Comment by hparadiz
This is the Achilles heel of having a closed platform. Eventually the government dictates what's supposed to be in it.
This is the Achilles heel of having a closed platform. Eventually the government dictates what's supposed to be in it.
> and it's a simple hop to create a similar circumstantial evidence trail with someone using GrapheneOS.
I think this is a bit exaggerated for effect. No one in India considers having a Linux laptop as being circumstantial evidence in case of a crime. Whereas having Tor installed would be.
If it was open, truly open, wouldn't using GrapheneOS be easier and far more common than it is now?
> That distro is seriously not good for your privacy.
How so?
> DYR (deeper)
Care to help with that?
That distro is promoted ad nauseam here, most cybersecurity experts write their arguments to warn people but it gets tiresome to repeat the same arguments over and over again every week.
There is a search box on the bottom of this page, just research for yourself and learn what this is about.
Even an open platform would do nothing. If you are a suspect, your phone would be checked in person (India doesn't have the concept of the 4th Amendment, and police demanding physical access to your phone during a search is routine) and if you were using something like GrapheneOS, it would be used as evidence against you. Indian law enforcement has already used access to Signal and Telegram as circumstantial evidence in various cases, and it's a simple hop to create a similar circumstantial evidence trail with someone using GrapheneOS.
And anyhow, major Android vendors like Samsung have aligned with the policy as well.