Post #3026426
2026-03-11 23:21 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social 2026-03-12 00:01
@RonRevog@social.tchncs.de @WeAreFairphone@social.fairphone.community There's nothing fair about the underhanded business tactics of Murena and iodé including years of still ongoing campaigns to mislead people about what GrapheneOS provides to sell more of their products. They definitely don't provide better long term support than 7 years of decent updates. They don't provide decent updates from the beginning and it substantially worse over time. What do you mean by European standards? Does that include Jolla's partnership with Putin?
-
@HybridStaticAnimate@infosec.exchange 2026-03-12 00:47
@RonRevog@social.tchncs.de @GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social @WeAreFairphone@social.fairphone.community Confrontation and attack would be a very mean thing to do. They havent chosen that path. They have chosen to defend themselves and call out an anticompetitive practice that violates the law. These companies do not care about fairness in the slightest. The idea of unified attestation, at its fundamental level, is to eliminate fairness. GOS stands nothing to gain by working with scammers and grifters who have harassed and attacked them for years. They also do not care about long device lifetimes and that is reflected in their updates. An iphone or pixel with 7 years of support is far better for the environment than these devices with barely any support time and needing to be replaced much sooner if not *the second you receive it*. If you call defending themselves from an attack "sensitive", Id hate to see what is warranted in your eyes.
-
@Xtreix@infosec.exchange 2026-03-12 06:37
@RonRevog@social.tchncs.de @GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social @WeAreFairphone@social.fairphone.community The Unified Attestation initiative is an attempt to create a cartel, no way ! The Play Integrity API only is already a problem, we don't want an alternative that does the same thing ! https://infosec.exchange/@metr0pl3x@grapheneos.social/116211955965368069