[deleted]
treequell If you do, read the docs:
https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections
https://grapheneos.org/faq#other-connections
I already did, and I couldn't see any reason why anyone would use standard Google servers.
treequell If you do, read the docs:
https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections
https://grapheneos.org/faq#other-connections
I already did, and I couldn't see any reason why anyone would use standard Google servers.
Just because one sees no use for something doesn’t mean no one should have or use it.
treequell ISPs will know that someone is using GrapheneOS regardless of whether they choose standard Google server or GrapheneOS proxy server.
Blastoidea Could you name a use case for it?
[deleted]
No need to.
Just because you don’t think it is useful doesn’t mean it should be removed or changed.
Graphite ISPs can identify GrapheneOS users by all of these GrapheneOS connections, and changing these two to Google servers doesn't change that. So as I said, I couldn't find a single use case for this.
Eirikr70 In my opinion, these two toggles are unnecessary and cause unnecessary confusion. But I could be wrong.
You are.
blicero If you're saying this with such confidence then might as well name some use cases for it.
[deleted]
There's a big difference between inference of an operating system, based on HTTPS connections,.. and having actual certainty of an operating system because identifying information is traveling through your own servers.
Yes, an ISP can infer if they manually do forensics on connection logs between mobile devices and third party servers. But it would be much easier and a bigger privacy concern if they were the actual servers being communicated with.
Graphite I was just saying that changing these two to use Google servers doesn't help hide the fact that someone is using GrapheneOS at all.
Graphite How realistic is this?