I never used /e/ but I used iode (https://iode.tech/) and it worked really well. Main differences:
Graphene doesn’t support pattern unlock because they claim PIN is more secure. This is stupid because you can just as easily see what PIN someone typed as the pattern. Since PIN is less convenient most people will use finger print unlock which means you can be easily forced to unlock your phone against your will
iode has support for shortcuts when using 3 button navigation, Graphene doesn’t for some reason
iode has really nice tracker blocker which can run next to a VPN, Graphene doesn’t
Graphene let’s you install Google Services in a separate work profile and separate apps that have access to them from other apps. In iode you will have microG installed system wide
For me that were the biggest differences. When it comes to app support they worked pretty much the same. I’m on Graphene now and it would be too much work to change now but for my next phone I will most likely go with iode.
Graphene has a pin scrambler, so the numbers are in a different position everytime you have to enter them.
It isn’t hard at all to get used to it, and it circumvents the pattern recognition bit.
Fingerprint unlock…that’s a different discussion especially with biometrics not being protected under the law, but for first unlock you always have to enter in a pin
Quickly looking at my phone, you can enter in a passphrase (though personally I think that’s too cumbersome). There’s also a swipe option, I THINK that might be pattern, but I’m not sure. I can’t test it, because it means deleting the already in place measures, and I don’t wnat to do that at the moment.
I don’t know enough about other points to comment on it.
Graphene has a pin scrambler, so the numbers are in a different position everytime you have to enter them.
It doesn’t matter. When I’m inserting my PIN on a bus or while standing or line with people behind me or something I know that anyone interested can clearly see my screen and learn my PIN, scrambler or not. Also, scrambler is not mandatory (I don’t have it enabled) so Graphene OS devs explanation that “we will not enable patter ulock because it’s not secure” while normal PIN can be enabled still doesn’t hold.
This is actually a broader problem with Graphene OS. The devs often fixate on some minor security issues that don’t impact 99% of their users at all and refuse to introduce features that they request. It’s exactly the same with supporting phones other than Pixel. 99% of users would be completely fine using Graphene on a different phone (CIA is not going to hack them) but the devs prefer to directly reject all those users.
It’s not as easy to see. If you miss the first two numbers then you can’t reasonably guess it. You can see the whole pattern even if you glanced for 0.3 seconds
Thank you, I was curious as well. Bit I did notice Graphine has pin scramble, so as annoying as it is sometime couldn’t use your finger pattern for your code. Assuming they didn’t see what numbers you were hitting and just your fingers.
I never used /e/ but I used iode (https://iode.tech/) and it worked really well. Main differences:
Graphene doesn’t support pattern unlock because they claim PIN is more secure. This is stupid because you can just as easily see what PIN someone typed as the pattern. Since PIN is less convenient most people will use finger print unlock which means you can be easily forced to unlock your phone against your will
iode has support for shortcuts when using 3 button navigation, Graphene doesn’t for some reason
iode has really nice tracker blocker which can run next to a VPN, Graphene doesn’t
Graphene let’s you install Google Services in a separate work profile and separate apps that have access to them from other apps. In iode you will have microG installed system wide
For me that were the biggest differences. When it comes to app support they worked pretty much the same. I’m on Graphene now and it would be too much work to change now but for my next phone I will most likely go with iode.
In defense of Graphene for the first point:
Graphene has a pin scrambler, so the numbers are in a different position everytime you have to enter them.
It isn’t hard at all to get used to it, and it circumvents the pattern recognition bit.
Fingerprint unlock…that’s a different discussion especially with biometrics not being protected under the law, but for first unlock you always have to enter in a pin
Quickly looking at my phone, you can enter in a passphrase (though personally I think that’s too cumbersome). There’s also a swipe option, I THINK that might be pattern, but I’m not sure. I can’t test it, because it means deleting the already in place measures, and I don’t wnat to do that at the moment.
I don’t know enough about other points to comment on it.
It doesn’t matter. When I’m inserting my PIN on a bus or while standing or line with people behind me or something I know that anyone interested can clearly see my screen and learn my PIN, scrambler or not. Also, scrambler is not mandatory (I don’t have it enabled) so Graphene OS devs explanation that “we will not enable patter ulock because it’s not secure” while normal PIN can be enabled still doesn’t hold.
This is actually a broader problem with Graphene OS. The devs often fixate on some minor security issues that don’t impact 99% of their users at all and refuse to introduce features that they request. It’s exactly the same with supporting phones other than Pixel. 99% of users would be completely fine using Graphene on a different phone (CIA is not going to hack them) but the devs prefer to directly reject all those users.
It’s not as easy to see. If you miss the first two numbers then you can’t reasonably guess it. You can see the whole pattern even if you glanced for 0.3 seconds
Thank you, I was curious as well. Bit I did notice Graphine has pin scramble, so as annoying as it is sometime couldn’t use your finger pattern for your code. Assuming they didn’t see what numbers you were hitting and just your fingers.