i dont want to sound like a dick but they really should’ve just forked the LineageOS apps that are maintained like they did with seedvault. this feels like theyre reinventing the wheel, or NIH
Would be great if those two could play nicely. Lineage features with GOS security would be the bees knees.
I think Calyx OS would strike that balance
As a Calyx user, only kinda. A lot of the hardening done in GOS is missing from Calyx. Likewise, a lot of features in COS (firewall rules per connection type per app for instance) are missing from GOS.
They could just… work with the community and use preexisting community apps
That is not how they role I guess
The maintainers are very picky and cynical about privacy & security. For better or for worse
Not-invented-here syndrome?
More like the maintainers want to be the center of attention
There are plenty of other projects they could work with that would genuinely make Graphene better but they don’t because they want to pretend like they are some exclusive clud. In reality almost all of the Graphene OS features are either built into AOSP or are easy to implement via an app from F-droid
In reality almost all of the Graphene OS features are either built into AOSP or are easy to implement via an app from F-droid
Straight up misinformation
No, most of Graphenes features are not implemented in AOSP. There are a lot of CVE patches from Graphene that land in AOSP, but it doesn’t have any of the hardening or sandboxing that makes GrapheneOS what it is.
https://grapheneos.org/releases#2026090700
All of the Android 17 security patches from the current September 2026, October 2026, November 2026, December 2026, January 2027, February 2027 and March 2027 Android Security Bulletins are included in the 2026090701 security preview release. List of additional fixed CVEs:
A short list of existing CVEs not available to the public
- Critical: CVE-2026-28591, CVE-2026-28604, CVE-2026-28639, CVE-2026-28653, CVE-2026-28662, CVE-2026-28666, CVE-2026-45515, CVE-2026-45531, CVE-2026-49879, CVE-2026-49882, CVE-2026-49884, CVE-2026-49918, CVE-2026-49921, CVE-2026-49926, CVE-2026-49927, CVE-2026-49932, CVE-2026-49933, CVE-2026-55256, CVE-2026-55265, CVE-2026-55268, CVE-2026-55269, CVE-2026-55273, CVE-2026-55277, CVE-2026-55280, CVE-2026-58814, CVE-2026-58820, CVE-2026-58823, CVE-2026-58835, CVE-2026-58865, CVE-2026-58868, CVE-2026-58876, CVE-2026-58880, CVE-2026-58882, CVE-2026-58984
- High: CVE-2025-22424, CVE-2025-22426, CVE-2025-22442, CVE-2025-48564, CVE-2025-48565, CVE-2025-48566, CVE-2025-48600, CVE-2026-0053, CVE-2026-28581, CVE-2026-28582, CVE-2026-28584, CVE-2026-28588, CVE-2026-28593, CVE-2026-28594, CVE-2026-28599, CVE-2026-28600, CVE-2026-28602, CVE-2026-28603, CVE-2026-28606, CVE-2026-28607, CVE-2026-28612, CVE-2026-28613, CVE-2026-28614, CVE-2026-28617, CVE-2026-28619, CVE-2026-28620, CVE-2026-28622, CVE-2026-28623, CVE-2026-28624, CVE-2026-28626, CVE-2026-28627, CVE-2026-28630, CVE-2026-28631, CVE-2026-28633, CVE-2026-28634, CVE-2026-28635, CVE-2026-28638, CVE-2026-28643, CVE-2026-28645, CVE-2026-28650, CVE-2026-28652, CVE-2026-28655, CVE-2026-28657, CVE-2026-28658, CVE-2026-28660, CVE-2026-28663, CVE-2026-28664, CVE-2026-28665, CVE-2026-28667, CVE-2026-28668, CVE-2026-28671, CVE-2026-45513, CVE-2026-45514, CVE-2026-45517, CVE-2026-45518, CVE-2026-45519, CVE-2026-45520, CVE-2026-45521, CVE-2026-45522, CVE-2026-45523, CVE-2026-45524, CVE-2026-45525, CVE-2026-45527, CVE-2026-45528, CVE-2026-45529, CVE-2026-49878, CVE-2026-49880, CVE-2026-49881, CVE-2026-49885, CVE-2026-49887, CVE-2026-49895, CVE-2026-49896, CVE-2026-49912, CVE-2026-49913, CVE-2026-49914, CVE-2026-49923, CVE-2026-49924, CVE-2026-49925, CVE-2026-49931, CVE-2026-49934, CVE-2026-49935, CVE-2026-49937, CVE-2026-55257, CVE-2026-55260, CVE-2026-55261, CVE-2026-55262, CVE-2026-55263, CVE-2026-55264, CVE-2026-55266, CVE-2026-55270, CVE-2026-55271, CVE-2026-55272, CVE-2026-55274, CVE-2026-55278, CVE-2026-55279, CVE-2026-55282, CVE-2026-55284, CVE-2026-55286, CVE-2026-55287, CVE-2026-55288, CVE-2026-55289, CVE-2026-55290, CVE-2026-55292, CVE-2026-55294, CVE-2026-58815, CVE-2026-58817, CVE-2026-58821, CVE-2026-58822, CVE-2026-58834, CVE-2026-58836, CVE-2026-58837, CVE-2026-58838, CVE-2026-58841, CVE-2026-58853, CVE-2026-58854, CVE-2026-58856, CVE-2026-58857, CVE-2026-58859, CVE-2026-58866, CVE-2026-58867, CVE-2026-58868, CVE-2026-58869, CVE-2026-58870, CVE-2026-58871, CVE-2026-58872, CVE-2026-58875, CVE-2026-58877, CVE-2026-58879, CVE-2026-58883, CVE-2026-58884, CVE-2026-58885, CVE-2026-58886, CVE-2026-58933, CVE-2026-58934, CVE-2026-58935, CVE-2026-58937, CVE-2026-58938, CVE-2026-58943, CVE-2026-58944, CVE-2026-58945, CVE-2026-58946, CVE-2026-58949, CVE-2026-58951, CVE-2026-58953, CVE-2026-58954, CVE-2026-58955, CVE-2026-58956, CVE-2026-58957, CVE-2026-58958, CVE-2026-58960, CVE-2026-58961, CVE-2026-58962, CVE-2026-58963, CVE-2026-58964, CVE-2026-58965, CVE-2026-58966, CVE-2026-58968, CVE-2026-58969, CVE-2026-58970, CVE-2026-58971, CVE-2026-58972, CVE-2026-58973, CVE-2026-58974, CVE-2026-58975, CVE-2026-58976, CVE-2026-58978, CVE-2026-58979, CVE-2026-58985, CVE-2026-58986, CVE-2026-58988, CVE-2026-58990, CVE-2026-58993, CVE-2026-58994, CVE-2026-58995, CVE-2026-58997, CVE-2026-58998, CVE-2026-59000, CVE-2026-59001, CVE-2026-59002, CVE-2026-59003, CVE-2026-59004, CVE-2026-59005, CVE-2026-59006, CVE-2026-59007, CVE-2026-59008, CVE-2026-59011, CVE-2026-59013, CVE-2026-59014, CVE-2026-59015, CVE-2026-59016, CVE-2026-59017, CVE-2026-59020, CVE-2026-59021, CVE-2026-59022, CVE-2026-59023, CVE-2026-59028, CVE-2026-59032
- Unclassified: CVE-2026-58994
deleted by creator
When you have a unique goal and set of constraints that are not shared by most users and are actually opposed to the interests of most users and developers it’s not a good idea to try to add them into an existing general purpose project.
Part of the memory tagging support of graphene for example is that the applications need to actually support it too. You can force them to deal with it, but that causes instability and crashes.
Shouldn’t all applications support memory tagging? Well that would be nice but it makes everything slower and only a few schizoid weirdos want it. Clearly the better option is to rewrite the basic system apps that everyone expects to support all the optional security features graphene requires.
Bear in mind graphenes security competition is ios. The system applications in ios all got rewritten to support emte when apple rolled out os level support for it combined with concurrent releases of new hardware with silicon support.
They’re playing a different game than the aosp community.
You are correct, TrollAccount.
Hopefully we can get a calendar app!!
Cheers to the GOS team, doing the lord’s work truly.
THE GOAT
It’s a big ask, but might that include the browser?
They could contribute dev time to the Servo browser project.The already have vanadium
That’s just Chromium with some removed “features”, not a whole new app.
Well they can’t do everything, can they?
Apparently, they plan to.
On a long enough timeline they can
Excellent. Does it run on the basic Tracfone devices? otherwise, they need to get on the road to compatibility.
GrapheneOS is very picky about what phones are supported, which is why up to now only certain pixels are supported, as well as Motorola phones in the future.
From recent posts on the Fediverse I’m afraid their slopping these apps …
What posts?
In the announcement threaded, they replied they us AI code analysis and code review tools to review security.
It still goes through a human before it’s pushed to the repo. That’s very different thing than “slop”. Slopcode is generating the actual app code via claude or whatever and shipping it as-is.
