Android Authority GrapheneOS Slander

Byku

Kinda hyprocritical - in their bio the author claims to use several Pixel phones.

DeletedUser299

seems that androidauthority cut and pasted from a spanish article
https://www.xatakandroid.com/sociedad/cada-vez-que-vemos-google-pixel-pensamos-que-puede-ser-narcotraficante-movil-perfecto-para-crimen-sencilla-razon

below is an onlie translation...

"Every time we see a Google Pixel we think it could be a drug dealer." It's the perfect motive for crime for a reason ◦ Strong words from a person in charge of the fight against drugs of the Catalan police according to the DiariAra ◦ The Pixel features GrapheneOS as a privacy-focused alternative to Android ◦ Therefore, criminals modify hardware and software to avoid being hunted The Google Pixel are the highest representatives of Android, with Samsung's permission. That is why they convince enthusiastic users of the operating system, also because they succeed the extinct Nexus of the search engine firm. We have recommended them for their extensive update policy and their camera app, among other reasons, but they are also presented as the perfect device for other types of users: those who participate in organized crime.
As it sounds. The phrase, as forceful as it is surprising, is from a person responsible for the fight against drugs of the Mossos d'Esquadra in Catalonia to the DiariAra. Far from being Google's problem (of course), the reason why its mobiles have become popular among criminal gangs is, paradoxically, one of its greatest virtues for Android enthusiasts: its freedom. A freedom that, combined with the installation of an alternative OS, makes it an almost infallible communication tool.
According to the Catalan police and cybersecurity experts to DiariAra, the Google Pixel is one of the devices preferred by organized crime for a key reason: it allows "to freely install any operating system," said René Serral, cybersecurity expert at InLab FIB. The 'ghost' operating system. That's none other than a well-known ROM in the Android scene: GrapheneOS. This is the software installed by criminal gangs, a version of Android focused on maximum privacy that does not require 'Google Apps'. This provides an encrypted communication system, which is exploited by criminal gangs.
In addition, these phones are configured to be completely erased if the PIN is entered incorrectly several times or if a remote reset is attempted. And as if that were not enough, the police have detected how they go to local specialized stores to have components such as the microphone, GPS or camera removed. According to information from ARA, the security forces admit that traditional wiretaps are no longer useful for investigating these gangs. They now communicate exclusively through encrypted applications. This change in strategy has led to an escalation in the technological battle between police and criminals.

dc32f0cfe84def651e0e

JW10233 But think of the children!

DeletedUser299 a version of Android focused on maximum privacy that does not require 'Google Apps'.

Definitely criminal!

matchboxbananasynergy

GrapheneOS - the OS for criminals (like PewDiePie)... /s

This is outrageous that this was actually published. Even that Spanish website made an article citing our response - that's the bare minimum. We still think they're wrong and their framing is dangerous to people's freedoms, but at the very least they followed up and gave people a chance to hear us out. Android Authority seemingly didn't even do that.

I'm hoping that they'll see that this is a completely wrong move and retract it.

matchboxbananasynergy

For anyone who hasn't read it, here's our response to the original article that Android Authority is citing:

https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784469162979608

wuseman

The author should be a comedian if he isn't already. Claiming that GrapheneOS can be installed on any device shows that he did zero research for this article, literally zero.

DeletedUser299

wuseman the author (Android Authority article) should be a comedienne as they are a she, not a he.

WestQuester

I don't see anything slanderous or negative in that article. There are criminals that have been using Pixels and GrapheneOS specifically. If they had said they were using iPhones that wouldn't be a slanderous against iPhones.

They even say that the miscreants "exploit" GrapheneOS's full disk and metadata encryption. Even if that's misinformed, to exploit means to misuse or abuse GrapheneOS. It's not against Pixels either. "Google surely didn't intend", "unexpectedly attractive to the wrong crowd", "as weird as it sounds", etc.

It may be a misinformed article and some people may draw their own conclusions (e.g., GOS and Pixels are used by criminals and I don't want to seem suspicious so I don't want to use them) but the article itself is not negative about either Pixels or GrapheneOS.

Titan_M2

the company’s FAQ section strongly recommends using a Pixel phone

Which company LOL?

