[imiric]

There are good reasons why Pixel phones are the only ones supported by GrapheneOS. See the list of requirements here[1]. If other devices met that criteria, they would be considered for support as well.

The GOS team has done very thorough work to audit the supported devices, including the hardware, firmware and software components, to make sure they reach their high standards. They've made upstream contributions to AOSP, Linux and other projects with features and bug fixes to improve security and privacy of users. The project is well regarded in security circles, and I have no reason to distrust the team.

As much as I dislike Google, I wouldn't mind using their products if they respected my rights and freedoms. The GOS project ensures that more than any other modern smartphone, and I wouldn't change it for anything else.

[1]: https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices

[wkat4242]

I bet that if Google stops matching one of those requirements, the team will just drop that requirement instead of abandoning the whole project and all their work.

Which means that these requirements are at least partly informed by the capabilities of Google pixel phones.

I have to say though that the timely security update thing is really a weak point of Fairphone. Yes they have years of support but they often delay updates for many months or skip major upgrades altogether.

[scheeseman486]

Well yeah, because they have no choice? Like what kind of counter argument is this?

GOS is reliant on work upstream like most products and projects are, it's why they stop supporting phones once the SoC and it's associate blob code fall out of support of the manufacturer. Fairphone doesn't do this, they keep pumping out new versions filled with unpatched vulnerabilities while pretending the software they're producing for the hardware they're supporting is up to date when it actually isn't. It's not a weak point, it borders on fraud.

[wmf]

What's the chance that any non-Pixel devices will ever meet those criteria? 0%?