should not be to resolve any disrepancy, but instead to recommend **a change in the criteria** and have it **stand on its own**. **You should therefore not make any analogies to the desktop/laptop OS recommendations**. That would only clog up discussion **for you**. The discussion should be technical. Your goal should therefore be to explain how **decreasing smartphone security** in the criteria does not result in significantly **decreasing smartphone privacy** in the recommendations. Or how **security downgrades** to tools like debloaters or other custom OSes is allowed for XYZ threat models, that we should account for those XYZ threat models on the website, and that those XYZ threat models are not contradictory. I personally disagree that we should expand the smartphone recommendations list to non-GrapheneOS. **At the very least** , however, I think it would be nice to **centralize** or at least **synthesize** the arguments each of given side to this thread, or some wiki post. That way we aren’t **regurtitating the same thing over and over again across the internet**. This topic has been discussed throughout the privacy sphere time and time again, so we can comb through some explicit and implicit arguments from these threads: - [Budget Android Phones (Discussion and 📊 Poll—Feedback Requested) - Discussions - Techlore Forum](https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/budget-android-phones-discussion-and-poll-feedback-requested/6272) - [~$150 Budget Android Hardware [Suggestions Needed]](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/150-budget-android-hardware-suggestions-needed/15399) - [Stock OS vs GrapheneOS - Discussions - Techlore Forum](https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/stock-os-vs-grapheneos/4477) - [De-bloated/De-Google’d Stock OS vs GrapheneOS - Get Advice - Techlore Forum](https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/de-bloated-de-google-d-stock-os-vs-grapheneos/4602) - [Heavily torn on whether to buy a Fairphone with debloated Android or Pixel with GrapheneOS - The Products - Fairphone Community Forum](https://forum.fairphone.com/t/heavily-torn-on-whether-to-buy-a-fairphone-with-debloated-android-or-pixel-with-grapheneos/128965) - [Heavily torn on whether to buy a Fairphone with debloated Android or Pixel with GrapheneOS (maximum repairability vs maximum privacy)](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/heavily-torn-on-whether-to-buy-a-fairphone-with-debloated-android-or-pixel-with-grapheneos-maximum-repairability-vs-maximum-privacy/34518) - [Heavily torn on whether to buy a Fairphone with debloated Android or Pixel - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum](https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/30216-heavily-torn-on-whether-to-buy-a-fairphone-with-debloated-android-or-pixel) - [GrapheneOS/Privacy Roms VS Full Debloating using Canta? - GrapheneOS Discussion Forum](https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/26929-grapheneosprivacy-roms-vs-full-debloating-using-canta) - [Thinking about ditching GrapheneOS to get better hardware - Get Advice - Techlore Forum](https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/thinking-about-ditching-grapheneos-to-get-better-hardware/8322) - [LineageOS (Android ROM)](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/lineageos-android-rom/15404) - [Is iodéOS the best alternative to DivestOS?](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-iodeos-the-best-alternative-to-divestos/33857) - [Planning to get new phone, need recommendation - Get Advice - Techlore Forum](https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/planning-to-get-new-phone-need-recommendation/9930) I’m sure there are plenty of other threads, I just can’t find them all. I also agree with others… > [@notwithstanding](#): > > A harm reduction approach seems fit here. > [@Shampoo](#): > > That would fall under a harm reduction guide rather than a recommendation. > [@anon50038541](#): > > A phone hardening and opsec guide would be useful but I don’t think it should be recommended. … that this is probably best as a harm reduction guide rather than an outright recommendation. But this doesn’t mean I am not open to there being discussion on the matter. * * * > [@brinerustle](#): > > Graphene fanboys There’s no need to generate tribalistic feuds. It fuels the fire. > [@Bumbashirovich](#): > > they’re content with security best practices Not really. [Most of us would rather pick Linux](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/which-desktop-operating-system-s-do-you-use/14245) even though it’s not very secure over macOS, which is so much better in terms of security. The thing with GrapheneOS is that it’s private **and** secure. > [@Bumbashirovich](#): > > don’t want to test alternative products that focus on comfort This is not the point of the website at all whatsoever. Even in OP’s disrepancy case, the point isn’t to recommend comfortable smartphones but rather private alternatives for moderate threat models that do not require extreme security. * * * 1. [https://www.privacyguides.org/en/os/linux-overview/#security-notes:~:text=Avoid%20telemetry%20that%20often%20comes%20with%20proprietary%20operating%20systems](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/os/linux-overview/#security-notes:~:text=Avoid%20telemetry%20that%20often%20comes%20with%20proprietary%20operating%20systems) [↩︎](#footnote-ref-134643-1) --- ## Post 23 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-21T17:57:05Z I think I would have agreed with this more two years ago before the development of AI surveillance tools that are available to any government (and presumably non governments) that are able to scrape all data available from smartphones and smartphone apps (which is a terrifying amount of data) with the ease of an internet search. These tools are in the hands of governments that are actively (right now, this is already happening) using them to carry out mass terror and murder against their own populations. I think you are also missing a key point here in that cell phones are a much more dangerous privacy invasion than computers. You take a computer, then you add a microphone that is essentially always on, you add location that is essentially always on, and both of these can often be accessed, on many mobile OSes, whether you think you have them toggled off or not. Then people carry the phone around with them 24/7. This is arguably the most dangerous surveillance tool that has ever existed. I don’t study the other OSes, because I’ve looked at them before and most of them to my knowledge don’t do much to prevent these things from happening. The security risk IS from Google, not some high-level nation state or Pegasus. Google is the one remotely activating microphones and then handing over all user data and location data to the first person who calls from a government and asks for it. I see the word “need” in your list of rationale six times. I think it’s safe to say that most of the times you use “need”, the word “want” should be subsituted. The fact that we have allowed the general population to believe that their desires for convenience are worth sacrificing all of our privacy and civil rights for is the exact reason we are in this mess today. It’s gotta stop. I understand your desire to present info in the spirit of “harm reduction”. I think anything that stops short of kicking big tech entirely out of your OS and ensuring control of your device is likely not harm reduction. I think any solution that stops short of those goals is offering a false sense of security and lulling people back into complacency. If there was a computer OS that offered the immense security of GrapheneOS alongside its ease of use, I’m sure this website would be recommending that with equal force…but that OS does not exist. GrapheneOS is nearly as easy to use and nearly as fully-functional (arguably more fully functional) as stock Android. Qubes…is not. You mention working to protect activists, lawyers, politicians, human rights defenders and antizionists from targeted attacks. That is admirable. I think you are really missing the bigger picture though. In America, immigrants (and anyone who looks like they could be an immigrant) (and also lots of people who just care about immigrants not getting murdered in the streets) are ALREADY being kidnapped en masse. These are literal targeted attacks of the worst nature that are possible in part because people are carrying around cell phones that are not properly private AND secure. When ICE is done with immigrants and people who look like immigrants (this is probably at least 100 million people) they are going to move on to queer and trans people. This is not hyperbole, fantasy, or paranoia, this is literally happening right now, and they have been telling us for years this was what they wanted to do, and now they have to do it to remain in power because it’s what their rabid, bigoted voters want. I think a lot of people on this forum aren’t acknowledging the actual magnitude of risk that exists in the world today (at least in America and other equally autoritarian and genocidal countries). This risk is real and it is already here for hundreds of millions of people. We need to stop telling people that switching from Google to Proton or that debloating their Android device (lol) is going to save them from being spied on and potentially persecuted in really severe ways. It’s not. What is needed is a complete overhaul of the way we interact with technology as a whole society as well as an evaluation of “needs” vs. desires that got us here in the first place. --- ## Post 24 by @anonymous520 — 2026-01-21T19:09:24Z This post seems to just disregard criteria and would prefer PG just make recommendations based on vibes --- ## Post 25 by @Anvil — 2026-01-21T19:16:02Z The disconnect I have with your argument is every mobile OS that is not GrapheneOS (with the exception of maybe the still very experimental linux OSs out there) _is_ a _significant_ step down from a _privacy_ perspective. You’re framing this like the only advantage of GrapheneOS is security, but that is simply not true. GrapheneOS is the only android based mobile OS that has actually done its due diligence to [disable or replace essentially all connections to Google](https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm). There is no getting around that. There is much more room on the desktop side of things for many different recommendations for different threat models because it’s incredibly rare for linux operating systems to spy on you. You’re not giving up anything major from a privacy perspective by using fedora workstation instead of secureblue for example. You only lose security. If you switch from GrapheneOS to LineageOS or IodeOS or whatever, you lose a _lot_ of _both_ privacy _and_ security, regardless of your threat model. --- ## Post 26 by @vincent — 2026-01-21T19:37:53Z You have literally described Fairphone > [@brinerustle](#): > > They don’t want to give Google money but want to buy a new device > [@brinerustle](#): > > Pixels are out of their price range > [@brinerustle](#): > > - They need an SD card. (Pixels don’t have one.) > [@brinerustle](#): > > - They don´t want to shell out 140€ for a screen repair. > [@brinerustle](#): > > - They want to buy hardware that is modular, ecological, fair-trade, or has hardware killswtiches --- ## Post 27 by @anon51983832 — 2026-01-21T19:42:30Z I wish there was a minimally secure and private alternative based on Android. When other non-Pixel devices compatible with GrapheneOS come out, I’ll be the first to buy them. Even though my personal strategy heavily emphasizes progressively moving away from using American technology, I can’t overlook all the disadvantages that other manufacturers and OSes have. --- ## Post 28 by @Olivia — 2026-01-21T20:06:47Z Many of the less expensive Android phones don’t receive security updates for long enough, and I’ve never felt comfortable recommending such devices to friends, even if they don’t seem to have an extreme threat model. The Pixel 8 (supported until October 2030) and 8a (supported until May 2031) can be found used or refurbished for around $200 USD, this is great value and I’ve recommended used Pixels to friends multiple times. Even if they’re not going to install Graphene, Pixels offer great advantages over new “budget” Android phones, many of which come with excessive bloatware. If they ever decide to install a custom ROM (hopefully one that supports verified boot) it’s relatively easy to do on a Pixel. --- ## Post 29 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-01-21T20:13:10Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > The problem is, the criteria are far too narrow, they exclude 99% of the hardware for security reasons, not for privacy reasons I do not feel this thread is valuing the importance of security in achieving privacy highly enough _There is no privacy without security_. Your alternate android OS is functionally useless if an arbitrary bad actor can penetrate it, regardless of its privacy features. There are exceedingly few mobile phones on the market with adequate hardware security, and even fewer alternate OSs that meet bare minimum security standards. Hence, the current GOS status quo --- ## Post 30 by @anon8259564 — 2026-01-21T21:04:35Z Nothingburger takes. > [@jerm](#): > > You will be soon able to run GrapheneOS on another device than Google Pixel [GrapheneOS: “We have a serious OEM partnership with a large co…” - GrapheneOS Mastodon](https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/115567906368050627) “please trust us bro” takes from the GrapheneOS team mean nothing as its been a year and they still haven’t revealed who that OEM is, until they do it’s not worth mentioning > [@jerm](#): > > This is PrivacyGuides not some other website like PTIO or brax, recommendations need to make sense and not just features that devices have, if so, chinese phones are getting a lot better than your average OEM that is lacking so far in battery tech etc. having hardware requirements does not mean a complete abandonment of security principles > [@jerm](#): > > which device have it other than fairphone which is non-secure device? Sony Xperia, Sharp Aquos, Leica Leitz, etc. and please do tell us what a “non-secure” device is. --- ## Post 31 by @anon69871701 — 2026-01-22T02:33:49Z 1 day old account making antagonistic statements across forum topics. > [@anon8259564](#): > > its been a year During which they have been clear it will come in late 2026, and now 2027, with an announcement soon this year. Do you have a problem with clear communication? > [@anon8259564](#): > > complete abandonment of security principles Yes, having hardware requirements is not complete abandonment of security principles, it is in fact the complete opposite. It is having security principles. > [@anon8259564](#): > > Sony Xperia, Sharp Aquos, Leica Leitz, Which of them meet the other