Since the Foxconn suicides media coverage, they would be pretty ill-advised not to claim having ethics. The roots of this claim, however, are not the same as those of Fairphone.
Fairphones are largely designed and manufactured by T2Mobile in China. Do you claim that this company has better ethics than Foxconn? What is the basis for the claim?
These two companies have certainly not the same credibility as Fairphone regarding those matters.
Fairphone doesn't have much credibility as a whole, particularly with their blatantly false claims about updates, privacy and security combined with being partner with a company (Murena) blatantly scamming people. Murena has also been engaging in spreading misinformation about GrapheneOS and personal attacks on our team for years. Their founder has supported harassment content from Kiwi Farms. What's ethical or credible about this behavior? Their response to this thread we published was more misinformation and also more personal targeting of our team members. That's the leader of Fairphone's /e/OS and Murena partners. Fairphone responded by providing a substance free corporate speak statement standing behind Murena and trying to mislead people by talking about Android enterprise requirements which is a Google effort to pretend many Android devices are more secure than they are. Fairphone doesn't even follow those recommendations despite implying they do, only the bare minimum and not even that.
As I said, I’m the first one to regret the lack of coherence, and I don’t want to debate this point too much, but the claims regarding privacy and security seem to be pretty mild on the Fairphone website (at least on the following pages):
Fairphone's site has egregiously inaccurate claims about updates, privacy and security.
Security doesn’t even seem to be a subject. Your explanation on this thread has been duly noted, however, when I look at the comparison you linked, I’m more under the impression that GOS is top-notch while /e/ is not really standing out from the crowd. Why not simply say that among all Android-based OS’s, only GOS is being expertly and uncompromisingly crafted and maintained?
The comparison table we linked primarily compare added privacy and security features along with what's done with the standard Android Open Source Project connections. It mostly doesn't cover rolling back privacy and security features. It doesn't cover the services added beyond the AOSP ones such as how /e/OS is sending user data to OpenAI and other services. It doesn't cover telemetry such as /e/OS generating and sending unique identifiers for update checks. /e/OS is dramatically worse than the other options listed there. The table does have 2 rows about patch delays showing how long ASB patches and further security patches are delayed. However, that only provides a baseline best case for the devices where the operating systems have the least delay.
I’m under the impression that most Android phones sold around the world are a danger, why not simply invoke Hanlon’s razor? (I’m obviously not talking about smearing campaign and harassment.)
Fairphones are worse than typical Samsung and Motorola phones.
That being said, my subject was Fairphone, not its partner…
Fairphone directly responded to this thread with a substance free statement standing behind Murena and trying to mislead people. It's very relevant to them.
Nature protection, fair sourcing, low pollution and humane raw material extraction, and slave free sourcing are serious subjects, as are privacy and IT security.
Things they claim to do, just like they claim to provide a level of privacy, security and updates they do not provide.
Because for the last ten years, Fairphone has been put under the spotlight, and as far as I know, no scam whatsoever has been uncovered. In the meantime, it gained recognition, prizes and labels (it’s the only Blauer Engel and TCO certified smartphone) – some environmental prizes and labels may be BS, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.
Certifications are very easy to game and are heavily based around self-dealing and money being paid. Fairphone chooses to market their company this way. They also market it providing privacy and updates it doesn't provide. You'll need to provide some actual proof.
I think we can reasonably believe their claims:
We do not and have little reason to believe them.
Regarding Foxconn suicides, I’ll let you draw your own conclusions when comparing Apple Progress Reports around 2010 with what actually happened:
Where's the evidence T2Mobile is so much better than Foxconn today?
Casting doubt on Fairphone’s environmental and labour claims, the way you did, was not appropriate. I hope you’ll agree.
Fairphone spreads misinformation about their products and supports spreading misinformation about GrapheneOS. They support harassment towards our team. They're not ethical or honest. Their claims should not be trusted. Raising doubts about their unsubstantiated marketing claims is entirely appropriate. We just had direct experience with iFixit marketing their products for them with misinformation and that looks very fishy. It draws into question the repair score from iFixit and lots of other accolades Fairphone boasts about when there's so clearly an extreme level of bias perhaps indicating corruption.
Understand, however, that the fair in Fairphone is related to the concept of fair trade which involves social and environmental standards, like avoiding child labour and mercury poisoning in artisanal and illegal gold mines, not this kind of BS on social networks. But any decent company would condemn swatting…
They're supposed to be sustainable but yet lack proper updates and long term support. They're marketing their products as having privacy and security they don't provide. You can see the response they gave to the Android Authority story for yourself.
Now, did you formally present the facts that you’re denouncing to Fairphone?
Have Fairphone been duly informed? Did you get a response?
Did you let Fairphone a chance to comment on their partnership with the Murena and the e Foundation before implying that Fairphone is being dishonest in its commitments?
Are you expecting a positive outcome and good relations with other actors in the industry?
Fairphone is consistently dishonest in their claims about updates and security for their stock OS. It's unsurprising for them to be partnered with blatant scammers and to be peddling false marketing on their behalf. Their partners have been spreading misinformation about GrapheneOS and making personal attacks on our team. It's their responsibility, not ours. Fairphone has repeatedly ignored communications from us and stonewalled people wanting information about things like the Fairphone 4 having an entirely broken implementation of verified boot using publicly available private keys intended only for testing. It looks very much like Fairphone took a shortcut for supporting /e/OS which compromised the security of their devices as a whole. They still appear to be taking similar shortcuts with the current devices. Their response is stonewalling and giving the kind of responses you can see they gave to Android Authority. Not much of an ethical company.
Also, the facts that you’re denouncing are serious, the ones you’re accusing of calumny are under the EU jurisdiction. I’m personally not a fan of never-ending mutual accusations on social networks and forums…
Regulatory and legal action against them within the EU and elsewhere is on the table.