Several months ago, Motorola and the makers of GrapheneOS announced a team-up that would expand support for the privacy-centric OS to beyond Google’s Pixel phones. The announcement, however, was bereft of details. Now, the creators of the OS have taken to Mastodon (naturally) to provide an update. Moto’s GrapheneOS phones are on track to launch in 2027, but they’ll cost a pretty penny.
According to the GrapheneOS team, the upcoming Moto phones will be premium flagship devices. The team expects pricing to be even higher than Pixel phones, which is saying something. The current Pixel lineup starts at $900 for the base model Pixel 11, a $100 increase from last year. The Pixel 11 Pro XL price has gone up to a whopping $1,300 this year.
While Motorola makes plenty of budget devices in the Moto G line, those devices aren’t a viable option. GrapheneOS has supported Pixels because Google’s Tensor chips provide the necessary security features, but not all Qualcomm chips offer the same capabilities. Only Qualcomm’s most expensive 8-series processors are comparable from a security standpoint, and those only go in expensive flagship smartphones.
The initial devices with GrapheneOS support should be available in 2027. The initial devices will be flagships so they'll be higher end hardware than Pixels at a higher price. Lower end devices will take more time to meet our requirements since the updates and security features aren't as good. It's mostly due to how Qualcomm handles it. The latest Snapdragon flagships have the best security features. We'll also need Motorola to start paying them for longer updates below flagships.
I mean, I sort of understand where they're coming from from a "technology of privacy" standpoint, however from a "privacy as a philosophy" standpoint, the decision is questionable. It's...
I mean, I sort of understand where they're coming from from a "technology of privacy" standpoint, however from a "privacy as a philosophy" standpoint, the decision is questionable.
It's essentially pricing people out of privacy. It's making privacy a high-end feature instead of the status quo.
If I were them my first priority would be to develop privacy techniques for lower-end devices. I would try to innovate within those constraints.
I don't know, it just sets a bad precedent for privacy at a time where privacy is being attacked from all angles, to have them say "You want privacy? Pay up."
Even if that's not the case, their decision to not focus on lower end devices first and the way they are so cavalier about these new privacy first phones being priced higher than standard, doesn't help the way it looks.
You can get a Pixel 8a for like 200$ and it'll be supported until 2031. There's no reason to buy a last year phone when Pixels are supported for 7 years.
It's essentially pricing people out of privacy. It's making privacy a high-end feature instead of the status quo.
You can get a Pixel 8a for like 200$ and it'll be supported until 2031. There's no reason to buy a last year phone when Pixels are supported for 7 years.
They have specific requirements which the vast majority of low end devices don't currently meet. This is stated most succinctly by this sentence in their FAQ: and is further expanded upon...
They have specific requirements which the vast majority of low end devices don't currently meet. This is stated most succinctly by this sentence in their FAQ:
The goal of the project is not to slightly improve some aspects of insecure devices and supporting a broad set of devices would be directly counter to the values of the project.
and is further expanded upon throughout.
As @fxgn mentions, a recent-ish Pixel A series is comparatively affordable and will be supported for years to come, thanks in part to the aforementioned requirements. They mention support for lower end devices taking more time, requiring more changes and support from Motorola and/or Qualcomm. It's clear they are pushing for non-flagship devices which support their requirements in the future.
Thats a bummer. I've been using GrapheneOS for around 4 years now and I might just go in a different direction, like doing more on computers and less on my phone. Maybe even having something like...
Thats a bummer. I've been using GrapheneOS for around 4 years now and I might just go in a different direction, like doing more on computers and less on my phone. Maybe even having something like a small tablet or a phone setup like an iPod touch and then a phone phone with literally nothing on it.
I find my current pixel extremely frustrating. Its glass scratches ridiculously easy, apps are more glitchy on this phone than my last pixel (also with graphene), and the camera bulge is ridiculous (same on the last pixel).
Sorry, I meant to look it up in the settings once I was done ranting and forgot. Pixel 9. The most irritating app glitch I have is that youtube (ya google stuff on my privacy phone) often stops...
Sorry, I meant to look it up in the settings once I was done ranting and forgot.
Pixel 9.
The most irritating app glitch I have is that youtube (ya google stuff on my privacy phone) often stops working when I try to use it in the background. The current failure is that it actually doesn't stop playing when I shut off the screen or swap apps... it keeps playing but the sound stops.
Have a look at Grayjay. It is video aggregator and can do Youtube as well (no ads). Louis Rossmann backed it up (by words and actions, I don't now if woth money as well). I use it and my daighter...