requirements? > [@anon8259564](#): > > non-secure Something that does not meet the minimum requirements :slight_smile: * * * Every fortnight someone makes this topic as if Privacy Guides or others are getting kickbacks from someone for selling GrapheneOS. Are there similar topics railing against the advice to only use locks made of solid steel and not lego plastics that are easily assembled and modified and colorful and other wonderful things that people totally cannot live without for securing a closed door? --- ## Post 32 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-22T06:58:53Z > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > _There is no privacy without security_ This fallacy is extremely common on PG. Saying “there’s no privacy without security” flattens the fact that security exists in layers, not absolutes. By that logic, if you don’t have military-grade defenses, you might as well be using a public forum for intimate comms. Security is largely an individual condition, while privacy is largely a collective reality. Even having the best personal security doesn’t protect you from living in a society where mass surveillance, data extraction, and privacy erosion affect everyone. Let me restate the obvious: Not everyone is going to get a pixel, and privacy recommendations should take that into account. Conflating security and privacy two ignores how systemic privacy loss harms even the most “secure” individuals, and completely misses how for many people degoogling any device they can is a huge step forward in terms of privacy. It may come with a few security tradeoffs that largely means it will be more vulnerable to mercenary spyware, cellebrite, things like that. But that is placing the bar too high (for non-vulnerable populations). You could arbitrarily raise it one point, which would mean you should toss anything in the bin that isn´t an iphone 17, because not even the latest pixel matches it for memory tagging, but that would be absurd. --- ## Post 33 by @brinerustle — 2026-01-22T07:14:23Z > [@anon69871701](#): > > Are there similar topics railing against the advice to only use locks made of solid steel and not lego plastics that are easily assembled and modified and colorful and other wonderful things that people totally cannot live without for securing a closed door? The PG criteria for mobile devices is not about a lock that anyone with a bumping key can open. The criteria are about preventing military-grade attacks. GrapheneOS rails against the security of e/OS, iodéOS, but i have yet to see them data-dump the contents of someone’s phone. Should be easy to do if the locks on their rivals are so trivial. --- ## Post 34 by @fria — 2026-01-22T07:24:22Z It’s about preventing bargain bin stock malware and exploits as well as targeted attacks. Military-grade isn’t a type of attack really it doesn’t mean anything. > [@brinerustle](#): > > GrapheneOS rails against the security of e/OS, iodéOS, but i have yet to see them data-dump the contents of someone’s phone. They make an OS they don’t make exploits (maybe they do sometimes I’m not sure). There’s plenty of published CVEs and malware for Android if you want to look into it, mainly malware targeting regular people in mass campaigns. --- ## Post 35 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T09:26:41Z @brinerustle you keep missing the point. Why would privacy guides recommend a device that harms a users privacy? It’s one thing to say: ”if you’re stuck with X, do Y to be more private” It’s a completely different thing to say: ”if you’re looking for a new device, we recommend [insert non-grapheneos phone here] ” (which btw, is the purpose of ‘Hardware → Mobile Phones’ (getting a new device)) The reality is that all other options are currently terrible for privacy and should not be recommended by any privacy-conscious person. Being annoyed at the lack of options doesn’t change this basic reality. --- ## Post 36 by @anon69871701 — 2026-01-22T09:44:35Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > criteria are about preventing military-grade attacks No, the criteria is about easy to obtain exploits that are used everyday on unsuspecting people with no backups, no opsec, no idea what security even is, to ensure they don’t have to walk around on eggshells to have some semblance of safety. If you think it is military grade, just go on telegram forums that sell these exploit chains as SaaS for stalkers, harassers, etc. This is all public, and happening regardless of your awareness of its existence. > [@brinerustle](#): > > see them data-dump the contents of someone’s phone. Should be easy to do if the locks on their rivals are so trivial. Maybe it is because they are people with principles who are not just copying scripts from the internet and exploiting people for fun, and actually believe in safety for all. Them not being a malware vendor or a pen tester for free for insecure shovelware is not a point against them. You again assume your lack of awareness implies lack of existence. These data exploits exist, are widely available on markets, and are deployed every day. It is a very weird posture to adopt where “I don’t see it so it doesn’t exists” is a valid argument. Was Signal inexploitable before they somehow [got their hands](https://signal.org/blog/cellebrite-vulnerabilities/) on a cellebrite device? Did [prism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM) not exist before snowden revealed it? This is the outcome of every similar thread: Lack of awareness, lack of technical arguments in support of other OS or against GrapheneOS, and then eventual descent into FUD and “why don’t they spend their limited time pentesting all software I like to prove to me that it is insecure”. I am not sure if this is a productive use of forum, maybe the moderators can have a mega thread to contain all these instances. --- ## Post 37 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T10:05:36Z Yes, it does seem like some astroturfing is happening with all these new accounts basically saying ”please compromise on your principles so that the Google Pixel isn’t the only recommended hardware” --- ## Post 39 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T10:51:30Z Why even go down this ‘lesser of two evils’ road if GOS exists and is secure and private? If you think it’s scaring away the normies, then let’s create a harm reduction guide for their existing devices as countless people have already stated > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > You are technical right, good boy here a treat. Also go away if you’re just going to be condescending --- ## Post 40 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T10:55:16Z > [@anon50038541](#): > > Why even go down this ‘lesser of two evils’ road if GOS exists and is secure and private? Because not everyone can have a Pixel device (too expensive, not available in the country, lacks of features that are needed). > If you think it’s scaring away the normies, then let’s create a harm reduction guide for their existing devices as countless people have already stated It is not only about guides. It is about the wiki, how people recommend what in the forum, KB and the official recommendations. But such things would be a good start. --- ## Post 41 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-22T11:10:26Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > If this forum actually wants to help normies/ **beginners** that don’t know anything about privacy at all. Than I can say for sure you are all failing. I will confine my interpretation of your comment within the scope of this thread. Are you suggesting, 1. Using abb to flash other Custom Roms is easy enough for 2. Other custom roms in general provides on good enough usability, stability and support, to meet the expectations and match the experience of 3. using adb plus a third party tool, also having to preview / customize the commands / scripts , list of changes for debloating is easy and friction-free enough for 4. Alternative commercially available OS (like /e/OS as you mentioned) provide tangible privacy advantage against the still privillaged GMS for 5. Other services, such as email, messaging, storage, etc. If those service claims themselves to be private and secure, however there is no E2EE and had plenty of data breaches (so they are not selling your data, they are good guys), but they are free to use and enable plenty nice features such as automations, integrations, etc. Are you going go recommend those services to your suggested group of people? Are you serious? --- ## Post 42 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T11:13:43Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Because not everyone can have a Pixel device (too expensive, not available in the country, lacks of features that are needed). The first 2 issues are addressed on the site: [tips on how to get a good offer](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-phones/#buying-a-google-pixel) and [NitroPhone](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-phones/#buying-a-google-pixel). As for lack of features, that’s up to the user if they want to sacrifice some privacy for a headphone jack, for example. It’s irresponsible to give bad recommendations just to satiate some feature they require --- ## Post 43 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T11:19:01Z > Using abb to flash other Custom Roms is easy enough for There are companies already selling flashed devices. So they don’t need to do this. > Other custom roms in general provides on good enough usability, stability and support, to meet the expectations and match the experience of I think eOS is stable enough, yes. > sing adb plus a third party tool, also having to preview / customize the commands / scripts , list of changes for debloating is easy and friction-free enough for I don’t know what you mean with that. > Alternative commercially available OS (like /e/OS as you mentioned) provide tangible privacy advantage against the still privillaged GMS for Please write in sentence. It is extremely hard to understand what you mean. > Other services, such as email, messaging, storage, etc. If those service claims themselves to be private and secure, however there is no E2EE and had plenty of data breaches (so they are not selling your data, they are good guys), but they are free to use and enable plenty nice features such as automations, integrations, etc. Are you going go recommend those services to Do I only recommend Proton for E-Mails? No I also recommend Tuta, StartMail, FastMail or [Mailbox.org](http://Mailbox.org). The same goes for smartphones. > your suggested group of people? Are you serious? Yes I am. --- ## Post 44 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T11:25:48Z > The first 2 issues are addressed on the site: [tips on how to get a good offer](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-phones/#buying-a-google-pixel) Still there are people out there, how can’t effort them even with such tricks. But I didn’t saw this actually, so yeah that’s not bad. > [NitroPhone](https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-phones/#buying-a-google-pixel) Oh didn’t know that. > As for lack of features, that’s up to the user if they want to sacrifice some privacy for a headphone jack, for example. It’s irresponsible to give bad recommendations just to satiate some feature they require Okay, so you recommend the classic Pixel + GOS. Now the user says no that’s not an option I need feature xy and the Samsung smartphone has them, while the Pixel not. Now also the fairphone has the feature. So wouldn’t it be more responsible to advise him to the Fairphone with eOS instead of the Samsung? --- ## Post 45 by @anon69871701 — 2026-01-22T11:54:26Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > good boy here a treat Does this pass as discourse for you? Does not deserve a response at all. Hopefully those beginners you keep white knighting for do not receive the same behaviour from you, which might be the core reason why they are turned off by the topic. Just as a helpful tip, beginners do not come in with any delusion that they are correct or have rigid opinions in mind. Here is a post by an actual beginner who comes in with an open mind, asks questions, and then lands on what is the best available option: [Hardening Pixel without installing GrapheneOS](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/hardening-pixel-without-installing-grapheneos/34690) > [@anon50038541](#): > > astroturfing I agree, it seems like astroturfing. The entry of various snake oil salesmen with huge marketing but apparently small privsec budgets in the private phone business has muddied the water with constant demands for evaluating punkt, unplugged, and the like, when they have been evaluated already and found to be severely lacking. Hope the forum clamps down a bit on these repetitive questions by closing them and pointing them to older questions or megathreads. --- ## Post 46 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T12:00:10Z > Just as a helpful tip, beginners do not come in with any delusion that they are correct or have rigid opinions in mind. Here is a post by an actual beginner who comes in with an open mind, asks questions, and then lands on what is the best available option: [Hardening Pixel without installing GrapheneOS](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/hardening-pixel-without-installing-grapheneos/34690) I’m talking about non-tech people who have no connection to privacy and are total beginners. The post you linked is from someone who already knows a bit about privacy and isn’t a total beginner anymore. He can talk about threat-modeling and he tried GOS. > I agree, it seems like astroturfing. The entry of various snake oil salesmen with huge marketing but apparently small privsec budgets in the private phone business has muddied the water with constant demands for evaluating punkt, unplugged, and the like, when they have been evaluated already and found to be severely lacking. So you are basically saying that the OP is a bot that comes here any tries to market other phone without any evidence? Come on …. --- ## Post 47 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T12:02:50Z That’s exactly what I meant by going down the ‘lesser of two evils’ road. The great thing about GOS is that we can both confidently recommend it and stay principled. If in the future GOS changes and no longer meets our criteria, of course we would have to start recommending ‘lesser of two evil’ phones. But until that day, I can’t think of any compelling reason to give a bad recommendation --- ## Post 48 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T12:04:32Z I don’t see the connection between my comment and your comment right now, because I agreed with two of your points and disagreed with one. So it is hard to know which you mean for me. --- ## Post 49 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-22T12:09:26Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > There are companies already selling flashed devices. So they don’t need to do this. With a much steeper price tag and additional risk of allowing a third party to tinker your device without your presence? > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > I think eOS is stable enough, yes. Not only stability , also usability (features) and support (OS and driver updates, customer support, community support, etc.). Also, microg in eos is still privileged. it is still on A15, built on AOSP it has no chance to enable Google Pay, it will also struggle with Play integrity test. So what exactly is the advantage here, other than to bandaid an existing device? If it is solely for damage control, it should not be on recommendation, it should be mentioned in a community guide as harm mitigation measures (with little effect). Oh, also Fairphone, it’s firmware update track record is not good, it will not survive a reasonable checklist. