Stories like this one from are not unusual:
arstechnica.com/information-te
That's why Purism takes the digital supply chain so seriously. Read about our efforts to protect the digital supply chain here:
puri.sm/posts/protecti
Conversation
This is a company making a fork of open source code and including a backdoor in it. These aren't Google Android devices. How exactly do you prevent someone doing the same with any of your projects? You don't, and as usual you're misleading people with your dishonest approach.
2
8
The headline and article on Ars is a little bit misleading but that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about Purism repeatedly attacking iOS and Android by being misleading and even outright dishonest, especially when what they're offering is much worse at these things.
An iPhone is an all around better choice and will remain that way, and they seem totally uninterested in actually doing the work to make a product offering more privacy and security rather than just marketing it as such and misleading people. It's incredibly harmful to users.
1
1
It's increasingly clear that it's about branding and marketing, not substance. What they care about is bringing Debian, systemd, GNOME, etc. to mobile not privacy and security. In reality, they'll be delivering a device with substantially worse hardware and OS privacy / security.
1
Show replies
They also falsely claimed that they completely disabled the IME and in reality they didnt. Kinda bad intentions...
Do you think the Pixel 3 + GrapheneOS can be set to support strong privacy and with right tools and usage an anonymity too?
1
I don't think that's an on-topic discussion and would rather not have it here. GrapheneOS could run on the Librem 5 but since it's not going to support many of the standard and important hardware security features it likely wouldn't make sense as an officially supported target.
1
Show replies