r/GrapheneOS

How to customize GrapheneOS? I really like this OS, but I want everything to look beautiful, but I lack basic functions.

Its an unverified APK but it's a official. I can't get past the verifier screen to install it.

no clue why. everything seems to be fine though. maybe an os crash? has anyone experienced this before?

Hi guys, currently on my stock android, I have made a Work user on my Pixel to use Teams, Outlook etc for work. They can't work without an app called Company Portal. Any sysadmins/IT folks out there who know if these apps would work on GOS? Could you please let me know if they might work on Lineage too?

Thanks a ton!

Sticking with the Google Pixel will be the most economical option. Furthermore, there are no guarantees that Motorola's initial devices will be more secure than current ones. At best, they might meet the minimum standards required by GrapheneOS: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117078064184215730

https://preview.redd.it/ieqti8wslckh1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=a1c25802f45aa859abdb88a42f68a2aa3046f2ea

I made VC Port — a phone app that opens the same VeraCrypt file containers (.hc, .tc, .vera, or any disguise name) you already use on a computer.

This is not VeraCrypt. I am not allowed to use that name. It is a derived work with the VeraCrypt volume core, so TrueCrypt License 3.0 is inherited (not a random TrueCrypt revival). Phone UI is Apache-2.0.

What it does

• Pick a locked file (on the phone, or a file on a USB stick — not the whole USB disk).
• Type password / PIM / keyfiles. Master build does not remember passwords.
• Browse folders on a Mounted tab inside the app. This is not a system drive — Files / Files.app cannot browse the unlocked folder. That is intentional (seizure / forensic leftovers).
• Copy or move several files between the phone and an open volume, or between two open volumes.
• Create new volumes on the phone (with the same finger-scribble entropy step as the desktop wizard, mixed with the OS CSPRNG).
• Share encrypted — send the locked file as-is, no password on the send.
• Panic wipe / Dismount clears secrets on the phone. The ciphertext file is not deleted.

Platforms: Android + iPhone. Offline by default — FOSS build has no INTERNET permission. No ads, no analytics, no crash reporters.

Honest limits

• Not unbreakable. A compelled password still wins.
• 0.3.7 is a stable alpha, not 1.0, not a Play/App Store build.
• GitHub APK is a debug-signed preview. Production = build FOSS yourself and sign with your keystore.
• iPhone: unsigned IPA — you sign with your Apple ID (AltStore / SideStore or Xcode). I do not ship a store-signed app.

Not included: whole-disk USB unlock like OTG Master. If your stick is one big VeraCrypt partition, use OTG Master or a PC. If the volume is a file on the stick, pick that file in VC Port.

Links

• Source + APK/IPA: https://github.com/ShivamPingaleDev/Veracrypt_port
• Release: https://github.com/ShivamPingaleDev/Veracrypt_port/releases/tag/v0.3.7
• Screenshots in the README (Volume, Create, Mounted, Tools)

I am Shivam Mangesh Pingale — still doing a five-year IT engineering degree, built this because I wanted something I could actually use on a phone. Open to suggestions, teaching, internships, or work (shivampingaledev@proton.me · shivampingaledev@gmail.com). No pressure.

Security issues: please use the repo’s SECURITY.md, not a public exploit thread.

This is something I'd really like to see exist for three main reasons: a non-Google option, a small form option, and a budget option. Additional useful features would be a headphone jack port and microSD card slot. All of these factors are unfortunately very difficult to find nowadays. It's important to have options as there are various use cases for different people, and no "one-size-fits-all" works that well***.***

Why? I discovered about deGoogle/deCorp practises and have been working to minimise my reliance on such. I'm also concerned about ever getting a future Android phone due to the progressing, undesirable developments. Compact phones became a personal priority due to being a light phone user, having small hands (so it's easier to manage a small phone), and actually fit in pockets -- I don't need it as an entire phablet, I have a separate device (a desktop PC) primarily operated for such, keeping the functionalities/use cases separate. Being affordable is also important for a light phone user, and in my case, I've always had phones well under $100 that work fine enough for many years.

The struggle is finding a small smartphone (esp by major companies) the longer we go in the modern tech age. And I don't mean foldables, those are still large at full, I'm referencing wholly small forms like the iPhone Mini. Smartphones used to be compact, there were great options. When they started becoming phablets and I got my first one at 6.6", it was too big, genuinely uncomfortable to use, and didn't fit anywhere well. I wanted my old phones back, but at this point, they are too "outdated" (the main issue is apps that wouldn't support certain Android OS versions anymore).
I did a lot of research for days to find compact smartphones that could work for now (but probably not for several more years...) The iPhone Mini would be ideal in form, but I've always used Android and discovered the major differences would not be personally feasible to use (plus, I don't want to switch to another big tech product). Narrowed down most options to all early Pixel phones, Sony Xperia models, and Galaxy A-series. The only one I found feasible was the Galaxy S10e (pre-owned for $100, so not as "budget" as all of my past phones, but affordable enough), so that's my current phone -- it's sufficiently small at ~5.8", plus a headphone jack output (which is great as I basically only have wired headphones) and ability to have a microSD card for extra/easily portable storage. I have to stick with this 2019 Android phone as long as there aren't viable compact models being released, but apps will sooner stop working on it vs having a more recent device, and so Idk what my options will be in the future at this rate.

I get that larger phones now may be due to factors like larger battery capacities and what sells the most, but it shouldn't be the only option. There's proof that modern phones can still be manufactured as compact and usable, there's evidence of people who use those or still want options for compact phones (even if it's niche, it exists, and should be provided the choice). Some people don't care for powerful batteries or large screens, it's not always needed. Of course, not to say phablets should be replaced, I'd just like to see compact options offered alongside them to help broaden the consumer base.