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > I don’t know what you mean with that. Ride on the same logic, PG also needs to cover debloating tools and scripts, to cater the needs of people who cant be covered with custom roms, it is straight forward. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Do I only recommend Proton for E-Mails? No I also recommend Tuta, StartMail, FastMail or [Mailbox.org](http://Mailbox.org). > The same goes for smartphones. From your arguments these are all “Magnum Heavy Duty Solid Body Combination Lock“, really. Most people are using Gmail, Outlook, Yahoo Mail, none of the providers you mentioned / recommended by PG can provide comparable functions, not even close. * * * The first thing general public should learn and adapt is 1. Choose services wisely 2. Picking a “private and secure” device doesn’t make themselves “private and secure”, this is not the first step, it is further down the line. It is counterproductive to keep arguing what device, what custom rom, what niche script / tool to recommend, to me it is simply a waste of time. General public are using Tiktok, Facebook, Chrome / Edge, Gmail, keeping every contact information with Google/ MS as well as phone contact storage which is easily accessible by random apps. General public are spraying their personal information like watering their lawn. These are the REAL LIFE SCENARIO and IMMINENT THREAT, not the stupid little thing on our palm. If they couldn’t even pick and choose privacy friendly services and privacy preserving ways to life their life, there is ZERO chance they could daily drive any device running custom ROM, given the inherited disadvantage of AOSP. --- ## Post 50 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T12:18:02Z > With a much steeper price tag and additional risk of allowing a third party to tinker your device without your presence? Threat-Model …. Not everyone might be a potential target of a big supply chain attack like the pager attacker (I hope I wrote it correct). For some people the risk it too low and they can life with it. > Not only stability , also usability (features) and support (OS and driver updates, customer support, community support, etc.). Okay, true. > it will also struggle with Play integrity test Like GOS …… > So what exactly is the advantage here, other than to bandaid an existing device? You don’t have installed google spying on you. You can also buy the Google device from Fairphone …. (Again this is if you can’t buy an IPhone or Pixel for whatever reason) > Oh, also Fairphone, it’s firmware update track record is not good, it will not survive a reasonable checklist. Did you read what I wrote? What I wrote: > **Phones that for fill this list are the Google Pixel and IPhone devices.** > However, if you can say that some of these features are out of the scope of your threat model **or you just simply can’t have a Google Pixel or IPhone, there is also Fairphone with an eOS** , or you can check out dumphones. > Ride on the same logic, PG also needs to cover debloating tools and scripts, to cater the needs of people who cant be covered with custom roms, it is straight forward. And the forum needs to also recommend these. > From your arguments these are all “Magnum Heavy Duty Solid Body Combination Lock“, really. No these are not. I recommend multiple products from multiple companies and not one product from one company. > If they couldn’t even pick and choose privacy friendly services and privacy preserving ways to life their life, there is ZERO chance they could daily drive any device running custom ROM, given the inherited disadvantage of AOSP. Okay, that’s a point. --- ## Post 51 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-22T12:43:01Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > No these are not. Try assessing these services again with the lens of general public, you are telling them to give up the usually free Google Suite, Microsoft 365, which offers great features and integrations, for services with much less features and convenience, just for the sake of privacy. Yes, to them these are all “Magnum Heavy Duty Solid Body Combination Lock“. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Threat-Model You don’t need to be anyone special to be a victim. > **[Mini PC maker ships systems with factory-installed spyware — AceMagic says...](https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/mini-pc-maker-ships-systems-with-factory-installed-spyware-acemagic-says-issue-was-contained-to-the-first-shipment)** > > Some batches of mini-PCs come with malware For smartphone, it is not easily for users just to clean install a OS because of bootloader, suggesting them to get tinkered device from third party is a very bad approach as it is very difficult for general public to check device integrity and rectify thing doesn’t look right. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > check out dumphones I saw that and I tried not to address that as I just dun want to be too dismissive. How is a dumphone less privacy invasive / more privacy friendly than using a android with no google account logged in and not using it for anything other than what you would do on a dumphone? Most dumphones uses UNISOC, a Chinese Chipmaker, from a country that loves forcing their companies planting malware in their products, they mostly comes with unknown web browser, phonebooks, whatsapp, and a closed source, infrequently updated firmware. How private and secure can your activity and information can be? > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > there is also Fairphone with an eOS I already responded in my previous post so I am not going to repeat. --- ## Post 52 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T12:49:46Z > Yes, to them these are all “Magnum Heavy Duty Solid Body Combination Lock“. I see now what you mean. But still disagree. It is a difference if you recommend only Proton and nothing else. Or if you recommend Proton, Tuta etc. > For smartphone, it is not easily for users just to clean install a OS because of bootloader, suggesting them to get tinkered device from third party is a very bad approach as it is very difficult for general public to check device integrity and rectify thing doesn’t look right. This could also happen on a normal smartphone manufacture without the involvement of Third-Parties. > I already responded in my previous post so I am not going to repeat. I extra highlight the important phrases for this discussion, and you are arguing about the non-highlighted phrases … My argument was not about Fairphone, not about dumphones. It was that I recommend a list of feature a smartphone needs to have, and such smartphones are Pixel or IPhone device. However, i **f you can’t get a Pixel or IPhone there are other alternatives like** ….. My argument in this post was not about Fairphone or anything. It was that I still recommend Pixel or iPhones, however if this doesn’t work there are also other. --- ## Post 53 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-22T12:52:53Z As I already stated my logic in my previous posts, I would suggest you read through those posts again, try to understand my underlying logic and argument, rather than just the surface. I spent too much effort on this post and I am not going to invest anymore time on this topic. --- ## Post 54 by @Man — 2026-01-22T13:02:58Z Trying to mitigate the risks of stock Samsung products is like treating cancer with radiation. You don’t want to be in that position to begin with. GrapheneOS is like starting with a clean bill of health. ‘Curing’ the Samsung leaves us wondering when the next cancer will emerge. Any preferences you set can be reversed with an update. It is good to help users make the best of what they have. Spending time resisting Samsung won’t change anything. Supporting GOS does. I wouldn’t consider buying another Samsung device at this point. They need to be boycotted. --- ## Post 55 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:04:35Z > [@Man](#): > > best of what they have. Spending time resisting Samsung won’t change anything. Supporting GOS does. I wouldn’t consider buying another Samsung device at this point. They need to be boycotted. Why are you bringing up that somebody recommends using Samsung? I think nobody did here, actually. It’s about other things like Fairphone with eOS --- ## Post 56 by @anon69871701 — 2026-01-22T13:05:18Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > non-tech people They are just as unfamiliar with GOS as with anything else. This is just the same tired argument again and again. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > you are basically saying that the OP is a bot No, I am saying the spare of recent threads on this topic smells like astroturfing. It has no relation to OP or is calling them a bot. The quality of conversation on the forum has turned terrible, and quality contributors have left like @/skewedzeppelin and others. It is just full of corporate shills posting company blogs like @/tuta while not answering any questions or people who created threads like this just constantly. Very unfortunate. Will rejoin in the future if it improves. --- ## Post 57 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:07:54Z > They are just as unfamiliar with GOS as with anything else. This is just the same tired argument again and again This might be true, but doesn’t change the outcome. Again my point is not about technical aspects or which ROM is the best. It is how we approach non-tech people and people for which a GOS or an IPhone are not an option. --- ## Post 58 by @Man — 2026-01-22T13:11:41Z I was using Samsung as a universally available brand with significant market share. Nobody here recommends Samsung, which is my point. Dedicating our time and effort to combat a closed ecosystems designed for surveillance is pointless. The only way to win is to not play the game. --- ## Post 59 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:12:42Z > I was using Samsung as a universally available brand with significant market share. Nobody here recommends Samsung, which is my point. Dedicating our time and effort to combat a closed ecosystems designed for surveillance is pointless. The only way to win is to not play the game. I think I agree with most of it, but I seem to lose to connection to this topic. What does it have to do with the ongoing discussion? --- ## Post 60 by @sha123 — 2026-01-22T13:21:09Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Why are you bringing up that somebody recommends using Samsung? > I think nobody did here, actually. > It’s about other things like Fairphone with eOS Nobody should be using /e/OS --- ## Post 61 by @Man — 2026-01-22T13:21:20Z The OP is talking about regular consumers with regular devices and complaining about how privacy advocates consider those devices unworthy of consideration. In essence we ignore Samsung / Oppo / Motorola because they don’t satisfy our needs, while in reality most people own one of those devices. But there is nothing we can do about international availability of Google Pixels and proprietary devices like Samsung makes cannot be fixed. --- ## Post 62 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:28:08Z Oh, I see. --- ## Post 63 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:28:33Z > [@sha123](#): > > Nobody should be using /e/OS Why? --- ## Post 64 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T13:36:41Z And so? What I see @Onscreen5341 proposes is that if in case an iPhone nor a Pixel is an option, there needs to be an alternative we can all agree or otherwise based on knowing their threat model, we can try to persuade or find the alternative Even out of the question about doing deal hunting if you’re in countries like Brazil for Pixels, and it has happened before. The best way for many in this situation is either debloating devices from stock OS or installing an alternative like LineageOS. You can’t have it in-between . If that Major OEM that GOS says they’re working on turns out to be Motorola like many have more or less speculated and it can trickle down to budget devices then I can see it being accessible and being a general recommendation. I feel OP is also right, what if I want the most compact possible phone, in which it cannot be a pixel, sure an iPhone 15 Pro and 17 seems to fill that gap but what if I don’t want to get an iPhone? See what the problem is here. Sony fills the gap of Having a MicroSD and Headphone jack while being a decent phone with the only caveat of not supporting something like GrapheneOS, what if that’s what I want? Unless my threat medal involves Targeted Attack and/or Mass surveillance or equivalent/worse, I see nothing wrong with say telling me to use something like LineageOS or debloating the system as a way to satisfy my needs. I think reading this thread made me realize We likely have learned almost nothing since the guy who asked between pixels and Fairphone, even though in their specific situation the repairability aspect is more of a less priority that the pixel 10 can fulfill nowadays which I think we all agreed on that, but still goes to show you This kind of attitude (not referring to you specifically) is exactly why we’re seeing people leave at Privacy Guides or otherwise become anonymized or start lurking, depends on their situation. --- ## Post 65 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T13:38:53Z Thank you. I think you understood exactly what I meant. --- ## Post 66 by @Man — 2026-01-22T14:01:01Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > Unless my threat medal involves Targeted Attack and/or Mass surveillance, I see nothing wrong with say telling me to use something like LineageOS or debloating the system as a way to satisfy my needs. Compatible LineageOS devices are scarce or relativly expensive on the used market. Debloatieg can be undone with an update and works best on rooted phones, which isn’t always possible. I agree it would be nice to have alternatives but you can’t beat the current combination of GOS + Pixel. I’m sure everyone who eventually bought a Pixel tried to debloat or flash their existing hardware first. Mobile devices simply do not work like desktop computers. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your points but we must be realistic. Choosing headphone jacks over basic privacy is madness. USB to 3.5mm adaptors are available and enhance privacy in a sense. Pixels are competitively priced in most places. Yes it sucks but we need to make the best of it. I understand the frustration over a lack of choice in the market. I still use a debloated Samsung tablet for a couple of apps but waited too long before buying a Pixel Tablet. I should have purchased one the day GOS announced support. We need to pick our battles and debloating isn’t adequate, which is why it isn’t recommended. If anything it gives a false sense of security. --- ## Post 67 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:03:07Z > I agree it would be nice to have alternatives but you can’t beat the current combination of GOS + Pixel. This misses the point. It is not about beating GOS, it is about what if GOS and IPhones are not an option. --- ## Post 68 by @anon92357554 — 2026-01-22T14:08:06Z Personally, I came to the site because I wanted to improve my privacy against big-tech. I improved my privacy drastically but always felt exposed, because there is also a mission creep towards security hardening becoming the deciding factor on whether an app/distro/repository is useful, even as most posters have boring threat models. I do think that GrapheneOS is a solid choice to increase privacy permanently, but I also think that recommendations can do a better job reflecting real life instead of worst-case threat models. This thread covered it already and said it better than I can: > [@When Privacy and Security Conflict](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/when-privacy-and-security-conflict/30397): > > Something about the online discourse around privacy and security has been bugging me lately, I try and articulate it below. Main Point I think there is an alternative to the black and white approach demanded by security experts and security enthusiasts. As a premise, they state you cannot have privacy without security. I do not accept this premise wholesale. I think it is factual in many cases, but not all of the time. Concession But first, a concession. I am not nearly as technically adep… --- ## Post 69 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T14:09:04Z OK, let’s break this down. I’ll use an extreme example to illustrate my point and bring it together in the end. Would you recommend to someone a phone literally bloated with spyware if it was the only one on the market with a 5 inch screen? Of course not. You would say: ”wait for future releases” ”save your money” ”maybe you can’t get the screen size you want” It’s perfectly acceptable to _not_ recommend something if you know it’s going to harm that person. If PG kept recommending the ‘lesser of two evils’ phone for every feature and every combination of features, what have we become? Certainly not a privacy guide. We’ve become a ‘less sh\*t phone guide’. It’s a tough pill to swallow but there is only currently 1 phone that should be recommended --- ## Post 70 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:11:25Z > Would you recommend to someone a phone literally bloated with spyware if it was the only one on the market with a 5 inch screen? Is anyone recommending companies that try to harm the user (Samsung, Microsoft, Google)? You put “not the most secure device with downsides” on the same boat as “device that actively harms the user”. Edit: If you apply your logic elsewhere you are also not allowed to recommend debloated windows. Most people and PG (afaik) do this though. --- ## Post 71 by @Man — 2026-01-22T14:15:38Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > It is not about beating GOS, it is about what if GOS and IPhones are not an option. I understand that. For many of us GOS is the ONLY option. I would prefer not to use a phone if GOS or equivelant wasn’t available. Maybe a dumb phone for contacting emergency services. If you have no alternative then debloat in the meantime and save up or wait for Pixel to become available. This is documented and frequently discussed. iPhone is always an option, even in China. I have felt the OP’s pain and now own a couple of GOS devices. They weren’t cheap but I shopped around and bought a couple of products which had been returned to retailers. Privacy is worth the effort. Settling for anything else is merely hypothetical and even those who live in poverty can afford phones. They need one to access welfare programs and benefits. --- ## Post 72 by @anon50038541 — 2026-01-22T14:22:44Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > If you apply your logic elsewhere you are also not allowed to recommend debloated windows. Do you recommend that someone buys Windows just to debloat it? Or is it in fact that they already have Windows and you want to debloat an existing system? Remember we’re talking about recommending a privacy-respecting phone that someone will _buy_. As we agreed on above, a guide for existing phones would be helpful --- ## Post 73 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:24:22Z > Do you recommend that someone buys Windows just to debloat it? Or is it in fact that they already have Windows and you want to debloat an existing system? Since you can install on every device that runs windows also linux it doesn’t matter what he buys. What matters if he is buying and keeping windows or buying and removing windows. --- ## Post 74 by @Man — 2026-01-22T14:27:30Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > You put “not the most secure device with downsides” on the same boat as “device that actively harms the user”. In my opinion these are synonomous. Imagine buying a car with ‘downsides.’ This could mean anything from the breaks don’t work to the roof leaks. Why settle for less? --- ## Post 75 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:28:10Z > Why settle for less? Because some people as you already said can’t have a pixel or IPhone. --- ## Post 76 by @Man — 2026-01-22T14:35:36Z This is all hypothetical. Privacy Guides should help those with no alternative. I’m sure everyone agrees. But the OP said this: > [@brinerustle](#): > > The PG recommendation framework should acknowledge other custom ROMs, GSIs, and [UADNG](https://github.com/Universal-Debloater-Alliance/universal-android-debloater-next-generation/) while pointing out the security advantages of pixels. Recommending a substandard product isn’t in our interest. If all you have is a Samsung then there are multiple threads and blogs to help. PG can’t reccomend those options because they aren’t good. Buying from Google is less than ideal but it is the best we have. Jolla and SailfishOS exists but lacks security features and compatibility. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > some people as you already said can’t have a pixel or IPhone Everyone can have an iPhone. If you have money for a phone then used iPhones are more widely available than Google Pixels. --- ## Post 77 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:53:15Z > Everyone can have an iPhone. No …. You argue from the point that everybody has enough money. There are people out there who only can spend 150€ for phones are even need free phones, because they don’t have money. --- ## Post 78 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T14:55:50Z If I can make it a draw on the scoreboard They said _can_ not _should_ or _would_ However I have to agree that this is not always the case for everyone, look at Brazil and India for example --- ## Post 79 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:58:27Z > However I have to agree that this is not always the case for everyone, look at Brazil and India for example Or look at homeless people. They need a phone with active SIM for searching from jobs, but can afford them. They get the phones from NGOs where people donated their old phones instead of throwing them away. Usually they are not EOL, however they are not IPhones nor Pixels. Mostly some cheap Samsung A class, Huawai, xiaomi and so on. --- ## Post 80 by @Man — 2026-01-22T14:58:48Z It looks like markets where Pixels aren’t sold (South America, Africa, large parts of Asia) are beyond the scope of an English speaking website. Places like Brazil are ten years behind the latest Korean or Japanese made consumer products, which are beyond what they can afford. For context a low to mid range Pixel costs roughly half a week’s wage here. For minimum wage workers it would be around one week or maybe two. I assume this is true for most countries where the Pixel is sold. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > There are people out there who only can spend 150€ for phones are even need free phones, because they don’t have money. My current Google Pixel was £200. My first smartphone was £150. All of the other phones I’ve had were given to me by relatives. Pixels are competitively priced in my region. --- ## Post 81 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T14:59:52Z > My current Google Pixel was £200. My first smartphone was £150. All of the other phones I’ve had were given to me by relatives. Pixels are competitively priced in my region. Wow … .thats insane. For me a cheap, not EOL, Pixel would be at least 350€. --- ## Post 82 by @Man — 2026-01-22T15:01:36Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Or look at homeless people. This is a marginal case and charity is off topic. Beggers can’t be choosers. Everyone has a right to privacy and I wish GOS or equivelant was the norm. But it isn’t. I wish poverty doesn’t exist. But it does. I wish PG had a solution for everything but they don’t. --- ## Post 83 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T15:02:15Z Just so we’re clear £ ≠ € Doing conversions as Jan 22 2026 15:00 UTC £150 = €172.07 £200 = €229.42 I also have to say that the puzzle you are missing is shipping, even in countries like cyprus they always have to pay shipping for getting things overseas regardless, there’s almost no free shipping here (outside of Skroutz for orders over 200, still) or through eBay or whatever it may be. In Cyprus it is not bad but In Brazil and India that is almost impossible to get a good deal if you account for shipping and I think Indonesia as well. So no in conclusion you _ **can** _ but it shouldn’t be _ **everyone can** _ --- ## Post 84 by @Man — 2026-01-22T15:04:17Z Actually you may be right. I paid £300 when the phone was released and saved money buying an open box return. Paying a premium for privacy was worth it though and the used market is full of Pixels with years of support remaining. --- ## Post 85 by @Man — 2026-01-22T15:08:56Z I know most people in Brazil can’t afford Pixels. My position is they should have educational resources but Privacy Guides isn’t the place. Muddying the waters talking about debloating devices which aren’t available in English speaking countries could be counter productive. 5G isn’t available globally so different markets require a targeted approach. PG shouldn’t be expected to address continental differences. It isn’t arrogance or an unwillingness to help. --- ## Post 86 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T15:10:14Z Then where? Techlore? That’s fine if that’s the case but I guess it’s safe to say we can agree to disagree --- ## Post 87 by @Man — 2026-01-22T15:14:02Z On a regional website catered to their unique challenges obviously. I’m not searching for Portuguese alternatives. I have the same issue ordering a System76 laptop from the USA or Tuxedo computer from Germany. There is no point getting worked up because a company based in Colorado doesn’t have any UK retailers. I just can’t have one and bought a cheap ThinkPad instead. --- ## Post 88 by @Man — 2026-01-22T15:37:19Z The long and the short of it, as others have explained, is that if you have no alternative to GOS then you’re screwed. Apple is less bad than stock Android in some respects but still invasive and expensive. Threats cannot be entirely mitigated on a device full of intentional backdoors. Ironically there are homeless people with no banking or bills who enjoy more privacy than me. The only advantage I have is a locking door and curtains. Highlighting alternatives is a moot point when a Pixel 9 costs less than the average person earns in a week. This number is skewed by high earners but not everyone needs the latest generation phone. I purchased the budget model after weeks of deliberation and bargain hunting. An equivelant phone would have been £100 cheaper but privacy is a luxury these days. --- ## Post 89 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-22T17:03:19Z > [@Man](#): > > Everyone can have an iPhone. If you have money for a phone then used iPhones are more widely available than Google Pixels. Yeah, maybe in the west. :v My current phone is some Chinese brand, ~100$ when I bought it in 2023. Meanwhile used iPhone 11 64gb in my place is ~256$ in 2026. I already eat instant noodles every day, buying iPhone is just not rational choice for me. XD --- ## Post 90 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-22T17:03:49Z Tldr: Feel like this conversation might be redundant and the website already have answer for most of the questions. The only talking point left is suggesting [UAD-ng](https://github.com/Universal-Debloater-Alliance/universal-android-debloater-next-generation/) or [Canta](https://github.com/samolego/Canta) and maybe dumb down the guide to be more clear step by step if the concern is to reach more general populace > [@brinerustle](#): > > We can’t brush all of these off as fringe needs. These are common, everyday use cases — and yet the Android guidance in PG doesn’t reflect them at all. Because PG is _Privacy Guide_. Not Phone Guide, of course PG guide main recommendation will be about privacy. Not about your best value to price phone. > [@brinerustle](#): > > They care more about privacy than security > should acknowledge other custom ROMs, GSIs PG did acknowledge them tho. in Android section: > Unfortunately, many custom Android distributions often violate the Android security model by not supporting critical security features such as AVB, rollback protection, firmware updates, and so on. Some distributions also ship userdebug builds which expose root via ADB and require more permissive SELinux policies to accommodate debugging features, resulting in a further increased attack surface and weakened security model. Not to mention it’s opening another can of worms. So many hardware vendor and various android distros. Unlocking bootloader Risking bricking SELinux not enforcing Etc @Onscreen5341 talk about giving alternatives for non techie people but the truth is there is no alternative that is good enough. Like iPhone is recommended here in forum as alternative for pixel but if we check official PG recommendations for mobile phone PG didn’t even recommend the iPhone. We talk as if PG don’t have hardening guide but we already have Android and Android Overview tho. Don’t have Pixel or iPhone? Then just use filtering DNS and PG software recommendations. Also pretty sure officially PG here is just want to teach people to be more aware, decide your threat and pick your poison yourself based on your independent assessment. Not spreading absolute dogmatic. If non techie people are the concern then perhaps more correct solution is giving opinionated, dumbed down, step by step guide to harden your android. --- ## Post 91 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-22T17:16:40Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > degoogling any device they can is a huge step forward in terms of privacy you cannot “degoogle” stock android. connections back to google are too entrenched. > [@anon50038541](#): > > let’s create a harm reduction guide this entire website is a harm reduction guide. if a user does everything else recommended on this site except buying a pixel to install gos, they have reduced harm. