other8026 i just found it and I have to say: that's really bad! I think there should be some kind of warning on the forum to make people stay away from the FUTO products.
Response to dishonest attacks on the GrapheneOS project by Robert Braxman
Some commenters in this thread think the project should comment less on non-technical issues with certain parties, while other commenters think the project should issue more such warnings. That seems like a delicate balance at best!
Ya, when teaming takes hold it can get dicey. I certainly see both sides of desired responses.
Personally, I prefer a more academic response - here's the claim/misinformation, here's what it does within Android/AOSP, here's how GOS handles it and why it may/not be an issue.
Just keeps it clean for everyone to understand and helps users increase their knowledge base overall.
- Edited
Yes I do understand what you mean but there is a lot of negative energy unfortunately around this subject.
The whole Internet (Social media) is a big sh...t hole.
I should say stay focused on this fantastic project and I hope that the DEV team will keep up the good work and find the inspiration they need.
- Edited
Before GrapheneOS (I'm still a super newbie at it), I watched his content and was wanting to buy one of his phones. After I saw the phone price tags alongside the cost of his other products/services, I decided to look elsewhere since it was out of my price range... I'm so glad I didn't buy any of his things LOL Instead, I invested in a Pixel phone and put GOS on instead. No regrets! Just a learning curve, but it's been a hobby challenge I like learning about. ^__^
TL;DR: I seriously appreciate this post and am GrapheneOS all the way investing in a Pixel instead spending on these scams. lol
"In the end, and what I think the GrapheneOS account was also trying to get at, is that it isn't the AI based scanning or even that it happens on your device that is the problem, it is automatic reporting of illegal content that is the problem"
I was referring to the latter half, while what you said is all fair and good, I was talking about "and multiple false positives would exist" not the privacy violation part. I have a feeling NCMEC makes it hard to file reports outside of the standard tipline because of false positives and similar concerns
Braxman is continuing to double down on dishonest rants about GrapheneOS and targeting our development team with fabricated stories and harassment content. We're working on a detailed article going into detail exposing his products/services as highly insecure and non-private scams along with exposing his content as being filled with blatant fabrications. His continued dishonest attacks on us are being archived and can also be talked about. This post we made about it is completely insignificant compared to what's on the way. He's participating in extreme Kiwi Farms harassment which is plainly visible on his social media accounts, mainly on his own privacy unfriendly social media site. It will all be dealt with via a detailed article about him which can be expanded to cover he business partners. Lots of progress is being made on the article and we'll continue improving it after publishing it.
GrapheneOS I appreciate you warning everyone of false information (of this man yet unknown to me). I agree with you 100% and understand your project as the objectively best option for an OS.
Nevertheless I would find it better if you tried your best to react more positively or neutral on attacks against you, not always with a (rectified) counter attack. I know it is hard when you know you are right and the other is wrong but it shouldn’t be you vs the others. It should be you guiding directions to the least wrong answer (aka the „truth“).
Don’t be on their level fighting back with their means. Stay above that because you know you’re right.
This would much likely enhance your reputation eliminating claims of other calling you rude. I’d love to see the privacy & security come back together and stop fighting each other… but one party has to step back from the frontline, initiating friendly contact again although they’re right and I hope it’s you.
basedFOSS Braxman is someone trying to profit from scamming people, not someone trying to make people's privacy better. He does the opposite. There is never going to be any coming together with scammers.
- Edited
basedFOSS He is not someone who is trying to give advice to protect the privacy but makes mistakes or is misinformed, no, he wants to sell you a sensational stories and get you to buy his horrible products in return as a solution, he makes money with his lies and he is far from alone, why ? Because there are paranoid people who think that all their devices can be magically hacked and who think they're being tracked H24, Braxman targets this kind of people, tells them what they want to hear and then offers snake oil for one purpose only, to make money.
basedFOSS I’d love to see the privacy & security come back together and stop fighting each other…
Here, it's not a battle between security and privacty, both of which are absent from Braxman's work.
GrapheneOS It's sad that this needs to be done, but I appreciate your time and courage to do it anyway. 💪
GrapheneOS Sure, he is a scammer and things have to be said in a way that people get the message. Yet preferrably in a polite way.
(I meant it in a more broader and a social way.) The reaction of people like him when being critisized will be more false accusations and hostility... it will go down a rabbit hole fighting each other on who said what and did this or that first. (That's a pattern I recognized which must not be true, just my perception)
I think you did quite well achieve a professional tone. As a strategy you could have targeted privacy & security scammers in general and make him and others an example of it. So then it's you vs a problem and not people. I think you get the point.
Thanks for your great work and...
Community members: Donate if you are financially in the position
Just wanted to leave behind some nice words in this time of hate :)
- Edited
I understand that a ML component may not phone home and just acts as an API. I rarely use photos or videos or download anything. I still do not want machine learning to locally classify my files through API. If there is an exploit, all my files could be pre-classified by API calls by an App (in a worst case scenario) for an attacker to easily exfiltrate what is most economically or otherwise damaging. I don't know if information about files will be stored anywhere. This increases my attack surface (not of being hacked but for easy data exfiltration) even if sandboxeded if I am not making sure there are no API calls and I don't care if someone texts me a naked picture so I have no use case for it. Is there an option in GOS to delete this? I don't care about ML models being on the device, I care about an accessible API that I may be oblivious to or does stuff and I'm too stupid to realize it's classified everything and stored metadata somewhere. I don't want to have to think about this. I doubt I am notified if there's an API call and can't read the code for all my Apps.
I'm sure the person's video was misleading, but it should be fine for people to be aware of this without being hysterical or irrational about it's limited impact.
angela It is not available in GOS unless you go out of your way to install it.
I too am aware of Braxman and his continuous nonsense. I watched a few of his videos back in the day. Fortunately they were not very technical and led me to actually valuable information along the way, when I started researching further. He sadly is technically savvy enough to develop products himself that he can sell to his audience, but not savvy enough to actually understand the technical intricacies of the subjects he's talking about. I would go as far as calling him the Steven Seagal of the privacy and security community.
However, the only way forward is to make sure that actually knowledgeable members call him out by exploiting the same mechanisms he does. Social media and SEO is an even playing field that can be used by anyone to reach an infinite amount of people.
If you decide to make others aware of his misinformation, make sure to keep it in a professional manner. No name calling, no accusations. Just provide a technical analysis of his claims and disprove them. It's an uphill battle that can't be won any other way sadly.
If you are a journalist or can reach one, this would also create a big splash. You would be surprised how much impact traditional media has. And it certainly makes for a good story too.
Tl;dr: don't overthink it. He will be exposed sooner or later anyway and justice will be served.
angela That is not what this does in the first place. Read our post about it.
10 days later
Hathaway_Noa hi mate, where can one contact you please?
n3t_admin I would go as far as calling him the Steven Seagal of the privacy and security community.
This is a very bold, but accurate claim.