Graphene1

Everyone should leave a comment on the article

DeletedUser495

It saddens me such inaccurate picture is being continously painted of GrapheneOS and its users by bad actors. Yet I pay it no attention and every chance I get I advertise this inherently private OS to my surroundings for the right reasons.

TrustExecutor

DeletedUser495 Recommendations between friends and other sssociates are very important, thank you for spreading the word! It creates rings on water.

secrec

final What is the obsession with authoritarian media trying to point fingers at us falsely claiming we are supporting illicit use?

That seems to be a common problem with media. Most media is nothing but state funded propaganda. This also implies the root issue BEHIND the slander, which is that the state funding the media has an interest in steering people AWAY from Pixel and GrapheneOS. Why? That's obvious -- they make it difficult or impossible to monitor the users.

DeletedUser313

Maybe it's the government doing damage control after Pewdiepie advertised GOS. I always thought privacy software should be private - no one should know about it unless they do research. If too much attention is cast upon it there will be trouble

raccoondad

tremble1256

"Its the choice of phone for a drug user"

Its also the choice of phone I use to report suspected child abuse to law enforcement, but of course one makes headlines :/

I mentioned this before, but I work with very vulnerable people and use GOS actively to make sure their information only goes to the right places.

matchboxbananasynergy

An update on the article has been issued.

Blastoidea

“All you have to do is prove that you aren’t a drug dealer, and you can be on your way.”

“However, we do require that you leave your phone with us.”

wizoatk

Update, July 3, 2025 (11:45 AM ET): The crew behind GrapheneOS is understandably none too pleased about their good name being dragged through the mud, and members are speaking out about these reports from Spain. Over on X, the official GrapheneOS account posts:

European authoritarians and their enablers in the media are misrepresenting GrapheneOS and even Pixel phones as if they’re something for criminals. GrapheneOS is opposed to the mass surveillance police state these people want to impose on everyone.

Security is a tool, and can be wielded just as much for good as it can for bad. While some people may see this as an indictment, we’d say it’s more the inevitable consequence of GrapheneOS just being very, very good at what it does.

[...]

Editor’s note: We have removed earlier statements that mischaracterized GrapheneOS’s device support.

IcyScroll

wizoatk we’d say it’s more the inevitable consequence of GrapheneOS just being very, very good at what it does.

Yet they still weren't able to resist the urge to post sensationalistic propaganda. Their intentions might not have been malicious but damage to the masses is real. It's so frustrating having to deal with people who do not wish to think logically for themselves. Plenty of people view software with basic privacy considerations as something used exclusively by criminals, while failing to notice they also value what these tools provide; that those values are often fundamental human rights; that we all need them for functional democracy. I am sure that anyone who tried to introduce their contacts to Signal will know what I am talking about. It's deeply disturbing.

What is missing from the debate is the fact that freedom of speech is not an isolated right. To protect freedom of speech we need to fight for other rights, and it all comes down to privacy. If we don’t have the right to our own thoughts and emotions, without authorities, big tech companies and data brokers mapping all our searches and all the sites we visit, and if we can’t explore our most personal ideas, and decide exactly when and with whom we want to share them – then all our other rights are at risk.

https://www.mullvad.net/en/blog/2025/2/21/fight-for-privacy-to-protect-all-other-rights/

Everytime I see a lumberjack, chef or a baseball player the only thing I can hear in my head is "they might be a murderer"! Knifes, axes, bats, savages!!!! /s

DeletedUser313

IcyScroll The general public will not change its views on privacy and if GOS were far more popular, governments (and media) would invest more resources in interfering with its work. Those who believe publicity is beneficial for GOS may want to reconsider

locked

DeletedUser313 Yes, something similar to what Apple and Signal are facing today, and maybe are we starting to see it with GrapheneOS?

DirtyDan

DeletedUser313 Publicity and popularity are still useful, but I agree there is a tipping point where it becomes detrimental.

Pros:

More donations.
Better device support
Better third-party app support
More competition that can't be easily pushed aside by monopolistic powers due to increased consumer demand (play integrity etc).
Broader society cultural rejection of invasive massive surveillance and more mainstream adoption of privacy in general.

Cons:

Bigger target for parties trying to stop it.
More criminals using it.
More user complaints from less motivated new users with higher usability expectations and less tech savviness (RIP this discussion forum)
More misinformation (intentional and unintentional).
People are less impressed when I brag about my degoogled super hacker secret agent phone.