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > needed here is that word again. literally nobody “needs” a headphone jack or a five inch screen or any of the other features you’ve used as an example of things people “need”. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Like GOS …… i have never found a single app that would not work on gos. i know they exist, but they are not incredibly common like you would suggest. gos simply works. > [@TinFoilHat](#): > > dumphones this is not a good recommendation unless someone is just going to use this for an occasional call or text. nothing on a dumb phone can be secured or private. --- ## Post 92 by @Man — 2026-01-22T17:18:52Z This won’t make you feel any better but a used iPhone 11 in the UK costs £130. I don’t actually recommend iPhones. We can’t enjoy privacy using any Chinese phone :frowning: --- ## Post 93 by @Man — 2026-01-22T17:22:07Z > [@anon98749087](#): > > i have never found a single app that would not work on gos. Some banking apps don’t work apparently. I’ve never encountered this issue myself either. --- ## Post 94 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T17:25:42Z Tfw > **[Banking Applications Compatibility with GrapheneOS](https://privsec.dev/posts/android/banking-applications-compatibility-with-grapheneos/)** > > Maintained Compatibility List for International Banking Apps > This list includes banking apps that have been tested, submitted, reviewed, and verified as compatible. > LIST | SUBMIT | UPDATE | POSSIBLE WORKAROUND SOLUTIONS > Introduction Welcome to the... --- ## Post 95 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-22T17:28:01Z gos ships with vanadium, which uses practical and sensible means to harden chromium and in my experience does not break hardly any websites. i access my bank in the browser. most people should be able to do the same. --- ## Post 96 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T17:28:14Z > here is that word again. literally nobody “needs” a headphone jack or a five inch screen or any of the other features you’ve used as an example of things people “need”. Okay, then let’s try some other feature. Which smartphone is capable of being rolled over by a truck, crane or being punched with an iron sledgehammer? There are phones designed exactly for that. Mainly used in construction work. Depending on the person he also does this at home and not only wants his work phone to survive such things. So he buys one of these phones. He values privacy, but his priority is more to the phone physical hardening. (such person exist I know at least on of them …) What do you know recommend? Degoogling it, using F-Droid and NextDNS filters without any accounts or using GPS with a Google account and so on. Also, nobody “needs” privacy, but some people **want** privacy. So if you are actually making a word game out of this, then you are also kind of wrong. > i have never found a single app that would not work on gos. i know they exist, but they are not incredibly common like you would suggest. gos simply works. I need to use two apps (mainly banking) that don’t work on GOS (for that I have an old phone). > this is not a good recommendation unless someone is just going to use this for an occasional call or text. nothing on a dumb phone can be secured or private. A dumphone should be cable of more … otherwise it is a smartphone. --- ## Post 97 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-22T17:29:57Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Which smartphone is capable of being rolled over by a truck, crane or being punched with an iron sledgehammer? Have you heard of phone cases? Stop clogging up the forum with this debate. --- ## Post 98 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T17:30:27Z > Have you heard of phone cases? Stop clogging up the forum with your shilling for crappy privacy suggestions. No … cases will not survive that. --- ## Post 99 by @Man — 2026-01-22T17:34:22Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Which smartphone is capable of being rolled over by a truck, crane or being punched with an iron sledgehammer? Any smartphone in a case or box. > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > Mainly used in construction work. Use a tough phone at work and a privacy respecting phone at home. You cannot have a consumer grade privacy respecting smartphone capable of being struck by a sledgehammer. They don’t exist. Carry multiple devices and stop trying to shift the goalposts. --- ## Post 100 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T17:39:50Z > Any smartphone in a case or box. Okay, I didn’t think of a box. > Use at tough phone at work and a privacy respecting phone at home. > You cannot have a consumer grade privacy respecting smartphone capable of being struck by a sledgehammer. They don’t exist. This argument ignores the fact that the top priority of people is privacy. Again this is not always the case. People might have another priority first and then privacy only as a second. Which is okay. Individual threat modeling. --- ## Post 101 by @Man — 2026-01-22T17:44:02Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > This argument ignores the fact that the top priority of people is privacy. Again this is not always the case. These people would be better served on another forum. There are currently no sledgehammer resistant privacy phones on the market. > **[Galaxy XCover6 Pro and Galaxy S23 Tactical Edition | Samsung Business US |...](https://www.samsung.com/us/business/solutions/industries/government/tactical-edition/)** > > Learn about the Galaxy XCover6 Pro Tactical Edition and Galaxy S23 Tactical Edition with Knox security, a mission-ready military phone proven by operators for deployment in tactical environments. Even these deveces wouldn’t meet that absurd criteria. Phones in this context are a disposable items provided by the employer. --- ## Post 102 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T17:46:28Z > Even these deveces wouldn’t meet that absurd criteria. Phones in this context are a disposable items provided by the employer. Actually depending on what happens these devices can survive that. I was live there while they presented and demonstrated their devices on a congress. --- ## Post 103 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T17:49:31Z For neo banks like revolut, this is not gonna cut it Besides some functionality tends to be locked in the app, for example in Bank of Cyprus they didn’t have quickpay it was app exclusive, then later was it added into the web app There’s also the fact that you **need the app to have secure transaction verification** , without the app the same bank I use for example again, uses SMS OTP to verify your payment which we all know SMS OTP is insecure, sure bank of Cyprus has thought of this and added a second step verification by asking your password (which is unfortunately just a 6 digit pin, what a nightmare for security, besides the point) but the point stands, and it’s an extra step over having the app that with 2 clicks you can get a transaction verified over multiple clicks and insecure sms --- ## Post 104 by @Man — 2026-01-22T18:00:36Z If your phone is worn on a lanyard then it shouldn’t be run over by a crane. If it still happens the phone will be the least of your worries :rofl: This thread was supposed to be about everyday situations, not worst case scenarios BTW. --- ## Post 105 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-22T18:01:11Z ok, we should recommend stock android so that every single feature of every single bank app works. (sarcasm) at the end of the day people need to decide for themselves if it’s worth it to care about their privacy and take steps towards it. some technology cannot be used in a privacy respecting way. i truly feel that for people who don’t want to make any changes or sacrifices, they should just switch from gsuite to proton, get an iphone, run it in lockdown mode, and call it a day. we can’t hand hold every single person through their unique use case of some technology they still want to use even though it doesn’t respect privacy. these are individual choices. --- ## Post 106 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-22T18:03:04Z I think you misunderstood saying “Just use the web app” is not viable when there’s a lot of variable or nuances when it comes to that statement Even if let’s say you do decide to use Bank of Cyprus’s web app, Revolut’s web app is not even considered a usable web app, You can barely do anything with it not even the basic things, therefore requiring the app to do even basic things If it was as simple as “Use the web app”, we wouldn’t even be reporting on app compatibility with banking. I’ll use myself and example I appreciate the convenience of Google Pay but purely because it doesn’t work on GOS, I just use the traditional method of tap to pay, Because I would much rather keep GOS than sacrifice it, when Revolut and my bank works just fine in GOS, There I may be sacrificing a little but at least I did not give up GOS. In conclusion: Nuances/Variables matter Besides good luck telling your average joe to “just use the web app”, I think most or some would spite you for saying that and go “No, I’ll just use the app, it’s fine thanks” or something like that I don’t think anyone really grasps the idea of using the web app of their banking (in average joe context if this gets lost). Not mentioning the other things I’ve already mentioned --- ## Post 107 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-22T18:05:27Z > we can’t hand hold every single person through their unique use case of some technology they still want to use even though it doesn’t respect privacy. these are individual choices. Okay, then let’s remove this forum and use just the KB.\> Because if we do not individualize then the KB is enough and a Forum is too much. Again, my point was not about not recommend GOS or generally say you should use Samsung, my point was about how absolutistic this forum is. --- ## Post 108 by @Man — 2026-01-22T18:26:43Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > I just use the traditional method of tap to pay, If you have a contactless payment card why does GOS compatibility matter? I only use cash but introducing an intermediary service, such as Google Pay, feels counterintuitive. --- ## Post 109 by @anon51983832 — 2026-01-22T18:45:07Z It’s fine to debate, but people are talking about things without offering technical evidence that more private OSes can be installed (other than GOS) than the OS that comes with the phone. By uninstalling Google Play Services you don’t automatically achieve privacy. When you provide technical evidence, perhaps the PG team will take these proposals seriously. --- ## Post 110 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-22T18:51:17Z these are not serious privacy proposals. they are proposals from people who want to think you can uninstall half of the google spyware and then ask google nicely to not harvest and sell 100% of all data that goes through the phone. it doesn’t work like that. if people don’t want to use gos, they should use apple and be done with it. --- ## Post 111 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-23T00:33:59Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > my point was about how absolutistic this forum is. At this point, i feel like you just want to tone policing the forum. And you are wrong as well On this [thread](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/i-dont-want-to-use-an-iphone-or-a-pixel-does-it-matter-which-samsung-i-pick/), user clearly state that user dont want Pixel and iPhone. You don’t see people replying with “Don’t want Pixel or iPhone? Screw you then!”. Well, nicotiu and Nathan inform the user about the risk of using Samsung. But with [good reason](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/i-dont-want-to-use-an-iphone-or-a-pixel-does-it-matter-which-samsung-i-pick/33588/21)! I’m still unsure what change that brinerustle and Onscreen5341 hoping. Add alternative hardware vendor in PG official recommendations? Can’t do that because that will just give user false sense of privacy. Make forum member to stop shilling pixel and iPhone? There no other alternatives that worth to recommend. Add hardening guide for every hardware vendor? Who is going to write that tho, there too many brand selling mobile phone and each have their own settings to turn off. I think we already have enough guide in official website. I will use myself as example: I read PG website, Teaching me more about privacy and security PG recommend Pixel, VPN, etc I look at my own wallet “dang im broke. And Pixel isbanned in here. Aint no way i pay for pixel and VPN” It is what it is, i guess So I bought Chinese brand. _Knowing its privacy risk, thanks to PG_ And i implemented _what i can_ (filtering DNS, using Brave, etc) based on my own individual limitations and preferences. --- ## Post 112 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-23T00:59:23Z Welp, it’s kinda off topic but i admit I made a mistake. I’m stupid! I unlocked my current phone bootloader and install other distro by random maintainer with _permissive SELinux_ for _privacy_. Without reading more deeply about the security risk… Previously i also think nothing wrong with custom rom. Like “its more private!”, “I’m not important enough to be hacked!”