[deleted] There are/were malicous apps out there that don't need Google Play to work.
Right, but the question was about Google Play or Google apps, so I was talking about Google Play and other Google apps.
[deleted] Instead we should look at what sorts of (dangerous) permissions app requests in order to work.
No argument there. Apps can't share information they don't have.
[deleted] Google Play Services require a whole lot of "privacy umfriendly" permissions in order to provide functionality for its well constructed ecosystem of apps to work well. Yes, you can deny some, some you can't if you want to ensure that it at all works.
This is part of what the compatibility layer does so Google Play and Google Play Services don't break when they don't have access to things they expect access to.
[deleted] Using GrapheneOS mitigates hatdware ID collection and fingerprinting and provides its own backends for certain services, but let's not forget and like someone said Google employs a whole army of hackers, excuse me, security researchers to break any such mitigations from working by employing new state of art technologies (questionable but highly probable) they don't shout out loud about using. So I assume zero trust when it comes to using their proprietary suite.
I'm not going to discuss hypotheticals. If you don't trust Google, or if you think that Google has some ability to access personal data despite not having access, then don't use Google apps. GrapheneOS project members, people who are way smarter than me when it comes to this kind of thing, say that Google doesn't have any privileged access. I'm going to trust their judgement when it comes to these things.