Have a look at Grayjay. It is video aggregator and can do Youtube as well (no ads). Louis Rossmann backed it up (by words and actions, I don't now if woth money as well). I use it and my daighter dpes as well. It doesn't have any algorithm built in, it may be pro or con, depending on your view. It is a pro for me - I just watch what I'n subscribed to and the app itself doesn't steer me away from it.
Semi-related post from GrapheneOS: Pixel 11 doesn't meet the GrapheneOS security standards and may be skipped full text We have a partial port of GrapheneOS to the Pixel 11 series after a week of...
full text
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.
ARM hardware memory tagging (MTE) is used by GrapheneOS across the entire base OS including the kernel and every standard base OS process. It's only temporarily disabled for a few device-specific processes. It greatly improves protection against nearly all remote exploits and many local exploits.
Pixel 8 launched with hardware MTE support in October 2023. We integrated it into our hardened_malloc project and began using it across the OS later that month. Android and the Pixel OS never started using it by default. Android Advanced Protection Mode in Android 16 enables it for a few processes.
Apple's Memory Integrity Enforcement (MIE) is an always enabled feature on the iPhone 17. It's simply a high quality implementation of MTE using the latest standard extensions. It uses MTE in the most secure mode in the kernel and a large portion of userbase. They did a very good job integrating it.
Apple's MIE and Android 16+ AAPM don't use MTE for user installed apps unless those explicitly opt in. GrapheneOS enables it for more apps automatically and has a toggle for users to opt-in for every user installed app. There's a per-app toggle to opt-out for incompatible apps which is uncommon.
Neither iOS or Android encourage app developers to opt into MTE and other more aggressive security features used in the base OS. Apple's docs warn developers of performance and stability issues. Even Signal doesn't opt-in. Our approach enables forcing using MTE in the standard allocators regardless.
Pixel 11 does have security improvements including moving to post-quantum secure verified boot (ML-DSA) and replacing Samsung Shannon IMS with AOSP IMS. Titan M3 should significantly improve protection against data extraction in Before First Unlock state. It's too bad they ruined it by cutting MTE.
Pixel 11 series is a lot more expensive for an incremental improvement to the CPU, the same underpowered GPU and reduced RAM for the Pro base models. They finally caught up to the last generation of Qualcomm cellular radio. It's overpriced, the upgrades aren't impressive and losing MTE is appalling.
Compared to the Pixel 11, a Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has 40% higher single threaded CPU performance, 80% higher multi threaded performance, over 100% higher GPU performance and a far better cellular radio. It also finally has MTE. The next gen is what will be in the first Motorola with GrapheneOS.
Pixel 9a and earlier (including Nexus devices) were the Android Open Source Project reference devices. Pixel support was removed from AOSP with Android 16. It's now harder to support Pixels than many other devices and massive progress towards open source firmware and driver libraries was discarded.
Compared to the stock Pixel OS, GrapheneOS ships AOSP patches months earlier and Linux kernel patches many months earlier. However, we rely on them for firmware and most driver updates. We also want to move to new kernel branches earlier. These things can be improved with our Motorola partnership.
We strongly recommend against buying Pixel 11 devices. Pixel 8, 9 and 10 have much better overall security for GrapheneOS. Pixel 10 is cheaper with similar hardware and MTE. Pixel 11's Titan M3 should improve BFU security for users without a strong passphrase, but losing MTE craters AFU security.
We haven't determined what to do about this situation. It may be best for us to skip the Pixel 11 series devices. We can shift our focus entirely to the upcoming Motorola devices instead. Pixel 10a was really a 9th gen Pixel, so hopefully the Pixel 11a does the same with 10th gen and includes MTE.
I mean, price-wise this makes sense? Especially since as usual the larger companies (like our Pixel maker, Google) can afford to sell at a loss if that's the case. Most of what is gotten back via...
I mean, price-wise this makes sense? Especially since as usual the larger companies (like our Pixel maker, Google) can afford to sell at a loss if that's the case. Most of what is gotten back via telemetry, ads targeting, etc. more than makes up for it?
Exciting. I currently use a Pixel 8a that I got when I couldn't afford anything better, and I'm not as satisfied with it as I'd like, thanks to its subpar fingerprint reader. I've been hoping for...
Exciting. I currently use a Pixel 8a that I got when I couldn't afford anything better, and I'm not as satisfied with it as I'd like, thanks to its subpar fingerprint reader. I've been hoping for my next phone to be a moto grapheneos phone, so if the first one of those will come out in 2027, there'll probably be a second in 2028 and that'll probably be around when my phone is starting to conk out.
I don't know much, but I'm not sure how I could trust Motorola, knowing it's a Chinese company. Not that other companies are any better, it's just, if you're advertising for privacy I feel like...
