- cross-posted to:
- android@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- android@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
ITT: People complaining about how this phone is 100% perfect and what they want. Instead of moving towards heaven, we might as well remain in hell until heaven is directly attainable. It’s a good start and the more money that gets thrown this way, the more others will follow. But by all means, don’t support this endeavor, let’s stay in our Apple/Samsung/Google versions of hell instead.
Is my fairphone 5 the perfect device? No, I guess.
Did I get to buy a new USB-C port for my nearly 3 year old phone after destroying the old one by dropping it in a full sink of dirty water and replace it in 5 minutes without soldering or phone repair knowledge? Hell yes!
A friend of mine just bought a new battery for his 6-7 year old FP3 and can keep using it.
If Fairphone can do modularity of that kind, imagine what big players Apple or Samsung would be able to achieve if they cared at all. Imagine GrapheneOS would not publicly shit on Fairphone for their flaws but instead reach out a hand and ask for collaboration to try and make their next phone compatible.
Oh well, hell is fine too, I guess.
GrapheneOS’s toxic leadership have crab mentality. Oh and a victimhood complex.
No not really. Their project is aimed at providing the highest level of security and privacy. They can’t help that Fairphone’s hardware does not adhere to their hardware requirements in order to attain that security and privacy.
GrapheneOS’s goal is not to deliver the most broad amount of support for as many phones as possible, its goal is to obtain the highest levels of security. For broad support there is /e/os for instance.
They choose to roast small hardware manufacturers for their hardware/firmware security deficits and burn bridges instead of being constructive and offering collaboration once their security requirements are met by future phones.
They could voice their legitimate concerns without being such total dicks about it.
that’s too many stairs
Basically sums up all the reactions to any increase in popularity of any open/foss project 🤷🏻♂️
That is what turned me off choosing Graphene, other than having to buy Google hardware. They, but also some other Foss people, are investing way too much time attacking other alternatives fiercely, as if they were created by the devil, because they are not pure enough or because they are less secure than Graphene.
@Jiral @DannyMac jasnt #grapheneos a partnership with #motorola ? When first devices?
There is no concrete timeline yet as far as I know. So your guess is as good as mine. Bottom line if you want to use GrapheneOS now or in the near future you have to buy Google hardware which is a nogo for me, even if you rip out the OS.
I only buy second hand hardware these days, but I get you
No not really. People keep asking them why they dont support certain hardware, and they need to keep explaining why they dont support the hardware. They don’t go out of their way to demonize those projects. Their project is aimed at providing the highest level of security and privacy. They can’t help that Fairphone’s hardware does not adhere to their hardware requirements in order to attain that security and privacy.
GrapheneOS’s goal is not to deliver the most broad amount of support for as many phones as possible, its goal is to obtain the highest levels of security. For broad support there is /e/os for instance. On the other hand, /e/os is not the most secure OS. Those are just the facts. Every OS has its own use cases.
Except that this is exactly what at least one of the leading developers is doing by harassing threads that are about other projects, with all sorts of loaded language, insinuations of nasty motives, Russian influence and what not.
All of that does nothing to achieve GrapheneOS’ goals.
I have no issue at all with GrapheneOS stating that FP6 is not an option because this hardware feature is missing or that firmware update routine being insufficient. That is not what I am talking about here.
But it’s also unfair to blame customers for not supporting something financially when it would be easy to improve from the criticism. If fairphone wanted to sell more they would address the feedback from GrapheneOS instead of hiding behind the startup label, but instead we get this zombie development where the product is held up by partnership decisions that are holding them back, and any criticism to help improve their standing is shot down.
Man I love it. Hoping one day it is supported on grapheneos. Still no headphone jack throws me off though
Graphene OS needs a hardware level chip, that enables secure encryption of data so far only pixels have that. They are working with Motorola though.
Somehow after being repeatedly told that they still ask it. But GOS team did make a post detailing why they won’t support nor partnership with fairphone
Yeah I am aware of their hardware requirements. I’m not sure if Fairphone has this on their roadmap
I personally think that the GOS team is intentionally not wanting to, not due to the requirements, but due to the water so to speak.
There was a lot of bad blood between a company that Fairphone closely partners with, so therefore they don’t want to even think about the concept of it. I think that shows quite well when you look at their post considering that their post goes into detail on the supply chain aspects of it and who they’re partnered with instead of focusing on the actual issues with the device.
