And to answer the OP more directly, what do you give up by using a GrapheneOS (besides being forced to buy a Google device), well, no much since you have the option of installing Google services in a second profile or compartmentalized in your main profile. This, of course, would have your device communicating with Google’s servers, but the info it can collect would mostly restricted. MicroG is potentially more private than creating a Google account (even if an anonymous one), but some claim is less secure too so I leave it as equal.

In conclusion, if you can live without installing Google services or juts just need it so sporadically that you only need to install it in a secondary profile, and you tolerate a Google Pixel go with GrapheneOS option. If, however, you are not a fan at all of having a Pixel, or need to have Google services constantly running, I would consider instead iodéOS, /e/, etc.

By the way… some opinions after dealing with their managers:

• GrapheneOS.… not friendly but they genuinely seen to care about their service. These type of devotion for a cause usually brings these type of developers.
• CalyxOS. The friendlier and approachable. Amazing human beings overall.
• /e/. French usually create a distinct world… they are hard to collaborate with but I fully believe in the difference they bring to the table. Wish they were more accommodating to the global market though. I don’t think any of them they would compromise their product for any government or monetary incentive.

After years of observing privacy OS for the phones, this is my conclusion on Phones’ operative systems:

· Android variants locked by a telephone carrier are absolutely the worse, both in privacy and security.

· The rest of OEM Android variants come next, absolutely bad on privacy, but also in security since most phones carry updates for very limited time.

· Newer Google phones (Pixels) at least have several years with security patches, in privacy still bad though.

· iPhones… Good with security (as Google’s) and in privacy… well, it depends; with 3rd party apps is quite good, but Apple has full control of everything and, since it is not opensource… Who knows what it does or does not. Now, there has not been cases brought to justice as evidence from what Apple claims is encrypted end-to-end so there is that. However, if I am an US intelligence agency I would also prefer to have a minimal access to iPhones reserved to critical cases and never reveal that to the public by using it as evidence in courts than revealing my access to iPhones and consequentially destroying the entire scheme permanently (and a trillion dollar industry!). In brief, iPhones are an acceptable device for the average consumer or those with minimal ‘phone hygiene’, but, for instance, certain high-stake journalists, politicians and organizers should however avoid them.

· Then we have these customized Android OS; The OP has included I great continuously updated site listing them. However, that list is too detailed for most since just a single app you install can place the entire privacy benefits of these OS pointless. There is no need to mention GrapheneOS is the one who, point by point, take privacy and security to the maximum level, while the others, in different degrees, try to bring some short of compromise with compatibility. With GrapheneOS’s recent compartmentalization of Google apps option, it has really dented competitors like LineageOS, /e/, etc… Now, I have to say, if I were a high-stake journalist, I would think twice using a Google Pixel device (the only one that work with GrapheneOS)… I trust GrapheneOS software, but what the Google chip could potentially do, no so much. I would trust more sending a secured message in a Sony device loaded with /e/ at the cost of not having updates (unless someone is being able to have physically access to it that is, if the device is in the hands of an adversary, I trust a Pixel 7 one thousand times than any Sony Xperia 5… I hope you understand what I mean. Any of these OS are** the best option for those that have an acceptable phone hygiene (choosing apps with some rigor and giving them access only for what it is needed)**.

· Finally there are the non Android based, mainly based on Linux. Linux Touch, PureOS, etc. but none has ever got beyong an experimental stage. I had really rooted for Sailfish OS since its very beginning, but unfortunately, most of them came much earlier when the market wasn’t demanding them, and now that the market demands for these, the effort and funds had been completely depleted on those types of initiatives. What puzzles my is how mid-sized phone companies never funded these privacy initiatives (looking at you Sony Ericsson , HMD’s Nokia, Alcatel…, they should have been able to have forecasting this trend since Snowden.)

To conclude, I just wanted to say, for the community, no so much for the individual, the importance of number of users in an OS/App and, paradoxically, the diversity in the market too. Market size for an opensourced OS is critical, because it increases the chances of being constantly audited… I am sorry, but the overwhelming majority of opensource OS and apps do no go through any audit at all (hopefully will put an AI scrutinize all these soon!) so they give a false sense of being non-malicious. But diversity is important too… Everyone relying on GrapheneOS alone, although considered trusted today, would be dangerous and would be bad from multiple fronts; Google may be compelled to lock bootloaders, governments may introduce backdoors for the chips since dealing with 1 manufacturer is easier to deal in secrecy with 6, GrapheneOS could relax its fight for privacy if there was no competition, etc… So, the mere existence of different OS CalixOS, SailfishOS, iodéOS, ect… Benefits all of us, even if not used by you.

One little fact not known by non-Americans is that In the United States, immigration officers are granted full authority to operate without any warrant within a 100-mile zone from any U.S. border… they can enter in the homes of 2/3 of Americans (200 million) without any explanation!! And now in masks and without visible IDs… It is going to be fun!

Thanks for the info and all references you do in Lemmy. I don´t consider myself with a similar ideology as you, but indeed I am learning lots of info from your posts.