I don't know much, but I'm not sure how I could trust Motorola, knowing it's a Chinese company. Not that other companies are any better, it's just, if you're advertising for privacy I feel like being IN China sort of sets you back from that goal.
I will be the first to admit that I'm being irrational here, but I feel like I am getting so jaded with US tech companies and their apparent readiness to replace all of us with AI and turn the...
I will be the first to admit that I'm being irrational here, but I feel like I am getting so jaded with US tech companies and their apparent readiness to replace all of us with AI and turn the rest of us into soylent green, and their pretty blatant disregard for our mental and societal well-being. And many of the tech giants seem eager to help end the age of democracy and turn us into something closer to Russia.
All that being said, my gut visceral reaction to your comment is that a this point I think I'd trust my privacy more with a Chinese company than a US tech company with the way things seem to be going. The US based companies aren't really giving me a whole lot of good reasons to trust them nowadays.
The difference right now is that it doesn’t seem like the tech companies have the power to directly stop and detain you at the airport should you ever actually visit China, and the Chinese...
The difference right now is that it doesn’t seem like the tech companies have the power to directly stop and detain you at the airport should you ever actually visit China, and the Chinese government certainly can and does do that to people and is trying to assert that power onto non Chinese citizens everywhere.
All the tech companies seem to want from us is our attention and our money. The Chinese government wants our obedience. I understand their motivations a lot less than our homegrown tech giants whose greed drives them. Big governments like the Chinese government seem more driven by paranoia.
I'm a bit sad to see this, as I wasn't looking to buy a flagship smartphone but rather a Pixel a-series replacement.
The Mastodon comment the article is based on:
I mean, I sort of understand where they're coming from from a "technology of privacy" standpoint, however from a "privacy as a philosophy" standpoint, the decision is questionable.
It's essentially pricing people out of privacy. It's making privacy a high-end feature instead of the status quo.
If I were them my first priority would be to develop privacy techniques for lower-end devices. I would try to innovate within those constraints.
I don't know, it just sets a bad precedent for privacy at a time where privacy is being attacked from all angles, to have them say "You want privacy? Pay up."
Even if that's not the case, their decision to not focus on lower end devices first and the way they are so cavalier about these new privacy first phones being priced higher than standard, doesn't help the way it looks.
You can get a Pixel 8a for like 200$ and it'll be supported until 2031. There's no reason to buy a last year phone when Pixels are supported for 7 years.
They have specific requirements which the vast majority of low end devices don't currently meet. This is stated most succinctly by this sentence in their FAQ:
and is further expanded upon throughout.
As @fxgn mentions, a recent-ish Pixel A series is comparatively affordable and will be supported for years to come, thanks in part to the aforementioned requirements. They mention support for lower end devices taking more time, requiring more changes and support from Motorola and/or Qualcomm. It's clear they are pushing for non-flagship devices which support their requirements in the future.
To be fair, the Graphene team tends to make it pretty clear that their focus is security and privacy is almost a side effect of that.
Thats a bummer. I've been using GrapheneOS for around 4 years now and I might just go in a different direction, like doing more on computers and less on my phone. Maybe even having something like a small tablet or a phone setup like an iPod touch and then a phone phone with literally nothing on it.
I find my current pixel extremely frustrating. Its glass scratches ridiculously easy, apps are more glitchy on this phone than my last pixel (also with graphene), and the camera bulge is ridiculous (same on the last pixel).
Which Pixel do you have?
Sorry, I meant to look it up in the settings once I was done ranting and forgot.
Pixel 9.
The most irritating app glitch I have is that youtube (ya google stuff on my privacy phone) often stops working when I try to use it in the background. The current failure is that it actually doesn't stop playing when I shut off the screen or swap apps... it keeps playing but the sound stops.
Have a look at Grayjay. It is video aggregator and can do Youtube as well (no ads). Louis Rossmann backed it up (by words and actions, I don't now if woth money as well). I use it and my daighter dpes as well. It doesn't have any algorithm built in, it may be pro or con, depending on your view. It is a pro for me - I just watch what I'n subscribed to and the app itself doesn't steer me away from it.
There are also other YouTube-specific clients, such as NewPipe, PipePipe and LibreTube
Semi-related post from GrapheneOS: Pixel 11 doesn't meet the GrapheneOS security standards and may be skipped
full text
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.ARM hardware memory tagging (MTE) is used by GrapheneOS across the entire base OS including the kernel and every standard base OS process. It's only temporarily disabled for a few device-specific processes. It greatly improves protection against nearly all remote exploits and many local exploits.
