Open source privacy and security focused mobile OS with Android app compatibility. Forum, Discord and Matrix: grapheneos.org/contact#commu…

We're happy to announce a long-term partnership with Motorola. We're collaborating on future devices meeting our privacy and security standards with official GrapheneOS support. motorolanews.com/motorola-th…
632
1,751
12,505
1,104,373
GrapheneOS retweeted
Replying to @Gabekxk
We're aware there's 5 ETH sitting in smart contract with fee revenue from a token someone made. We'll see if we can claim the money safely without a software wallet. If we can't, we'll simply wait until we've moved on to a new multisig hardware wallet setup. It might be years.
12
5
187
11,268
GrapheneOS retweeted
Replying to @Gabekxk
We use hardware wallets with split seeds to receive cryptocurrency donations. We aren't sure if we can even claim the money you're talking about. We're not going to gather seed phrases in 1 location, feed it into an Ethereum software wallet and hook it up to some smart contract.
4
2
161
10,282
GrapheneOS retweeted
Replying to @Gabekxk
GrapheneOS is freely available to everyone. It's a non-profit open source privacy project. Donations don't come with any personal rewards. The purpose of donating to GrapheneOS is making it better for everyone. GrapheneOS Foundation is non-profit. No one is getting rich from it.
6
43
752
12,799
GrapheneOS retweeted
Replying to @PikaSim_esim
GrapheneOS only uses devices where radio is isolated and unprivileged. Cellular works similarly to Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GNSS, NFC and UWB. Those run on isolated processors without access to the application processor or OS. Only memory that's explicitly shared is accessible to those.
1
6
273
9,049
No one other than us should make domains, accounts or anything else using the GrapheneOS name and logo. Those are our registered trademarks. We've been actively dealing with stores using our name/logo despite none being official. We don't want tokens using our name/logo either.
16
63
1,738
42,264
Do not create things using the former name and logo of GrapheneOS from prior to 2018 either. GrapheneOS has an active lawsuit against Copperhead based on their illegal takeover attempt back in 2018. We did not approve creating tokens using either our current or former name/logo.
1
5
293
13,841
We can't stop people creating memecoins directing fees to our donation addresses but please think first. Don't make something which looks official or which could create legal issues for us. We'll use whatever donations people send but it doesn't mean we approve of what donors do.
1
4
241
7,795
We need the person who recently sent a 1000 EUR donation via Wise to contact us via email with their full name so we can get Wise to unfreeze the payment. We regularly run into this issue with Wise but it's usually for small donations such as a 5 EUR one which got returned today.
150
163
5,187
491,395
There's someone who keeps trying to donate 5 AUD and it keeps being returned since we don't have their full name to pass this review. It's likely mainly caused by sanctions enforcement. There are often name collisions especially in cases where the sending bank gives initials.
9
9
945
61,343
GrapheneOS version 2026091900 released: grapheneos.org/releases#2026… See the linked release notes for a summary of the improvements over the previous release. Forum discussion thread: discuss.grapheneos.org/d/421… #GrapheneOS #privacy #security
4
29
355
20,736
GrapheneOS version 2026091700 released: grapheneos.org/releases#2026… See the linked release notes for a summary of the improvements over the previous release. Forum discussion thread: discuss.grapheneos.org/d/420… #GrapheneOS #privacy #security
13
34
371
21,009
The account we responded to at nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2100… is clearly using an LLM to masquerade as an expert and make inaccurate attacks on GrapheneOS. Our account was blocked alongside their clearly AI generated reply. They should be enabling the "Made with AI" content disclosure.
No, that's not accurate. The cellular baseband is an unprivileged component isolated from the application process and OS. It does not have control over the device. It's similar to Wi-Fi/Bluetooth and the other radios which are all isolated. The OS on the device definitely does matter for containing an exploit to the isolated component. The OS can also reduce attack surface for the cellular baseband which is part of the GrapheneOS feature set. Components having vulnerabilities is nothing new and that's why systemic security protections including isolation, attack surface reduction and exploit protections are important. A firmware patch for this vulnerability is available and currently being tested by GrapheneOS prior to release today.
15
23
578
31,716
GrapheneOS retweeted
No, that's not accurate. The cellular baseband is an unprivileged component isolated from the application process and OS. It does not have control over the device. It's similar to Wi-Fi/Bluetooth and the other radios which are all isolated. The OS on the device definitely does matter for containing an exploit to the isolated component. The OS can also reduce attack surface for the cellular baseband which is part of the GrapheneOS feature set. Components having vulnerabilities is nothing new and that's why systemic security protections including isolation, attack surface reduction and exploit protections are important. A firmware patch for this vulnerability is available and currently being tested by GrapheneOS prior to release today.
2
18
296
46,964
GrapheneOS retweeted
It's patched in the latest cellular firmware. That will be included in today's GrapheneOS release. We completed a port to Android 17 QPR1 prior to it being released. We were prepared to ship it on launch day with all the Pixel driver/firmware updates. Android 17 QPR1 wasn't pushed to AOSP and we don't currently have permission to ship it without an AOSP release. That means we couldn't ship what we prepared and need to make backports. We posted a thread about it: nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2100…
Android 17 QPR1 is the first release since Android Honeycomb (3.x) adding new APIs for app developers without a release to the Android Open Source Project. The new APIs are currently exclusive to the Pixel OS and aren't available to other Android OEMs. developer.android.com/sdk/ap…
4
21
245
7,451
GrapheneOS retweeted
GrapheneOS is partnered with Motorola Mobility which is Lenovo's mobile division. Motorola Solutions is an entirely different company from the one working with GrapheneOS. These companies aren't part of the same business and don't have the same ownership. In 2011, Motorola was split into Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions. Google acquired Motorola Mobility in 2012 and sold it to Lenovo in 2014. Motorola Mobility is the company selling smartphones and tablets. Motorola Solutions is a separate company. It's the continuation of the government contract side of Motorola selling radios, cameras and now drones. Both share the same brand for historical reasons but are entirely different things. People regularly get the companies mixed up due to both using the Motorola brand. It's Motorola Solutions making surveillance cameras, not Motorola Mobility. We're only working with Motorola Mobility. We're working with Motorola Mobility on upcoming devices meeting all of our requirements for updates and security protections. These devices will provide official support for GrapheneOS and we'll be provided with everything we need to provide proper updates. The first device with GrapheneOS support will be a very high end flagship but it will expand further from there.
12
16
266
7,295
Android 17 QPR1 is the first release since Android Honeycomb (3.x) adding new APIs for app developers without a release to the Android Open Source Project. The new APIs are currently exclusive to the Pixel OS and aren't available to other Android OEMs. developer.android.com/sdk/ap…
19
88
933
49,102
Pixels are now significantly harder to support than many other devices. One of the only advantages of Pixels is now a disadvantage instead. They're still the best fit for us due to the updates and security features but it burns time we want to spend on privacy and security work.
2
4
133
5,031
It will be far easier for us to support upcoming Motorola devices than Pixels. Qualcomm will hopefully expand MTE support beyond the highest end flagship SoC soon so we can expand to more than flagships. Pixel 11 didn't remove it from hardware, only firmware, so that's good news.
5
5
151
4,940