. Wrong. If we use analogy: security is the bucket and privacy is the water. If you punch holes in the bucket, the water leaks out. It doesn’t matter how ‘private’ the water was. For false sense of _privacy_, I end up: - Shifting my trust from a trillion-dollar corporation (who wants my data for ads) to a stranger (who might be incompetent or malicious) - Risking targeted by a 14-year-old with ChatGPT running a automated script and bots that infects thousands of phones to steal credit card numbers, crypto wallets, or just to use my phone as part of a botnet. - If thief got my phone, they can flash a modified recovery image. They can bypass my lock screen, dump my memory, or install a keylogger to catch my bank PIN. - When my phone actually got malware, SELinux be like “Oh, that’s against the rules. I’ll make a note of it in the log file.” _…Lets it happen anyway._ So like other people already said: You cannot have privacy without security. If your OS has holes, ‘Privacy’ is just a sticker you put on the phone to make yourself feel better while the data leaks out the back. Recommending _okay-ish_ hardware and software may mislead inexperienced users, overwhelm them with choices, and create a false sense of privacy instead of actually helping them. --- ## Post 113 by @Onscreen5341 — 2026-01-23T05:16:32Z My argument was never about Samsung. You are bringing this up and I don’t want discuss it further. My original comment got silently deleted and the Mods are ignoring me. For me that’s enough to end the discussion. --- ## Post 114 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-23T05:51:40Z > [@Onscreen5341](#): > > My argument was never about Samsung. I never say what is your argument is. I linked that Samsung thread in response of your absolutistic claim. To showcase: 1. “absolutistic” claim is inaccurate. 2. Other forum members can indeed give alternatives when the OP clearly specified that OP don’t want iPhone and Pixel. 3. From nicotiu and Nathan respond, we can see there is clear reason why something is not in PG official recommendations. Absolutism implies ignoring evidence or nuance but forum member’s stance is aligned with risk assessment and technical standards, not ideological inflexibility. From a security & privacy standpoint, restricting recommendations to safe options is responsible, not absolutist. --- ## Post 115 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-23T07:00:18Z Tell that to the guy deciding between Fairphone and Pixel while also stating that they had a very low threat model, we still inisisted on a Pixel despite the correct answer being “It depends on what you value the most” That is the definition of absolutism right here [Source](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/heavily-torn-on-whether-to-buy-a-fairphone-with-debloated-android-or-pixel-with-grapheneos-maximum-repairability-vs-maximum-privacy/34518) --- ## Post 116 by @Man — 2026-01-23T07:55:01Z The only reason they were considering a Fairphone was to remove the battery to ensure it is really off. Pixel with GOS in a Faraday bag is the solution, as suggested in the first comment. If Fairphone supported GOS I would never buy a Pixel again. Their ‘threat model’ was significant to remove the battery and brick the device on a regular basis btw. There was never a choice. --- ## Post 117 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-23T10:02:25Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > Unless my threat medal involves Targeted Attack and/or Mass surveillance or equivalent/worse, I see nothing wrong with say telling me to use something like LineageOS or debloating the system as a way to satisfy my needs. I agree with this. There should be general recommendations for people who can’t (or don’t want to) get a Pixel phone (or even iPhone). I think the general recommendation for now is to just stick with the phone and the OS you have. > [@anon0179693](#): > > I think reading this thread made me realize We likely have learned almost nothing since the guy who asked between pixels and Fairphone, even though in their specific situation the repairability aspect is more of a less priority that the pixel 10 can fulfill nowadays I think the consensus was that repairability is not worth the security and privacy trade-off that Pixel + GrapheneOS offers. They had a choice between either phones. But I’m sure most of us said Fairphone is a decent option. IF Google Pixel isn’t available (or too expensive) in your region, but you can get a Fairphone, that wouldn’t be a bad choice. --- ## Post 118 by @AnonOnion — 2026-01-24T09:09:38Z One thing I’ve realized while reading through these discussions is that it’s all so speculative. Yes there’s talk about threat models and some past incidents of non-GOS custom roms or phone firmware not being up to date, but no-one is explaining what the concrete threats of using non-GOS roms or phones like a Fairphone are. The closest thing I’ve seen here is the mention that an unlocked bootloader allows installed apps to modify the system. Please correct me if I missed something. I once saw someone say that using banking apps on a non-GOS custom rom is like walking around with an open wallet, and this is the kind of baseless FUD that bugs me. If the rom is receiving the monthly android security patches, there’s no way it’s that bad (obviously you have to trust that there’s nothing fishy happening with the rom itself). Like if we were dealing with houses here, I’d get the sense that an underground bunker is the only option because it’s objectively the best one for privacy and security, while all the other options are like living in a house made of glass, with a blinking neon light that says “Please come and rob me”. I’m not that technical myself, so when you make claims about other than Pixel+GOS, I’d appreciate concrete explanations (or links) for what the concrete threats are and why Pixel+GOS are better. --- ## Post 119 by @Man — 2026-01-24T09:19:14Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > what the concrete threats are Google. If you’re here, you know why. --- ## Post 120 by @anon53952245 — 2026-01-24T10:58:36Z honestly for my goals for me it is not as simple as “De-google” at this point, in fact i did kind of break that ethos to be able to use my smartwatch and Message RCS E2EE in which RCS E2EE is well worth the sacrifice for better security and privacy on something that basically you can use with any android user. [As GrapheneOS themselves said, they’re not about avoiding google](https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/113138020718055697), if you choose to avoid google and it doesnt sacrifice your own convenience or something like that, that’s fine (besides my secondary profile has always been about apps like banking and things I wanna avoid looking that im forced to stay like viber and does have play services, my main is a no account play services setup purely for those 2 usages (smartwatch and RCS E2EE android-to-android). But it is about being able to use them in a more private and secure sense (exhibit a: sandboxed instead of privileged google play services/store/framework exhibit B: contact scopes allowing to bypass whatsapp’s required contact permission without giving up any of it, exhibit C: whenever IPC Scopes comes out, Exhibit D: Seperated users for apps you dont trust on your main or are forced to use or isolation. Shall I go on?) --- ## Post 121 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-24T13:06:10Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > That is the definition of absolutism right here I think that just called biased :stuck_out_tongue: - OP in torn between repairability vs _privacy_ - Ask questions in forum that focused on _privacy_ and _security._ - Forum member recommends maximum _privacy_ choice. Obviously X forum will have X bias and Y forum have Y bias, that is normal. “It depends on what you value the most” for me is equivalent of “figure it out yourself”. Especially in context of question like that. Like bro, I’m asking because I’m in dilemma! I won’t asking any questions if I can figure it out myself! XD Lastly, who is this “we”? At the end of the thread is literally PG staff saying pick whatever you want but be mindful. --- ## Post 122 by @Anvil — 2026-01-24T13:28:07Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > I’d appreciate concrete explanations (or links) for what the concrete threats are and why Pixel+GOS are better. Already did ([source](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/android-recommendations-should-reflect-real-life-not-just-worst-case-threat-models/34840/25)). > **[Comparison of Android-based Operating Systems](https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm)** > > Comparison of Android-based Operating Systems --- ## Post 123 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T13:48:07Z I understand it is not a great or good example, but it still proves my point As you said, even bias is correct enough in my book --- ## Post 124 by @AnonOnion — 2026-01-24T13:50:03Z Thanks but this doesn’t really say anything about the real world implications of using something like Iode vs. GOS. Sure it looks nice for GOS with tons of green while others are covered in red, but what does it mean? So what if I can’t “disable USB-C and pogo pins data”? Do I really need blaarghs in the XYZ socket? --- ## Post 125 by @Anvil — 2026-01-24T13:57:10Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > the real world implications Even if you can’t understand all of the table, I’m sure you can understand or look up at least some of it? Per connection MAC randomization, VPN leak patches, storage scopes, contact scopes are all very important privacy features that very clearly help give users more control over their data. As I said in my previous comment, GrapheneOS replaces or disables Google services to prevent leakage of user data to Google. As for the security features, it can be hard to see the real world impact for average people because there simply aren’t that many people out there using these custom ROMs in the first place so there isn’t much empiric data. That’s why we have to go off of security features implemented and timely updates provided alone. If that’s not enough to convince you, that’s fine, but it’s hard for me to criticize the PG security criteria just because there haven’t been articles about the dozen existing /e/ OS users having their bank accounts drained or something. As others have said the minimum requirements are pretty basic. --- ## Post 126 by @anon64393658 — 2026-01-24T14:00:33Z Since there have been multiple mentions of “Military Grade” smart phones I thought it would be amusing to point out what the US military actually issues as work phones: iPhones in Otterbox cases :upside_down_face: --- ## Post 127 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T14:08:56Z Tbh makes me reconsider if work phones should be iPhones or Pixel with GrapheneOS as a gold standard Because at a scale of say company of 15+ employees, don’t you need an easy way to manage them? How would GrapheneOS do it with no resources to make it enter into some Android enterprise thing or something like that? I can see Apple providing proper documentation for IT management but idk about Graphene just saying --- ## Post 128 by @Man — 2026-01-24T14:49:14Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > So what if I can’t “disable USB-C and pogo pins data”? Disabling USB data is a standard Android feature now. The benefits are obvious. If you plug your phone into an untrusted USB socket it will only draw power. There will be no data transfer. Pogo pins allow your device to be manipulated. Is this likely? No. Will you ever use them? No. Does it matter? Not much. Disable that feature then. Having the option is good. If you want to use a less secure computer nobody is stopping you. --- ## Post 129 by @Man — 2026-01-24T14:57:19Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > Like if we were dealing with houses here, I’d get the sense that an underground bunker is the only option because it’s objectively the best one for privacy and security, while all the other options are like living in a house made of glass, with a blinking neon light that says “Please come and rob me”. What if this was true? Why shouldn’t your phone be a bunker? My phone is merely a Google Pixel with an alternate OS. Installation was automatic after I unlocked the bootloader. GrapheneOS is free. Updates are free. I didn’t lose any functionality. The battery lasts longer and I enjoy using it. Using a phone with an advertising ID _is_ like a neon sign to corporations. Do whatever you want. Nobody here will know unless they work for a databroker :rofl: --- ## Post 130 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-24T16:34:31Z > [@AnonOnion](#): > > non-GOS custom rom is like walking around with an open wallet, and this is the kind of baseless FUD that bugs me. If the rom is receiving the monthly android security patches, there’s no way it’s that bad Is it really baseless or maybe we are just ignorant? > [@AnonOnion](#): > > concrete explanations (or links) for what the concrete threats are and why Pixel+GOS are better. :thinking: What do you mean with concrete explanations tho? Can you specify it more? I mean maybe software and technology threat is something that hard to grasp to begin with? Tho seems like you already aware of the danger tho. Tbh i think it’s more accurate the reason is because the alternatives is bad. **Issues** : 1. Unlocked bootloader issues 2. Who the heck the non-GOS custom rom maintainer!? 3. The monthly support lie. 4. If multi billion dollars cant do it? Why would non-GOS rom can do it? 5. Too much assumption 6. I’m stupid and the world is big wide and scary **DISCLOSURE** : im stupid and everything here is merely from my opinion based on Google research and AI spoon-feeding me. Please do correct me if im wrong. # 1. Unlocked bootloader issues When malware infect my phone In locked bootloader: i reboot the phone. The malware is flushed from memory. Or factory reset then malware is gone. In unlocked bootloader: It’s still there no matter what and the neat part? We dont know. Not like attacker will politely inform you that your phone is compromised. Source: - [Verified Boot (Android security feature): Ensures a phone with a locked bootloader will only start legitimate, manufacturer‑signed software each time it boots, preventing unauthorized system‑level malware persistence.](https://source.android.com/docs/security/features/verifiedboot) - [Device state (Locked vs Unlocked Bootloader): A locked bootloader enforces software verification and resists unauthorized modifications, whereas an unlocked bootloader allows any software to run without integrity checks, meaning malware could survive reboot or factory reset if it modifies lower‑level parts of the system.](https://source.android.com/docs/security/features/verifiedboot/device-state) - [Pegasus (program that can secretly read messages, track locations, and access phone data without the user knowing.)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)) - [Rootkit (software that secretly controls a computer and hides its presence, allowing attackers to steal data or spy on activity.)