This is the de-Googled, more secure version of the Android Open Source Project. GrapheneOS, the modified version of Android that is devoid of Google while...
(nothing I am about to say is necessarily personal; I am genuinely grateful for the link!)
Is there a table of these requirements as columns and vendors as rows?
I think most of this list is acquired by having a modern CPU or SoC, no?
Much of the list is software requirements.
There is one item that sticks out:
Support for disabling USB data and also USB as a whole at a hardware level in the USB controller
Just how much of the hardware list is satisfied by say having a Snapdragon SoC?
I would prefer if people said such and such vendor is missing such and such feature which we need. Always NAME the SPECIFICS. A link to a web page with the exact specifics missing for the most popular phones would help, imo. This is clear and educational. Instead we get “they don’t got no good hardware maaaan.” It’s annoying. Looks handwavy even when it is not.
The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 — the chip inside the 2026 Motorola Signature — introduced MTE support, but only in the Elite variant. The Foundation has characterized MTE in the non-Elite Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 as effectively broken for GrapheneOS’s purposes. This is why even Motorola’s current flagship lineup cannot qualify: the chip is close but the specific hardware feature GrapheneOS treats as non-negotiable is not reliably present across the Snapdragon lineup.
Searching would probably have been quicker than commenting :)
https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices
(nothing I am about to say is necessarily personal; I am genuinely grateful for the link!)
Is there a table of these requirements as columns and vendors as rows?
I think most of this list is acquired by having a modern CPU or SoC, no?
Much of the list is software requirements.
There is one item that sticks out:
Just how much of the hardware list is satisfied by say having a Snapdragon SoC?
I would prefer if people said such and such vendor is missing such and such feature which we need. Always NAME the SPECIFICS. A link to a web page with the exact specifics missing for the most popular phones would help, imo. This is clear and educational. Instead we get “they don’t got no good hardware maaaan.” It’s annoying. Looks handwavy even when it is not.
I haven’t seem anyone respond in the way you’re complaining about.
There’s a long list of requirements, with a big one being hardware memory tagging.
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/325679/20260826/grapheneos-expands-motorola-better-snapdragon-radio-isolation-google-pixel.htm