We have a partial port of GrapheneOS to the Pixel 11 series after a week of work on it. We're unable to complete the port due to lack of support for ARM hardware memory tagging in software, firmware and near certainly hardware. It appears Google cut an important security feature to save money.
GrapheneOS is an open-source fork of AOSP. Anyone could fork it again and provide kernel modules/drivers for their hardware.
To my knowledge, GrapheneOS is not standards-based. They take one operating system, and tweak it. I don’t know if there are relevant standards to contribute to, or even standards bodies to approve them.
Thanks for taking the time to educate someone that is STEM-studied but not necessarily in computer hardware/software.
Given that GrapheneOS picked AOSP to be their canvas with which to tighten down the hatches and improve the base AOSP platform’s privacy characteristics, this to me indicates that nothing is stopping GOS from doing the same and contributing to other major platforms intended for mobile devices. Unless of course bandwidth is an issue for them, then they can’t contribute to more than just their AOSP fork.
As someone who uses tech and doesn’t really develop it, I would appreciate GrapheneOS expanding their vision to other software/hardware platforms like those being worked on by the Ubuntu Touch, SailfishOS, PostmarketOS, etc. teams.
I’m not advocating that GOS work on all of these, but I am advocate for GOS to branch off from corporate dependence in the event Motorola goes the way of Google.
If one thing capitalism has shown us over the last 100+ years, corporations that can enshittify will enshittify. It’s only a matter of time, and it’d be better imo for GOS to start pivoting sooner rather than later.
Unless GOS are ok with ceasing their entire project once Motorola drops them. Maybe they’re confident in that bet. I wouldn’t be, being a FOSS advocate myself nowadays.
GrapheneOS is an open-source fork of AOSP. Anyone could fork it again and provide kernel modules/drivers for their hardware.
To my knowledge, GrapheneOS is not standards-based. They take one operating system, and tweak it. I don’t know if there are relevant standards to contribute to, or even standards bodies to approve them.
Thanks for taking the time to educate someone that is STEM-studied but not necessarily in computer hardware/software.
Given that GrapheneOS picked AOSP to be their canvas with which to tighten down the hatches and improve the base AOSP platform’s privacy characteristics, this to me indicates that nothing is stopping GOS from doing the same and contributing to other major platforms intended for mobile devices. Unless of course bandwidth is an issue for them, then they can’t contribute to more than just their AOSP fork.
As someone who uses tech and doesn’t really develop it, I would appreciate GrapheneOS expanding their vision to other software/hardware platforms like those being worked on by the Ubuntu Touch, SailfishOS, PostmarketOS, etc. teams.
I’m not advocating that GOS work on all of these, but I am advocate for GOS to branch off from corporate dependence in the event Motorola goes the way of Google.
If one thing capitalism has shown us over the last 100+ years, corporations that can enshittify will enshittify. It’s only a matter of time, and it’d be better imo for GOS to start pivoting sooner rather than later.
Unless GOS are ok with ceasing their entire project once Motorola drops them. Maybe they’re confident in that bet. I wouldn’t be, being a FOSS advocate myself nowadays.