Being said, I understand their points on the software updates and the hardware requirement. But, ostensibly I don’t think they are rejecting it due to those concerns.
Shoot me down for this, but I think GOS is melodramatic. They need to think like a tech partner. If they get asked so many questions about other phones, they need to de-obfuscate their requirements and exchange a dialog with phone manufacturers like FairPhone! Gave you an upvote though.
Mannn, I wanted them, but Motorola took too long. I gotta go Fairphone+.
It still sucks for security. If you own this phone you should consider that the authorities and pretty much anyone who really wants to can get into your phone at will. I wish they could meet Graphene’s hardware requirements.
Aren’t Graphene’s hardware requirements “be a Pixel”?
No lol, they have a list of specific hardware security requirements for a device to have, the biggest one being a secure element. Without a secure element there is no hardware-backed key derivation throttling, so it’s much more possible for an attacker to brute force your phone’s PIN.
Support for using alternate operating systems including full hardware security functionality Complete monthly Android Security Bulletin patches without any regular delays longer than a week for device support code (firmware, drivers and HALs) At least 5 years of updates from launch for device support code with phones (Pixels now have 7) and 7 years with tablets Device support code updated to new monthly, quarterly and yearly releases of AOSP within several months to provide new security improvements (Pixels receive these in the month they're released) Linux 6.1, 6.6 or 6.12 Generic Kernel Image (GKI) support Hardware accelerated virtualization usable by GrapheneOS (ideally pKVM to match Pixels but another usable implementation may be acceptable) Hardware memory tagging (ARM MTE or equivalent) Hardware-based coarse grained Control Flow Integrity (CFI) for baseline coverage where type-based CFI isn't used or can't be deployed (BTI/PAC, CET IBT or equivalent) PXN, SMEP or equivalent PAN, SMAP or equivalent Isolated radios (cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, etc.), GPU, SSD, media encode / decode, image processor and other components Support for A/B updates of both the firmware and OS images with automatic rollback if the initial boot fails one or more times Verified boot with rollback protection for firmware Verified boot with rollback protection for the OS (Android Verified Boot) Verified boot key fingerprint for yellow boot state displayed with a secure hash (non-truncated SHA-256 or better) StrongBox keystore provided by secure element Hardware key attestation support for the StrongBox keystore Attest key support for hardware key attestation to provide pinning support Weaver disk encryption key derivation throttling provided by secure element Insider attack resistance for updates to the secure element (Owner user authentication required before updates are accepted) Inline disk encryption acceleration with wrapped key support 64-bit-only device support code Wi-Fi anonymity support including MAC address randomization, probe sequence number randomization and no other leaked identifiers Support for disabling USB data and also USB as a whole at a hardware level in the USB controller Reset attack mitigation for firmware-based boot modes such as fastboot mode zeroing memory left over from the OS and delaying opening up attack surface such as USB functionality until that's completed Debugging features such as JTAG or serial debugging must be inaccessible while the device is lockedUntil the collaboration with Motorola produces a device, only the recent Pixels meet the requirements.
Fairphone is also one of the worse OEM’s when it comes to how slowly they patch and releases security vulnerabilities, and they are known to be quite sloppy, in the past they have published their private keys. I wouldn’t trust keeping anything remotely private or sensitive on a Fairphone.
nah. grapheneos requires open source drivers and immediate security updates from the oems as well as an unlockable bootloader. pixel just happens to be the only one who fits the bill for all of those. as an example, the Samsung I had before my pixel wouldn’t get security updates for months after an Android release which was really annoying. Motorola will soon comply with these standards too, but they have their own line of flock camera alternatives so I won’t be touching their products with a 10 foot pole.
That’s two entirely different unrelated companies. They split ages ago
Those cameras are from Motorola Solutions, which is a seperate company to Motorola Mobility.
But you touch Google?
This
My dream phone is made by Fairphone, runs Graphene and has pin-board power switches like the Pinephone (its got good ideas, but its running a 2013 chipset, its a dev device for making linux mobile work better)
… Wishful thinking.
Samsung hardware
Fairphone sustainability / repairability
Pixel / GrapheneOS privacy
Chinese prices
Dream phone of mine.