Pixel 8 launched with hardware MTE support in October 2023. We integrated it into our hardened_malloc project and began using it across the OS later that month. Android and the Pixel OS never started using it by default. Android Advanced Protection Mode in Android 16 enables it for a few processes.
Apple's Memory Integrity Enforcement (MIE) is an always enabled feature on the iPhone 17. It's simply a high quality implementation of MTE using the latest standard extensions. It uses MTE in the most secure mode in the kernel and a large portion of userbase. They did a very good job integrating it.
Apple's MIE and Android 16+ AAPM don't use MTE for user installed apps unless those explicitly opt in. GrapheneOS enables it for more apps automatically and has a toggle for users to opt-in for every user installed app. There's a per-app toggle to opt-out for incompatible apps which is uncommon.
Neither iOS or Android encourage app developers to opt into MTE and other more aggressive security features used in the base OS. Apple's docs warn developers of performance and stability issues. Even Signal doesn't opt-in. Our approach enables forcing using MTE in the standard allocators regardless.
Pixel 11 does have security improvements including moving to post-quantum secure verified boot (ML-DSA) and replacing Samsung Shannon IMS with AOSP IMS. Titan M3 should significantly improve protection against data extraction in Before First Unlock state. It's too bad they ruined it by cutting MTE.
Pixel 11 series is a lot more expensive for an incremental improvement to the CPU, the same underpowered GPU and reduced RAM for the Pro base models. They finally caught up to the last generation of Qualcomm cellular radio. It's overpriced, the upgrades aren't impressive and losing MTE is appalling.
Compared to the Pixel 11, a Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has 40% higher single threaded CPU performance, 80% higher multi threaded performance, over 100% higher GPU performance and a far better cellular radio. It also finally has MTE. The next gen is what will be in the first Motorola with GrapheneOS.
Pixel 9a and earlier (including Nexus devices) were the Android Open Source Project reference devices. Pixel support was removed from AOSP with Android 16. It's now harder to support Pixels than many other devices and massive progress towards open source firmware and driver libraries was discarded.
Compared to the stock Pixel OS, GrapheneOS ships AOSP patches months earlier and Linux kernel patches many months earlier. However, we rely on them for firmware and most driver updates. We also want to move to new kernel branches earlier. These things can be improved with our Motorola partnership.
We strongly recommend against buying Pixel 11 devices. Pixel 8, 9 and 10 have much better overall security for GrapheneOS. Pixel 10 is cheaper with similar hardware and MTE. Pixel 11's Titan M3 should improve BFU security for users without a strong passphrase, but losing MTE craters AFU security.
We haven't determined what to do about this situation. It may be best for us to skip the Pixel 11 series devices. We can shift our focus entirely to the upcoming Motorola devices instead. Pixel 10a was really a 9th gen Pixel, so hopefully the Pixel 11a does the same with 10th gen and includes MTE.
I mean, price-wise this makes sense? Especially since as usual the larger companies (like our Pixel maker, Google) can afford to sell at a loss if that's the case. Most of what is gotten back via telemetry, ads targeting, etc. more than makes up for it?
Exciting. I currently use a Pixel 8a that I got when I couldn't afford anything better, and I'm not as satisfied with it as I'd like, thanks to its subpar fingerprint reader. I've been hoping for my next phone to be a moto grapheneos phone, so if the first one of those will come out in 2027, there'll probably be a second in 2028 and that'll probably be around when my phone is starting to conk out.
I don't know much, but I'm not sure how I could trust Motorola, knowing it's a Chinese company. Not that other companies are any better, it's just, if you're advertising for privacy I feel like being IN China sort of sets you back from that goal.
I will be the first to admit that I'm being irrational here, but I feel like I am getting so jaded with US tech companies and their apparent readiness to replace all of us with AI and turn the rest of us into soylent green, and their pretty blatant disregard for our mental and societal well-being. And many of the tech giants seem eager to help end the age of democracy and turn us into something closer to Russia.
All that being said, my gut visceral reaction to your comment is that a this point I think I'd trust my privacy more with a Chinese company than a US tech company with the way things seem to be going. The US based companies aren't really giving me a whole lot of good reasons to trust them nowadays.
The difference right now is that it doesn’t seem like the tech companies have the power to directly stop and detain you at the airport should you ever actually visit China, and the Chinese government certainly can and does do that to people and is trying to assert that power onto non Chinese citizens everywhere.
All the tech companies seem to want from us is our attention and our money. The Chinese government wants our obedience. I understand their motivations a lot less than our homegrown tech giants whose greed drives them. Big governments like the Chinese government seem more driven by paranoia.