I was aware of the atrocities and agreement violations, but not that perspective that colonials wanted to get free from any agreements the British did with the natives… Is that a common knowledge in the academia, disputed or a minority one? It is not to discredit it at all the idea, just to genuinely know its status at university level?

True. Apple would need a category on its own, but if i have to choose would place it on “As seen on TV”.

It is fairly private and they quite give a fight about maintaining that status. There are no cases I am aware off they comply to open the system for authorities publicly and if so, they do not claim encryption anymore (as per UK.) Now… the key word is publicly; If I were a zealous top intelligence agency I would not force Apple to break an account for me so to obtain evidence on an individual so I can present it to a judge… for me Apple or Protonmail (or any other popular encrypted service really) would be far more valuable a place where I quietly could obtain intel on tens of thousands of targets and with that find other ways to find evidence if need be. It is a good sacrifice for the sustainability of the scheme.

Of course, this is just a thought and no evidence has been brought up. Apple is a large company and some whistleblower could easily popup if that were the case… yet again, having the right tight team is easy to keep it undercover, specially in a closed sourced software. The fact that the US is eyeing so many encrypted SaaS but Apple, with its omnipresence reach, is almost always left alone is a bit odd.

Technically speaking is highly contested and you have arguments pro and con, one way an another. They use different technologies so it is hard to compare properly, specially since it depends on the users using it properly.

If the technology is good, it does not matter where it is located. Switzerland, specially since a couple of years, does provide more freedom guarantees than Germany but it is not immune at all, actually, the US had used the Alpine country to do operations due to its attractiveness to dissidents and criminals alike. However, for the overwhelming majority of customers, either option is fine for they privacy and security. Only metadata has been obtained in few instances in both companies and nothing else… at least no that was used in a court of law.

For ultimate targets, if they have to rely on email, that they should not, I would choose Tuta though. These are my reasons.

1. It has a lesser footprint, so less likely intelligence agencies tried to infiltrate it.
2. The people behind are there fro the very beginning and show their faces publicly (Many in Proton too like the CEO, but it is no so transparent with the rest)
3. The people of Tuta are more ideological so it is a barrier for intelligent services to penetrate. Tuta has show however being anti the Russian government (rightly or not), so this point is not valid if you are in that side.
4. Tuta has a very organic and progressive growth. Proton had an explosive growth. Of course, it could been good marketing, but still…
5. Proton still today requires Google’s Push Notification servers, after years and years demanding a solution. Tuta had that solved since long, long ago.
6. Recently a case came in Canada of a intelligent agent using Tuta since “it was infiltrate by intelligence agencies”… After a few hours going through the case, I read it the opposite, he used it because he actually considered it a better choice to cover his crime. He was not that high in the ranks, but I read that the he resumption o these officers.
7. Nothing regarding security, but as a paying customer for both I was “tricked” far less by Tuta. Proton, for instance, does not refund you, only gives you credits. Even 20min after an accidental 2yr renewal I got stuck with them unwillingly. That practice should never be acceptable for a SaaS.

Now, Proton overall, for most is a bit more reliable and full feature and better put together so it is easier to recommend. Think of Proton as the Apple of emails, quite secure and miles away from Gmail, but security wise and ethically, of the two, my bet would be with Tuta.

Wow… I use Aegis exclusively as my authenticator since 2 years ago and completely did not recognize the logo by itself!!! I used Yandex image search and it told me coincarp… Sorry.

Pretty good!! I agree with 95%.

Loved the “As seen on TV” category!

I agree that Tuta is more secure than ProtonMail.

Some are blended like Tor, that should be in Activist if used in secured computer.

Was not aware of the existence of Coincarp (logo by GrapheneOS). Is a crypto price tracker used by Activists? I left crypto a couple of years ago but though Activists just don´t trade much and stick for the long haul and use Monero for purchases.

No much. He would have to declare if conflict of interest or to IRS. But strong feeling that is not the case. Again, if evidence was there, the FBI and even Trump would be all over with the evidence. This guy, probably had no even Confidential Security Clearance (lowest one). The only thing I can think of is industrial espionage but those are brought by the injured party and goes to a normal judicial channel… nothing indicates that is the case here.

You really don’t know how researches work… they get to be in multiple projects globally, specially when working in a university… that is why of the name. Besides, the US is highly sensitive with confidential information and for the most ridiculous things you need a “security clearance” that he will never get even the most basic one. Today, most on the spying is not done presentially within the target country, let alone with such a prominent position.

China, for sure, has spies,… who doesn’t. But the overwhelming majority of these cases tend to be non factual. Causes like fearmongering, departmental rivalries, someone wanted a medal, gathering prisoners for exchange, setting example, etc… are usually what is behind this. If I were a Chinese researcher, no matter the area of expertise, I would leave the US… and this is not Trump! This is the current US policy that all sides subscribe to.

I find it pathetic. If politicians wanted to stop these violation they could. If I have a restaurant in town and the antitrust penalties is, by law, a maximum of 10% of my profits… considering a court ruling takes some 5-7 years that is an actual some 2% fine. What incentive is that from me to get rid of all my competition in town!? I would not stop my illegal practices even if fines where 10 times that!!