You probably aren’t safe from Pegasus but at least you are not streaming your location and IRL contacts to Google 24/7.
Just don’t bank on it.
Why? I’m not sure what am I missing?
Look, at least this way I don’t have to worry about all the software back doors phoning home.
I just don’t take the phone out with me when I think I’m going to be arrested or something.
Can they get in remotely? I would love to read more about it if you sit on some sources since I am just a novice.
Edit: Saw the comment about updates now.
(If I recall there was a reply from some devs about that update claim, and I got my impression changed after e/OS presnted some statistics.)
I think I found the reply to the accusation:
https://community.e.foundation/t/e-os-and-security-updates/72384
How do you break into it? If it’s not hard then why doesn’t everyone do it.
Everyone? The group of people that includes those who can’t use their computer after their desktop icons get sorted?
It still takes some skills, but those skills might just be “desoldering chips to stick them in a chip reader device” and doing that on the storage chips. Or maybe tapping a trace to read the signals that are sent over it to grab a key or something. “Not hard” doesn’t mean “you don’t need skill to do it”, it means “someone who has some skills won’t have difficulty applying them”.
Fairphone 6 might be the worst phone I’ve ever owned. I bought one hoping it’d last me 6 years and it barely last 6 months. The software is so buggy it’s embarrassing.
I am now 6 months in, I do not share that experience at all.
Same question for you then: what OS?
Standard Android. I have a kid running a 5 with e os.
Is that on their version of Android or e/OS? This is the exact thing that has kept me from even coming close to purchasing one of these without handling one first.
That’s with Fairphone’s own OS. I stuck it out until the Android 16 update but that introduced a load more bugs so I swapped it for a Pixel 10a.
I also tried iodéOS which was a slight improvement but still pretty buggy.
It’s a greenwashing phone. Might as well buy a normal phone and donate to charity.
Yes, that is a very common fun fact about these particular phones. It is also the case that it is one of the only mass production phones that has support for “deGoogled” Android OS’s, and therefore is unfortunately a contender for those of us who look for that. Pixels are unfortunately also the best option still.
I AM BUYING IT NOWWWW!!! LESSSS GOOOO!
Fairphones seem okay from a hardware POV but the software is a bit lacking in terms of security and support.
See I keep reading this, especially here on Lemmy but since owning one, I’ve had more frequent updates than I think any phone I’ve previously owned, and definitely more than family who go with bigger brands.
I don’t know why they have this reputation, perhaps it was true in the past
This comes from the people who run GrapheneOS e.g. https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private. Maybe they’re opinionated for some reason that extends beyond the hardware/software.
This is perfect - my wife and I have both been limping along on old falling-apart phones, and have been looking for something new that doesn’t make us feel gross for supporting a major company, and isn’t overloaded with so many nearly-useless features. Decided to take the de-google plunge at the same time, and grabbed the eos ones!
Honestly, the only thing that stopped me from going them this time around was the ip55 rating. I do too much stuff that involves my phone getting wet. So, realistically, I can’t look at anything that has less than IP68 because I need that full immersion rating. The quest for repairability doesn’t need to compromise that, you can have an IP68 rating with a battery that is removable by screws. The Samsung X-Cover Pro proved that. It’s just not financially incentivized for consumer devices, which is why you normally only find it for dedicated corporate device lines
Does it work on Verizon’s network? -Otherwise, Idc.
Fairphone or not T-Mobile isn’t anything like what it used to be. If you’re in a major city or suburb it’s worth taking a serious look at T-Mobile. I’m on US mobile which is a MVNO that allows you to freely switch between all 3 networks with two simultaneously active at any given time. 90% of the time T-Mobile has far better and faster coverage than either of Verizon or ATT. It used to be that Verizon was by far the best, but their network capacity hasn’t kept pace with T-Mobile’s growth, even if your Verizon plan has priority data (as mine does). This difference shows most when network capacity is limited.
T-Mobile’s rural coverage isn’t as great as either of Verizon’s or ATT’s, but it’s absolutely good enough for every road trip I’ve done. And when visiting family in rural northern Wisconsin only T-Mobile and ATT have reasonable coverage in their area. You can use a Mint Mobile trial SIM to see for yourself.
