You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_jduxnt2 wrote

Does it pass SafetyNet? Or is it useless like 99% of the ROMs out there?


ProgsRS OP t1_jduy8hd wrote

> That said, GrapheneOS excels at compatibility compared to running a de-Googled smartphone. Even third-party apps like Uber that rely on Google Maps work without a hitch. > > However, GrapheneOS cannot pass all SafetyNet compatibility checks without Google’s certification. This means that NFC payments in Google Pay and a handful of third-party apps will likely never work. Having said that, most apps don’t mandate SafetyNet. GrapheneOS also supports AOSP’s hardware attestation feature but it’s up to app developers to embrace it. > > But if you’re willing to stomach those two compromises, I can confidently say that you can use GrapheneOS as your daily-driver smartphone operating system. Throughout my time using it, I never felt inconvenienced.

I've never used NFC payments. There's always a certain minor tradeoff and the benefits far outweigh the cons IMO. Plus, it's very easy to switch back to Android or vice versa if it ever becomes necessary.


GameEnder t1_jdv054d wrote

Install Magisk and Universal Safety net Fix. Fixes pretty much every app that needs safety net to work. The remaining apps that are coded to look for it and you're going to get specific fixes for those. Mainly banking apps.


joshuaherman t1_jdvnahx wrote

Magisk can be detected and most apps that are doing banking or commerce will flag a device as fraud if it’s detected.


TheOfficialCal t1_jdva2us wrote

It passes most Safetynet profiles, just not the strictest one that Google sometimes uses. The vast majority of apps work.

However, GPay checks for Google's certification and won't work. You can still use your bank's app for NFC payments if it supports the feature.


VincentNacon t1_jdvcoae wrote

Damn... Pixel models only.


vindictivemonarch t1_jdvpdf2 wrote

iirc there's an encryption chip in pixels that most other androids don't have.


VincentNacon t1_jdvsxd9 wrote

I'm sure there are ways to make software handle the encryption rather than the hardware. Guess it's only matter of time.


DevAway22314 t1_jdx8n82 wrote

There are inherent security differences between the two, and that can never be reconciled


MajesticWaterBuffalo t1_jdw1oxs wrote

It's the combination of the Pixel hardware, and that Google allows you to lock the bootloader with a custom ROM installed.


squirrelhut t1_jdwkn0u wrote

Seeing this post after just now reading RESTRICT act and gaining a better understanding of it. Holy shit fuck privacy, there will be none if this bill , they have access to all data for any company over 1m people, vpns can be deemed illegal. And so much more.


TBTapion t1_jdz65y0 wrote

> vpns can be deemed illegal

Can't wait to become a criminal


Geek_King t1_jdyg5r2 wrote

That was a lot of reading to find out my Samsung phone can't use this OS. That's too bad, it would have been nice to have the an OS that could restrict app permissions on google stuff.


Ivanoff91 t1_jdvfiln wrote

Uh-oh, custom ROMs. Google wallet unavailable and camera stopped working.


nakedhitman t1_jdwq5va wrote

Camera works just fine. Google Wallet has always been a bad idea if you care about privacy.


PhilLB1239 t1_jdx6rxz wrote

> Google Wallet has always been a bad idea if you care about privacy.

I mean, is it? You are essentially giving up privacy on Google's side since they now have your credit card information and your purchase history, but in return, your credit card information is now randomized on the seller's side. Up to you if it's worth the tradeoff.


nakedhitman t1_jdxjqh2 wrote

It's not worth it to me. Privacy .com randomizes my payment info, hides my name and address from merchants, and doesn't sell my info to advertisers. It doesn't do NFC payments, but I never cared about that.