With that, I'd like to request if Motorola and GrapheneOS could please consider offering a compact budget option (optionally if with a headphone jack port and microSD card slot). It doesn't need to be powerful, just functional enough for light users or those who are on a budget for current and following years (however long of support is feasible).

Wondering if there are any type 1 diabetes on here that use (or want to use!) grapheneOS?

Insulin pump technologies use apps only compatible with IOS and android!!!!

Has anyone managed a work around using grapheneOS or have any tips on how to make your system more secure if needing to use the insulin pump system that requires apps?

VPNs are also blocked.

I see a lot of comments here telling people who don't use GrapheneOS yet, or who want to replace an old Pixel, to wait for the first device from the Motorola partnership. There's no evidence that those devices will be better than current Pixels in any way.

The first thing to consider is that Motorola will almost certainly rely on whatever security hardware Qualcomm builds into the chipset, rather than designing its own the way Google did with Titan. Google has an in-house team developing the chip, the firmware and the OS together, and Motorola doesn't.

That alone introduces some fragility in the chain, because any vulnerability found in the chipset has to wait for a fix from Qualcomm, while Google can push a correction to its phones whenever it wants.

Another issue is maturity. Titan and Tensor have been on the market for years and have gone through audits and testing by Google and by the wider community. Motorola will be starting with new hardware that still has to go through the same scrutiny before anyone can honestly claim it's on the same level.

On top of that, Tensor was designed to be used alongside Titan, so the engineering and the security model were built together. Motorola will have to trust the security of its device to a third party.

I understand that a lot of people in this community complain about Tensor's performance. But Google never set out to win Antutu or to run games faster than the current flagships. The marketing around the Pixel has always been about security and AI.

I do think a Motorola phone running GrapheneOS will bring some improvements, better gaming performance being the obvious one. What I wouldn't expect is any advantage on security. And Play Integrity won't change either, since that has to do with the OS not being Google certified rather than with the hardware underneath.

P.S.: I used AI to translate the text. Please overlook the robotic tone.

Hi everyone,

I’m having an issue with WhatsApp on my Pixel 9 Pro XL running GrapheneOS.
WhatsApp keeps showing:

“Download the official WhatsApp to continue. We can’t verify that you’re using the official WhatsApp app.”

What I’ve tried so far:
Pixel 9 Pro XL
GrapheneOS build 2026081301
Bootloader is locked
WhatsApp downloaded directly from the Google Play Store & obtanium & aurorastore
Google Play Services and Google Play Store are installed and enabled
I’m connected to Wi-Fi

I also registered the same phone number successfully on another phone, so the number itself works
Despite all of this, WhatsApp still gives me the same error on GrapheneOS.

Does anyone know what could be causing this or what I can do to get WhatsApp working?
Thanks!

everyone,

Between Google Play Integrity API lockdowns, Apple App Attest, and upcoming eID/age-verification mandates, alternative and privacy-focused operating systems (like GrapheneOS, LineageOS, and Linux on mobile) are being systematically locked out of banking, public portals, and everyday apps.

Rather than watching vendor lock-in get worse, I am organizing a European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) working title: "My Device, My OS" to push binding EU legislation for Device Neutrality and Open Attestation.

What we aim to achieve:

• Mandate Open Attestation Standards: Require services operating in the EU to support open, vendor-neutral hardware attestation rather than relying exclusively on proprietary gatekeeper APIs (Google/Apple).
• Ban Device/OS Discrimination: Prevent public services, digital ID wallets, and essential commercial apps from arbitrarily blocking users solely for running independent or de-Googled operating systems.
• Protect Hardware Sovereignty: Enshrine the legal right of consumers to install and run the operating system of their choice without losing access to the digital single market.

Before submitting it we need 7 persons from 7 different countries in the EU to sign the draft

Join the Matrix room to discuss, collaborate on the draft, and coordinate next steps:
👉 #my-device-my-os:pollorebozado.com

Feedback, technical insights, and EU organizers are all welcome!

I’m running Proton VPN on GrapheneOS and I’m having a weird issue accessing services on my home LAN.

My setup:

• GrapheneOS
• Proton VPN Android app 5.19.16.0
• Always-on VPN: enabled
• “Block connections without VPN”: disabled
• Proton “LAN connections”: enabled
• Proton “Allow direct device connections”: enabled
• Android Private DNS: Automatic
• Home network uses Pi-hole for local DNS
• Local services use *.home.arpa names, e.g. home-assistant.home.arpa

With Proton disconnected, everything works normally.

With Proton connected, I can’t access local services unless I manually add their IP addresses to Proton’s split tunnelling exclusions.

For example:

home-assistant.home.arpa → local 192.168.x.x address
homepage.home.arpa → local 192.168.x.x address

The hostnames resolve correctly, but the connection itself fails unless that specific IP is excluded from the VPN.

That workaround isn’t ideal because I’ve got multiple homelab services on different hosts/ports and I’d expect Proton’s Allow LAN connections option to handle local RFC1918 traffic automatically.

I’ve also tested with GrapheneOS’s Block connections without VPN disabled, so it doesn’t appear to be Android VPN lockdown causing it.

Has anyone else seen this with Proton VPN + GrapheneOS?

Is “LAN connections” supposed to bypass the VPN for the whole local subnet, or do I genuinely need to maintain individual IP exclusions?

Ideally I want:

Internet traffic → Proton VPN
192.168.x.x / *.home.arpa → local Wi-Fi/LAN

without excluding my whole browser from the VPN.

I've been told the sandboxed play store is more secure than alternatives like aurora store but I have no interest in making an account.

Given that google play store can update installed apps without an account, would it be possible to install apps with aurora store and then uninstall aurora store so the updates are handled by the play store without having to sign in?