I think Verizon knows this too, all of the cheapest MVNOs have been switching to use Verizon’s network in recent years. The ISP mobile networks you can often get a year of for free also nearly all run on Verizon now. If you’re paying for your service, the Total Wireless $20/mo BYO plan with unlimited priority data and 10GB/mo of international data is the best deal out there by far. Verizon certainly wouldn’t be providing MVNOs with the lowest cut rate pricing if they thought they had the best network.
Could you tell me what MVNO you’re using? I’m grabbing the FP+ ASAP, and I need the tea. \
I don’t use Fairphone, but I am a bit of a mobile network nerd. I’m on US Mobile which is a unique MVNO that allows you to move between any 2 of the 3 US networks as you please. You have to have signal to initiate a network change and sometimes it takes a day, but for premium mobile service they’re great. I mostly just stay on ATT and T-Mobile, but depending on the rural area you visit Verizon and T-Mobile is also a reasonable combination. My point in the comment above is to not discount T-Mobile, their network capacity in cities and suburbs is miles ahead of Verizon and ATT (I’m ignoring UWB since it requires you to be outside and line of sight to a tower, it’s not practical for the vast majority of cell phone usage which occurs in a building).
The Fairphone is the only modern phone I know of that has limited bands, so you’ll need to use a T-Mobile based MVNO. The best deal on the T-Mobile network is Mint Mobile, providing 1yr of unlimited service for $180 if you port in a number. They’re directly owned by T-Mobile and I used them for several years quite happily before switching to US mobile. Google Fi also occasionally runs promos bringing their plans into the $15/mo range. The only reason I’m not still on them is the requirement to port in a number to get that $15/mo price for a year. I tend to change network every single year to always get the best deal.
The absolute best phone plan deal recently is the Total Wireless $20/mo 5g BYO plan. Uniquely the price is guaranteed for 5yr and it includes unlimited priority data + 10GB international roaming every month. But it’s on Verizon’s network.
That sounds coool. And WOW, I’ve been considering Mint mobile this whole time, I didn’t know all of this!!! Thanks! :D
Pixel + graphene OS ftw
The Dutch company has stated they absolutely will not include wireless charging in the Fairphone because it’s too energy inefficient.
Well let me publicly state I absolutely will not ever buy a Fairphone because it lacks wireless charging, which is a basic convenience I now expect my wireless devices to all have.
Wireless charging requires induction coils, they either need to include them in a custom battery pack (which goes against their philosophy for how they source parts) or to include it in back plate which would also complicate a simple component. You can just get a protective case with the induction coils in it, it would make the device a bit taller for the extra usb-c plug.
Ive been rocking an EU FP4 in the states for years now (had a UK distributer just ship me one) so im biased, but try not to be overly negitive over a problem you can fix yourself.
It feels somehow wrong to do in U.S.A, I feel like it’s meant to be like a hellscape at this point, and a Fairphone is like water in hell.
Fairphones have very late security updates and many decisions are made by a Chinese ODM so keep those in mind if you buy one.
Android 💀💀
It can’t even compete with USA devices. The Dutch gimped it. I guess we shouldn’t expect the Dutch to engineer something nice.
The new Fairphone is available on Amazon and at Fairphone.com for $650, and it’s officially certified to work on T-Mobile and AT&T’s networks.
Fail lol
Yeah what a bunch of losers getting certified for 2 of the 3 largest US carriers.
Phones need to be certified for carriers in the US? How does that work?
In the EU, you just buy any phone you want, any sim card you want, put the sim card in the phone, and that’s it.
@DupaCycki @Clusterfck@lemmy.sdf.org Europe did the sensible thing and made cell phone towers public infrastructure. In the US, each cell phone company has to construct its own network of towers.
@SallyStrange @DupaCycki it’s real rail baron shit
Kind of. GSM (which all but Verizon and formerly Sprint used) let most any phone on the network. CDMA let carriers pick and choose compatible devices. In the early 2010s when Verizon was attempting to buy more spectrum for its 4G network, Google put themselves as a potential buyer, but they wanted the FCC to set a rule for the spectrum that said any phone compatible had to be allowed onto the network. Verizon won that auction and since then Verizon’s been way more open on what they allow.