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootkit) # 2. Who the heck are non-GOS custom rom maintainer!? With Samsung and Chinese brand, at least they are billions dollar companies. With GOS, still vetted employee or a known entity with legal accountability. And working with more limited devices so not spread out too much. And non GOS rom…well.. Which one we are talking about? There is so many. From lineage to Matrix Project, etc. In custom rom, a maintainer is: - xX\_DarkSlayer\_99\_xx from the XDA-Developers forum. - A Computer Science student from a country you can’t find on a map. - A hobbyist who does this in their basement after their real job. I mean yeah, they are definitely awesome and highly competent people but now what is the implications of this? - Scenario A: The maintainer buy new phone. They stop updating our device. The End. - Scenario B: The maintainer decides to add a “feature” that sends clipboard data to their server. They slip it into the kernel source. LineageOS automated code review might catch it, but device-specific kernel code is massive and hard to audit. The End - Scenario C: The maintainer’s GitHub account is hacked because they reused a password. The hacker pushes a malicious update. We download the “Official Update.” The End. “But this is speculative!!” Yeah maybe? But I don’t think system that rely on “hoping for the best” is reliable. Also we have irl case of this tho! The XZ Utils Backdoor: A “volunteer maintainer” (Jia Tan) spent years gaining trust in an open-source project (XZ Utils), then slipped in a backdoor that affected Linux servers worldwide. With custom rom, we basically trusting that User123 is not the next Jia Tan. Source: - [Wikipedia article about XZ backdoor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XZ_Utils_backdoor) - [Lineage OS confirm maintainer is volunteer](https://wiki.lineageos.org/faq#why-do-you-support-this-old-device-but-not-my-newer-one) Clarification: I’m not bashing Lineage OS, but just show GOS and Lineage is very much have different purpose and use cases. # 3. The monthly support lie. First off, I’m still very confused about this part so CMIIW Phone have OS (Android aka the manager) and Firmware (the workers). Custom ROM only can update the OS but they cannot effectively update the firmware because it’s proprietary blob. Which mean the OS is patched, but the kernel/drivers underneath are rotting. An attacker can exploit the GPU driver (which we didn’t patch) to gain root access, bypassing the OS security entirely. # 4. If multi billion dollars cant do it? Why would non-GOS rom can do it? Contination of previous point. - In 2022, Project Zero (Google hacker team) found that the Mali GPU Driver (Firmware) had critical vulnerabilities. ARM fixed it in July. - Months later, major phones (Samsung, Xiaomi, Oppo) still had not applied the fix. even though their “Security Patch Level” might looked new. Now what the implications? If a multi-billion dollar company like Shamesung is months late on firmware, I very much doubt that volunteer “Custom OS Maintainer” for a 4-year-old phone has chance of patching the proprietary blobs. The OS might say it from 2026 but the GPU driver is from 2021. Source: - [Project Zero: The vulnerabilities discussed in this blog post (CVE-2022-33917) are fixed by the upstream vendor, but at the time of publication, these fixes have not yet made it downstream to affected Android devices (including Pixel, Samsung, Xiaomi, Oppo and others). Devices with a Mali GPU are currently vulnerable.](https://projectzero.google/2022/11/mind-the-gap.html) # 5. Too much assumption Now combine all previous point. To believe phone with unlocked bootloader is secure, we need to assume: 1. The Volunteer Developer is competent and never misses a CVE.T 2. The Volunteer Developer is not malicious. 3. The Volunteer Developer’s computer wasn’t hacked by a Supply Chain attack. 4. The 4-year-old Firmware drivers won’t be exploited by new malware or by the [35 million malware samples.](https://search.brave.com/search?q=how+many+malware+sample+in+vx+underground&summary=1&conversation=08a76ae69ade982e18de1f1255648fca72ff) 5. We won’t get hit by an “Evil Maid” attack. Meanwhile with GOS or Pixel: 1. The math is mathing (Verified boot) 2. Google/GrapheneOS checks their code. (Ok this might be simplification too much XD.) # 6. I’m stupid and the world is big wide and scary Beyond all that, this is the simplest reason. Custom ROM is complicated, it’s not funny if i accidentally brick my phone just to get _privacy_ (Well i guess that one way to solve the problem tho lol) And cyber threat is ever evolving field. So many known unknown and unknown unknown. Example case: [“global cybercrime network” abusing Microsoft AI](https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/02/27/disrupting-cybercrime-abusing-gen-ai/) Microsoft try to make them cool calling them global cybercrime network or cool name like Storm-2139 but the truth is far simpler. The named individual doesn’t even know each other and not working together. They are just script kiddie scraping LLM api keys for NSFW roleplay chat. This just goes to show that again, you don’t need to be targeted because the attacker will just check everything with security flaws. If you can access to internet, assume attacker can access your device too. # Ok but lets play devil advocate “That’s long rambling, lordhomeless. Does it actually matter to irl day to day life tho?” …well… Okay. I dont know. xD Maybe if you never let the phone leave your hand) and you don’t install sketchy apps along: - If nobody physically touches your phone. - If you don’t browse risky sites that target old GPU drivers. - Then maybe an unlocked bootloader is “fine.”? After all if your threat is surveillance capitalism, maybe custom rom is just fine. But then again, if the option is between: A. A concrete bunker with a guard at the door (Verified Boot) who checks everyone’s ID and the Foundation is inspected monthly (Firmware Updates). B. A house where we removed the front door (Unlocked Bootloader) + the land under the house is a sinkhole (Outdated Firmware). We put up a sign that says “Please Respect Privacy” (The Custom ROM features), but because ee removed the front door (Verified Boot), if a burglar (Malware) gets in, they can live in our attic (Persistent Rootkit) and we will never know. A is clearly better option. Maybe with exception like if we are a poor person living in a country where Pixels are illegal or expensive. Can’t buy updated phone as well. Then using a Custom ROM on old phone is better than using an old Stock Android phone with unpatched software. (Maybe) Side note: This longer than i intended.. I really appreciate it that you are reading this long writing. Many thanks! XD --- ## Post 131 by @lordhomeless — 2026-01-24T16:38:53Z > **Off topic pondering** > > The more I write my last post, the more I realize how insecure my current phone really is… > > ![4b1e7552-977c-4b83-a4f4-eb2e499ed254](https://forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/3X/4/4/447186d50375e9b8b85adc0a43f4f355978327c7.webp) --- ## Post 132 by @anon98749087 — 2026-01-24T17:21:51Z For anyone reading this thread, and for the people who gave negative reacts on the post I’m replying to, I want to remind you that you’re on a PRIVACY forum. Google is potentially the single company that has done the most to purposefully erode privacy rights globally. If you are using a phone that makes connections to Google, there is no way to make that device private. Google is a surveillance company that funds building their surveillance apparatus through selling the data they collect. Further, Google has _always_ gleefully handed your data over to whatever authority figure calls and asks them for it. (For all the “link me to sources” people in the thread, reputable reporting has been reporting on this for about 15 years, I’m sure you can find it yourself.) They are now openly supporting and collaborating with the most corrupt US government in history…you know the one that opened up essentially all your data the government has to a team of caffeine-addled, unvetted, and unqualified twenty-year olds to pour through (“DOGE”). There were multiple leaks during that process. Google is one of the top concrete threats to your privacy AND security. If you don’t realize that, I don’t know what to say that can help you. If you’re using a phone that makes connections to Google, there is no way for it to be private, and there is no way for it to be “secure” because Google will hand your data over very, very quickly. Sure, stock Android may be secure against non-Google threats, but that requires you to trust Google, and if you trust Google I have no idea what you’re doing on this forum. Use a stock Android phone if you want, or use one of the other Android-based custom roms that still makes connections to Google. I don’t care. But please stop telling people in this forum there’s a way to make those devices private. There is not. --- ## Post 133 by @ImTooPhaT — 2026-01-24T17:50:51Z Pretty much the same gripe I have with Windows user. How do I debloat Windows and make it private? And please don’t say install Linux. Well, you’re inherently giving up privacy if you use Windows in exchange for whatever benefit you get out of Windows. Big tech companies don’t want you to have both ways. You can continue to use Windows, but you have to accept there’s a privacy ceiling. And if continue to have privacy concerns with Windows, maybe you should think about using Linux. --- ## Post 134 by @Man — 2026-01-24T18:02:25Z > [@anon53952245](#): > > honestly for my goals for me it is not as simple as “De-google” at this point, in fact i did kind of break that ethos to be able to use my smartwatch and Message RCS E2EE in which RCS E2EE is well worth the sacrifice for better security and privacy on something that basically you can use with any android user. I’m not an expert but isn’t RCS carrier dependant? Using a compatible app or device at your end doesn’t guarantee secure communications at the other end. Everything Google produces is spyware, unless you choose an open source fork. --- ## Post 135 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T18:16:34Z If a user uses Google Messages too (so Android-to-Android), you have RCS E2EE which is more secure and private than SMS On your question to if RCS is Carrier dependent, it used to be carrier + Google, Now to my understanding it is carrier, but RCS should work just fine for the most part that is regardless of carrier, especially with the updates and if the other person on the line has Google Messages (which is likely and does come pre installed), you are guaranteed to get E2EE I would say it’s about on par with using WhatsApp, except that Google Messages is pre-installed on many Android devices and it is a rarity for them not to connect to RCS with Google Messages so for those users you get E2EE and no need to negotiate on an app. In a recent build GrapheneOS, they added support and can confirm works very well. yes with say: Google Messages - Samsung Messages (and vice versa) iOS (iMessage) - Google Message (and vice versa) **does not grant E2EE** but Google Messages to Google Messages does [But I am hoping like @overdrawn98901 here that RCS E2EE becomes a standard so that communication across iOS to Android is also E2EE] Idk what to tell you, enjoy using sms which is more insecure and not private Again by all means if you want to be degoogled, that’s fine, the problem is being absolutists about it rather than looking at the benefit. And I do support people using Signal over RCS or even WhatsApp, but sometimes or often you gotta have a compromise that is more private and secure than sms and RCS fits the bill especially with the extra perk of not needing to negotiate on an app and E2EE which makes it again about on par with WhatsApp except it’s again, pre installed on many android devices, guaranteeing RCS E2EE on those and no need to negotiate. But I do still try to get them to contact me on signal if I can. Laugh at me for having a smartwatch if you want, **I don’t care** , but dismissing anything “Google” especially when there are things that can benefit more than make it worse is outright poker face [Yes Google deserves criticisms, like the fact that E2EE RCS is only between 2 Google message users or more if on a group, The data collection, the killing of products etc. But Christ have common sense that SMS \< RCS E2EE = WhatsApp \< Signal or something, and as I said I’m not saying you shouldn’t degoogle, if you can do it, I’m saying there are some exceptions you can make without feeling like you **need** to degoogle like RCS E2EE, think of implementing it here without a google account as a 0.1-0.5 Google or something, It is up to you to say if it is worth going that route, I think if you’re stuck on SMS, it is] --- ## Post 136 by @Man — 2026-01-24T18:34:37Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > Idk what to tell you, enjoy using sms which is more insecure and not private I don’t use SMS exept for 2FA. > [@anon0179693](#): > > Again by all means if you want to be degoogled, that’s fine, the problem is being absolutists about it rather than looking at the benefit I’ve never heard of Google Messages and can’t install it. If it improves privacy for others that’s good. But any app that requires a Google account or services is incompatible with privacy. My position isn’t absolutist. An app either meets my criteria or it doesn’t. --- ## Post 137 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T18:39:28Z Got it So my setup is that I avoid making a Google account, I just installed it off Aurora store, to my surprise Google actually does not ask to make an account on Google messages when you have None. Enabled RCS and after putting patience, it worked (However you can make a temporary login then logout/remove the account before launching Google Messages if my logic is correct, it should work) I’ll leave you the patch log described that GrapheneOS enabled it > **[READ_PHONE_NUMBERS - GrapheneOS releases](https://grapheneos.org/releases#2025092700)** > > List of tagged releases. Snapshot releases without tags such as early releases of the project and early device support releases are not listed. | Official releases of GrapheneOS, a security and privacy focused mobile OS with Android app... --- ## Post 138 by @Man — 2026-01-24T18:44:54Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > Laugh at me for having a smartwatch if you want, **I don’t care** , but dismissing anything “Google” especially when there are things that can benefit more than make it worse is outright poker face I wasn’t going to mention that but you keep editing as if I’m being antagonistic. Why would I laugh? We both know smartwatches are bad for privacy. I have no idea what does or doesn’t work with them. All I use is Signal and that’s good enough for me. Google is bad for privacy. If you found an acceptable compromise to maintain relationships then I’m happy for you. --- ## Post 139 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T18:47:15Z I mean idk maybe someone would but I have calmed down