I simply wanted to explain that you will always pick the security side if a balance has to be made between security and privacy. I don't mean this as a bad thing. It's a good point and a good differentiator between both IMO.
> GrapheneOS has https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-play-services which is able to provide much better app compatibility, far more functionality and without the privacy/security sacrifices of microG. microG lacks the same security checks and key pinning of Play. It doesn't avoid trusting Play because the apps using Play are using the Play client libraries. microG is an additional trusted party.
I don't agree with this. I would not want any google play stuff on my phone, sandboxed or not.
> Those apps work fine on GrapheneOS. CalyxOS isn't more private and more secure than AOSP. CalyxOS includes a lot more proprietary services (Google, WhatsApp, etc.) than AOSP. For the most part, they're making changes which quite easily hurt privacy and security.
Does Calyx really include WhatsApp out of the box? That would indeed be a very negative point for me. As I mentioned I haven't used either.
> This is a highly inaccurate portrayal of what GrapheneOS provides and the decision making process. GrapheneOS values privacy and usability very highly. It balances those with security.
As far as I understand your website you do always pick security if a tradeoff has to be made. I don't think this is a bad thing. I think it's a good option. It's just not the choice I would make but it's nevertheless a good stance for those who care about security the most.
Anyway like I said in my other post I'm sorry you view my post as an attack. If you look at my other posts you will see I praised you for promoting security features that were incorporated into AOSP after you had initially developed them.