And with Sprint being purchased by T-Mobile, it would make more sense at this point to have a phone certified for AT&T and T-Mobile and Verizon would just have to let it on the network. These days, a phone being “certified” is Moore just a carrier making the statement of “we’ve tested the phone and we do know it works on the network.“ it doesn’t mean an uncertified phone will never work, it just means that this one should work by all metrics they’re able to tell.
Murena suppirts it in the US. I think Mint Mobile might but not sure. I’m also not sure that it will work on thise with Linux, but for sure on Murena with /e/OS.
The peasants in the USA will learn what a repairable phone is!
Now make it for Graphene
It’s never good enough
It doesn’t sound possible on the FP6 or FP6+. But maybe in the future? If people keep asking them (politely!) they might consider adding support for the 7 or 8
There’s one dev who’s been hard at work making postmarketOS work for FP6:
I thought Fairphone was one of the few supported phones. Perhaps I’m thinking of a different phone OS.
No I think you are thinking of calyx. Graphene repeatedly asserted that they won’t support fairphone because of the slow update.
It wasn’t just the update cycle either, it’s that they don’t have the physical hardware chips to support Graphene’s minimum requirements for security, which would severely weaken any benefits you actually get from GrapheneOS.
not any, but some benefits, and GrapheneOS maintainers are perfectionists
Entirely lacking disk encryption for typical users due to not having a secure element is a pretty major flaw.
It’s also missing hardware accelerated virtualization which is necessary for much of GrapheneOS’s sandboxing, has weak security for other keys in the OS keystore, is missing hardware memory tagging which makes it much easier for apps to use overflow attacks, doesn’t have proper verified boot support once a custom alternative OS is flashed, and leaves exposed debugging APIs even when the phone is locked.
This breaks:
- Secure app spawning
- Memory corruption protection
- Integer overflow protection
- Most of Graphene’s kernel hardening
- Much of Graphene’s attack surface reduction abilities
- Hardware-based attestation and security monitoring
- Quick tile protection pre-unlock
- Debugging access prevention
- Verified Boot
- The security of your PIN against any automated attack
At that point, GrapheneOS can’t physically provide you essentially any security anymore.
Entirely lacking disk encryption for typical users due to not having a secure element is a pretty major flaw.
all android devices have been using file based disk encryption since several Android versions now.
the others are all good to have security features, but lets be honest, a proper sensors permission toggle does not require any of that, just like a dozen other features only GrapheneOS has. storage scopes, contact scopes, pin scrambling and the requirement of fingerprint + pin for unlocking the lock screen, duress pin, the user profile improvements
all this does not require any hardware support.
While that is true yes, their whole brand is built on being secure.
If they release to Fairphone it won’t be long before the news is flooded with “Police easily bypass supposedly secure GraphoneOS”
And that’s not a look they’d want.
I like their stance on All or Nothing.
Motorola is shipping with GraphineOS soon.
all android devices have been using file based disk encryption since several Android versions now.
All Android devices are supposed to support it, but not all do. (or at least, not all do effectively without compromising the cryptographic root of trust by not implementing proper hardware security chips)
I’ll grant it to you on the scopes, PIN changes, etc, but realistically I just don’t think anyone can justify GrapheneOS being something that should be supported on Fairphone given how absolutely desolate the phone looks with regard to any attempt at all to hardware security.
It really depends on what security level you want out of a phone. Most people are concerned with a pickpocket stealing and being able to access everything. Most of the world doesn’t need the security level required to pass through the united states border control. Which they will just force to put the pin anyways or put you in jail for even having a secure device.
It really depends on what security level you want out of a phone
It does, but that’s exactly my point. GrapheneOS will provide you essentially no more security than any other alternative Android operating system, should it have to operate on a Fairphone with all those features not supported by a Fairphone stripped away.
Unless Fairphone adds more hardware security features that are standard on most other phones, and highly supported on Pixels, installing a heavily crippled GrapheneOS on a Fairphone would get you essentially none of the benefits of GrapheneOS in the first place.
Well sans duress password being a good idea now, when you get to the border, you can either unlock it or they’ll just confiscate it. You don’t get to be on their list and go through with a phone because they can’t manage to decrypt it.
Buy a Pixel or wait for Motorola to release their GrapheneOS compatible smartphone.
Been burned too many times by Motorola. They always promise but I have rarely seen them deliver.