I guess absolutist is a bit of a too loose word to use but I just thought you were one of those to push a narrative that Google should be avoided at all costs When remember even GrapheneOS themselves have stated > **[GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)](https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/113138020718055697)** > > @buzzdee@mstdn.social @synapsenkitzler@digitalcourage.social @korporal@fedifreu.de The purpose of GrapheneOS is not specifically to avoid Google apps and services but rather to provide a high level of privacy and security. Being able to use Google... --- ## Post 140 by @anon0179693 — 2026-01-24T18:50:36Z > **Off-topic pondering** > > I see we have a fellow human of culture here, that’s a way to say “I play ZZZ” without saying “I play ZZZ” --- ## Post 141 by @Man — 2026-01-24T18:59:13Z To be clear I do believe that Google should be avoided at almost any cost. I still have Google devices but only to preserve my Google account, which I’m slowly migrating away from. My Pixel doesn’t have Google Play Services or Aurora Store. Enabling Google Messages still requires Play Services. It is unclear how the sandbox works from the page you linked but thanks for bringing it to my attention. > Using this requires granting the Phone permission to Play services to provide carrier information to it, granting the required permissions to Google Messages and then setting Google Messages as the current carrier messaging app. A sandboxed Google app doesn’t meet my criteria unless it’s free software with no malicious components. If it was FOSS then GOS could integrate it into their system properly. Any form of encryption is a bonus, but everyone I communicate with already uses Signal. --- ## Post 142 by @anon51983832 — 2026-01-24T19:41:09Z > **[Choosing Your Android-Based Operating System](https://privsec.dev/posts/android/choosing-your-android-based-operating-system/)** > > Android is a secure operating system that has strong app sandboxing, Verified Boot (AVB), and a robust permission control system. > When you buy an Android phone, the device’s default operating system often comes with invasive integration with apps and... --- ## Post 143 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-01-24T20:00:35Z Lots of good, relevant information in this document, but an important note for future readers: the DivestOS recommendation is outdated, DivestOS was discontinued in 2024 --- ## Post 144 by @AnonOnion — 2026-01-25T08:29:55Z Thanks for the response, this was helpful! The scopes thing is new to me, I’ll look it up :+1: --- ## Post 145 by @AnonOnion — 2026-01-25T08:38:59Z Yeah it’s not a perfect analogy here as GOS doesn’t have the same impracticalities as a bunker, but my point was that there are options somewhere in between – if I’d like to build my house of more sustainable materials for instance. This different priorities thing has already been discussed earlier so let’s not get to that. As you said, I’ll do whatever I want, but it’s difficult to make decisions based on some abstract speculative threats. So thanks for the USB explanation above :folded_hands: --- ## Post 146 by @AnonOnion — 2026-01-25T08:44:48Z Oh wow you really cooked here! (even if it was with AI) Some useful info and links on concrete threats, thanks :folded_hands: I was reflecting the info on the Fairphone 5 + IodeOS combo that I’m considering, and to me it seems safe enough. You can lock the bootloader and firmware gets [regular updates](https://iode.tech/iodeos-official-supported-devices) (albeit it’s not the same as on a Pixel+ GOS combo, I know). --- ## Post 147 by @IksNorTen — 2026-01-25T10:46:30Z > [@TinFoilHat](#): > > Alternative commercially available OS (like /e/OS as you mentioned) provide tangible privacy advantage against the still privillaged GMS for You should take a look at this thread and see what kind of “privacy advantage” they propose: > **[Service Announcement : 26 May](https://community.e.foundation/t/service-announcement-26-may/41252/10)** > > This maintenance just leaked my data, I have found other /e/ users data on my phone and have unlinked it, what the hell are you doing with the servers !? --- ## Post 148 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-01-25T10:53:39Z I wasnt suggesting that. You need to read that bit with > Are you suggesting at the front and > your suggested group of people? Are you serious? at the end. --- ## Post 149 by @IsItJustMe — 2026-01-27T13:58:09Z I can attest to this being true. I bought a cheap trac moblie android 2 years ago. It is stuck on Android 12! Really! Lol It gets small updates once in awhile but I would imagine it’s pretty insecure. Yeah, if possible, save some pennies and grab a used or refurbished pixel and stay away from these bottom of the barrel budget phones. They’re also incredibly slow. --- ## Post 150 by @notwithstanding — 2026-02-05T15:06:55Z If this discussion has taught me anything about the privacy community (at least on this specific forum), it’s that there’s still hope for every single person on the planet to acquire a Google Pixel and install GrapheneOS on it. And if you aren’t doing that, then you might as well just give up on privacy. I like and wholeheartedly endorse this message. Hopefully there’s enough Pixel phones for every cellularly connected person on the planet. I suppose we’ll find out when this very realistic dream becomes a reality. I am not at all disappointed by the extremely naive and unrealistic understanding of what building momentum in a movement involves. I am, however, heartened to see these privacy advocates alienating every single person who didn’t buy their favorite phone and install their favorite custom ROM on it. At least, that’s how the general public is going to view those kinds of opinions. And then they will completely disregard the entire effort. --- ## Post 151 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-05T15:29:41Z > [@notwithstanding](#): > > And if you aren’t doing that, then you might as well just give up on privacy. that’s a way to rub a defeatism attitude nope, as someone unable to use a pixel yet, it only takes learning and time to know how to improve privacy on for example a Samsung phone (which is what my backup phone has always been when the pixel is unavailable) - Start with disabling alot of the privacy invading settings like say deleting advertising id, turning off data collection or sharing where you can - Move away to services like google, go to services that respect your privacy like signal, proton and if on social media, move to mastodon or put it in a privacy respecting browser like for example brave - Finally debloat or if available put a custom rom that more or less hits ticks enough boxes (of course with exception of slow security updates, I agree that they deserve some paddle for this even if it also may be partly due to lineage but still) than others (not GrapheneOS in this context, calm down, I mean Murena’s /e/ os which definetely has more deserving criticism) like iodéOS, but it only works best if you would use a phone that can lock the bootloader like Moto Gx2 (where x = 3, 5 or 7) series or fairphone. so yeah I can see why in many cases its best to try sticking to stock and do a curated debloat from a security perspective. **more importantly I have to emphasize that this only applies not to higher threat models and more on the levels of say surveillance capitalism or light mass surveillance. Those higher levels must afford a supported iPhone or a Pixel and put GrapheneOS on it.** (it’s actually crazy that such emphasis is required to avoid as much controversy as possible, on something like techlore I wouldn’t need to do that and it shows) --- ## Post 152 by @brinerustle — 2026-02-06T11:05:31Z > [@notwithstanding](#): > > there’s still hope for every single person on the planet to acquire a Google Pixel and install GrapheneOS on it. And if you aren’t doing that, then you might as well just give up on privacy. I wholeheartedly agree with your critique of much of the privacyguides community, though the sarcasm is easily lost. But yes, many people here are so against any other degoogled alternative that they repeat the assertion that “you’d be better off using stock Android”, an assertion I could understand if this forum was called [securityguides.org](http://securityguides.org). But otherwise it’s hard to understand. I have two theories that could explain this behavior: 1. Authority bias: Daniel Micay repeatedly says this and trashes other custom ROMs, and since he’s competent and has lots of followers, everything he says takes on a halo effect. None of this does anything to improve the dismal state of privacy on mobile. 2. People have accepted the “without security there is no privacy” assertion as if both terms were binary - either you have it or you don’t. By this baffling logic only iPhones or grapheneOS are secure and therefore they are the only private options. Never mind that many mortals live in relative security that malicious actors won’t empty their bank account even if their banking app runs on iodéOS. Please point me to the youtube channel where the white hat prankster with a few exploits downloaded from telegram cracks some influencer, geolocalizes them and interviews them on the street for laughs. If security is binary, it wouldn’t be hard to get 100 million views. My theory is, some combination of these two factors leads to bizarre recommendations: Your custom rom uses google connectivity check? That is so much worse than stock Android geolocalizing your every move, overseeing every contact you make and reading every message you ever typed into your keyboard. Wanting microG, because you still want to have a life and use some apps that require play services? Nope, the only acceptable option is proprietary software: Don’t worry, it’s sandboxed! What could possibly go wrong? --- ## Post 153 by @anon51983832 — 2026-02-06T11:18:45Z The problem is the dishonesty and marketing carried out by the companies and organizations behind those custom ROMs. They’re simply not honest, even though you do gain some privacy with them. Your comment also reflects the typical “you’re either with me or against me” Manichaeism that you yourself criticize. --- ## Post 154 by @Man — 2026-02-06T12:11:44Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > Authority bias: Daniel Micay repeatedly says this and trashes other custom ROMs, and since he’s competent and has lots of followers, everything he says takes on a halo effect. I have never heard of this person. No other custom ROM offers what GrapheneOS does at this time. Can you enlighten us? Is Daniel wrong? > [@brinerustle](#): > > None of this does anything to improve the dismal state of privacy on mobile. If there were a plethora of viable independent custom ROMs available to everyone, why would there be a dismal state of privacy on mobile phones? Is it because there is currently only one acceptable option called GrapeheneOS? I like GrapheneOS but if there were a remotely viable alternative I would choose that instead. Elements of GrapheneOS are still closed source or proprietary. Cellular technology is invasive by design. No phone is truly private. --- ## Post 155 by @TinFoilHat — 2026-02-06T12:29:46Z > [@Man](#): > > I have never heard of this person. No other custom ROM offers what GrapheneOS does at this time. Can you enlighten us? Is Daniel wrong? > **[GrapheneOS history](https://grapheneos.org/history/)** > > History of the GrapheneOS project. > GrapheneOS was founded by Daniel Micay in late 2014. --- ## Post 156 by @Man — 2026-02-06T12:40:38Z That guy is one of the reasons I hesitated to buy a Pixel after what he said about Louis Rossman. FOSS is full of unreasonable people but sometimes that is what makes them great. I would like an alternative to GOS if there was one. --- ## Post 157 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-06T12:56:20Z I’m compelled to chime in again - this is the most well-written argument Ive seen in favor of broader ROM recommendations, respect You’ve correctly identified the reasons _I_ use to claim GOS is the only viable private ROM. I don’t believe either is flawed, though I feel your frustration that they logically eliminate many options --- ## Post 158 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-06T13:02:45Z which frankly there isn’t closest is iodé but it only has locked bootloder for motorola g32, g52 & g72, fairphone and pixel and even then. I’ve just tried to figure out about things like update frequency on iodéOS, met with disappointment, they seem to have moved ota updates to gitlab with no way now to determine or even say if the claims of slow security updates is valid. I think people also forget that it is in the mercy of LineageOS-MicroG so there’s that. ill put a reminder next month and check if they continue publishing OTA updates for security updates. but honestly it is all over the damn place and it’s annoying. [gitlab ota repo](https://gitlab.iode.tech/ota/release) Edit: it seems [I can only rely on the board matrix so far](https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm) that says 2-4 weeks, I would keep track, this is keeping in mind though that with the same source lineage says 1-2 weeks so it goes to show, iode waits for the 1-2 week release, then goes ahead and upstreams but yeah I wish it was minimum 2 weeks doe. --- ## Post 159 by @Archer — 2026-02-07T21:16:41Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > They don’t want to give Google money but want to buy a new device Is this related to the price of Pixel or an probably unreasonable antipathy towards Google? > [@brinerustle](#): > > pixels are a bad choice for a child’s first device if they are likely to get robbed for having one. Pixel’s are not so famous as beeing expensive like for example the iPhone’s, I never heard that anyone was robbed because of them. > [@brinerustle](#): > > They care more about privacy than security Which device goes better then a Pixel with GOS on privacy? They are just worse in terms of security and at best equeal on privacy. --- ## Post 160 by @Man — 2026-02-09T15:04:42Z > [@brinerustle](#): > > pixels are a bad choice for a child’s first device if they are likely to get robbed for having My Pixel has a generic case and screen protector for this reason. It could be a cheap generic Chinese import for all anyone can tell. Children shouldn’t have expensive new phones if it makes them a target. An older Pixel would be more appropriate. In a market dominated by Samsung and Apple most people wouldn’t even recognise a Pixel where I live. I almost never see anyone using one. --- ## Post 161 by @anonymous549 — 2026-02-09T15:23:19Z These types discussions are odd to me. It’s not a site suggestion so there is nothing actionable here. Its just a complaint, some people agree, some dont but, none of it matters. For people that agree with OP, someone should submit a tool suggestion / site development post outlining a defined criteria change.