I haven’t heard of this. Looking into it there’s at least a year wait. I’d consider it - though my Edge 2022 battery may not make it until then. Damn thing was crap from day 1.
I am pretty sure Motorola plans to sell flag ship devices with GrapheneOS preinstalled. They won’t support old devices. Also the manufacturer needs to still ship firmware updates for a specific duration for GrapheneOS to support it.
GrapheneOS already announced a direct partnership with Motorola, so they clearly already figured that out officially.
Motorola also promises 5 main Android version updates for their phones now.
I thought the deal was they shipped with normal OS because of existing deals with Google over Android but that they would have unlocked bootloaders so that the end user can install it.
Also it’s limited to their very high end so expect $1000+ USD.
I meant more like if I am forced to get another phone before it comes out. I should at least try to put a new battery into my edge and I’ve done it for several phones but there’s always that 10 percent chance you might bork your phone.
Graphene is only on pixels, why not their /e/os?
Graphene is only on pixels
Only because Pixels have met their hardware requirements. They are going to start working with Motorola now.
why not their /e/os?
From what I understand, the two OS are not aiming for the same objectives. /e/os is a degoogled OS and that’s its main purpose. GrapheneOS is focused on hardening security on AOSP.
/e/ os is not degoogled.
On some technical level you may be correct, but their site claims that /e/os is degoogled.
/e/OS is a “deGoogled” version of Android OS. It has an open-source Android OS core, with no Google apps or Google services accessing your personal data.
- Google default search engine has been removed from the OS everywhere and replaced with our new ethical search engine: Murena Find
- Google Services have been replaced by microG
- Connectivity checks do not use Google servers
- We do not use Google’s Network Time Protocol servers
- We do not use Google’s Domain Name System servers
- Geolocation uses BeaconDB Location Services in addition to GPS
So I would love to know more about what you’re talking about.
This comparison chart shows which parts of /e/OS are not deGoogled:
https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htmtheir site claims
Yes, they lie. GrapheneOS is the only fully degoogled android based OS, full stop.
Yes, they lie. GrapheneOS is the only fully degoogled android based OS, full stop.
What are they lying about? What part of their OS is not degoogled?
Why not posmarketOS?
I love Linux as much as the next guy but I’ve got PostmarketOS as well as Ubuntu touch running on a Fairphone 4 and the experience is far from polished, postmarket doesn’t even do VoLTE.
Not saying it sucks - I love it. But it’s not for everyone and unlikely to replace android for most use cases at the moment unfortunately.
postmarket doesn’t even do VoLTE.
Well do i have good news for you!
they got the camera kinda working on the 6+ yesterday too https://catcrafts.net/posts/fairphone-6-postmarketos-working-main-camera
Yeah I think it just doesn’t work on the FP4 yet. At least I haven’t managed to get it working. On Ubuntu touch it also took years (although that community is also very… special)
I want postmarket so bad.
They did actually get a camera working for fairphone 6+, yesterday, kinda, mostly https://catcrafts.net/posts/fairphone-6-postmarketos-working-main-camera
I need an ok camera, ok video, gps, volte, sms, and ~18 hours of battery life with maybe 6-8 of it active.
All of the above, preferably
That’s definitely possible, although it will take some work, because the processor is different from the Fairphone 6, which is currently running post-market OS already.
It won’t take any work, Luca has confirmed the image works on both Fairphone 6 and Fairphone 6+
https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Fairphone_(Gen._6)_(fairphone-fp6)
its on the wiki now too
Oh sweet, thanks
Preferably before my Pixel 6 is EOL later this year…
You’ve got a month, FYI…
You either have to wait for Motorola or get a new Pixel.
For my Pixel 6 Pro I think I’m going to wait for Motorola or the low chance that a Linux phone becomes daily drivable, and even then considering my budget I don’t think I’ll switch until enough stuff breaks. Although I wish they’d extend updates for at least the few months before their phone releases so people aren’t left hanging
I’d choose any other company over Google tbh.
My last few have been used off ebay. Pixels really are mediocre phones these days. And the deals on used A series aren’t as good as I remember.
Pixel 5 was the last good one.
Does official pixel eol affect grapheneos?
yes, they only support devices still supported by Google updates. When a pixel is eol’d, graphene stops supporting the device
Wow, thats dumb.
