# Delete GrapheneOS? We need to talk... ## Метаданные - **Канал:** The Hated One - **YouTube:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6dsshMYj9c - **Дата:** 08.05.2026 - **Длительность:** 12:53 - **Просмотры:** 13,412 ## Описание GrapheneOS is inevitable. Support my work: https://www.patreon.com/thehatedone The most private... no scratch that. The only private phone on the planet is under attack. For years, I've been biting my tongue, but I am done. This is my truth about GrapheneOS. Because I am done being polite to fragile egos with failed ambitions. When you can't take down a security project because it's open source and thus will live forever, what do you do? When you can't take down a security project based on the merits of security because it's by far the very best available anywhere, what do you do? The only thing you can do is to vilify the very existence of the project. You try to convince people that only criminals would want privacy and security. This is already happening. Another way you can do this is to portray the project itself as a fruit of a deranged crank of paranoid anti-social despots who can't be trusted. This is also happening. I was holding back from telling you the truth but no more. The damage that's being done to what I think is the most important project of our lifetimes, is unacceptable. I am the Hated One after all. So here is the tea. Bridges can't be burned if they don't exist, right? This is where I draw the line. I am not here to tell you you have to like Daniel Micay. But I am not gonna let you pretend you can just discard his work because of his personality traits. Daniel Micay has done more for security and privacy than all of his critics combined. Literally. No other security project comes even close to what GrapheneOS offers. GrapheneOS has security hardening features unavailable anywhere else. It has a hardened memory allocator, hardened SELinux polices, hardened webview and web browser, hardened sandboxing and exploit protections, better defaults, better privacy, it is actually the only fully anonymous device in existence and it is the only phone capable of completely sandboxing Google without any privileged permissions. The list of improvements goes on for many pages. Most people though don't understand any of the technicals I just mentioned. But they do understand the drama. The problem is that it is these technical facts that should convince you that all these people who are disparaging GrapheneOS and Daniel Micay's work are all wrong. Anyone recommending against a privacy project because of drama is a fraud and shouldn't be taken seriously. And despite his character flaws, Daniel Micay has been a principled leader of his security project. He made the right decision to sever ties with CopperheadOS. He made the right decision to keep his work open source. He made the right decision to repel corporate interest in his project and keep it non-profit. This idea to repel corporate interest appeals to me too. I am inspired by Micay's decision here because I too reject corporate interest. I refused lucrative sponsors because they would introduce a conflict of interest to my privacy videos. The same can't be said of those that sought to kill Micay's character. So like Micay, I too am funded by donations on my Patreon. I think you should honor that. You should support GrapheneOS and you should support my work. People like us are fighting for your privacy and your freedom with principles. What I do pales in comparison to what Daniel Micay does. I am giving it my all. The ball is in your court. Follow me: https://twitter.com/The_HatedOne_ https://www.reddit.com/r/thehatedone/ The footage and images featured in the video were for critical analysis, commentary and parody, which are protected under the Fair Use laws of the United States Copyright act of 1976. ## Содержание ### [0:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6dsshMYj9c) Segment 1 (00:00 - 05:00) The most private. You know what? Scratch that. The only private phone on the planet is under attack. For years, I've been biting my tongue on this, but I'm done. This is my truth about Graphen OS. When you can't take down a security project because it's open- source and thus will live forever. What do you do when you can't take down a security project based on the merits of security because it's by far the very best available literally anywhere in the world? What do you do? Well, the only thing you can do is to vilify the sad project and its very existence. You try to convince people that only criminals would want privacy and security, which is already happening. And another way you do this is you portray the project itself as a fruit of some deranged crank of paranoid antisocial death spots who can't be trusted. This is also happening. The damage that's being done to what I think is the most important project of our lifetimes is unacceptable. I am the hated one after all. So here is the tea. Burgers can be burned if they don't exist, right? So the Wired wrote this article that sought to dive deep into the graphino history. And what they discovered was actually a very familiar sounding story. Like you have this tech geek who is really passionate about what they're developing. They devote their whole life to it and they want to share it with everybody for free. And then you have the charismatic marketer who somehow befriends the tech geek, realizes the revenue potential of the tech geek's work, and is literally willing to go through dead bodies and stab others in the back to make himself more money. In a just world, it should be the geek that everybody listens to. But because the geek is probably socially awkward, everybody listens to the charismatic marketer instead. Now, you would think that a journalistic outlet like Wired should know better. So, what is Wired doing? So this is the story of Graphin OS according to Wired and also according to what actually happened. Wired wrote a story that talks about two co-founders of Graphin OS a company that wanted to sell a security enhanced Android operating system. The story focuses on these two people but the company was actually started by three people Daniel McKay James Donaldson and Dan McCrady. Wired makes no mention of McCrady at all. I will and I wonder if this will become a pattern. Now, let's take this from the beginning because right from the start, Wired presents Daniel Mccay as a security visionary and a potential death spot. Why despot? Well, because according to Wired, that's how some of McKay's critics view him. So, what kind of a despot is Daniel McKay really? Like Lannis Torvt? — Nvidia, [ __ ] you. — Or maybe Richard Stolman. — Most people erroneously call the whole thing Linux, which means they're giving us no credit for our work. So it's the GNU plus Linux or GNU/ Linux system. That's not nice. Please don't do that. Please treat us right. — There's no problem, is there? — Well, more like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. — You know, I had dinners with him. Uh I regret doing that. — Daniel Mccay is the tech geek that built the security focused Android operating system all on his own at a time. He started with the project before ever meeting with Donaldson. And what did he do with that project? He gave it away to all for free, which means he licensed it as open source. That's despotic behavior if you ask me. With his skills and talents, Daniel McKay could have taken on a lucrative job at a big tech company, but in a true despotic fashion, refused because he didn't want to work on a proprietary software for hire. What a fascist. Throughout more than a decade of dedication to his project, McKay repelled powerful sponsor and for-profit interests and decided to keep his project donationfunded. To this day, Mikay's income is GitHub donations. [ __ ] dictator Wired. Not only is Mikay a potential benevolent dictator for life, he's also a ghost. Who is he really? What does he really want? In reality, Mikay has been doxed multiple times and he was swatted on at least three occasions. Both of these facts have been communicated to the wider journalists who was interviewing the Graphino team for 6 months. Did any of this make it into the article? Nope. But let's just write he's a ghost because we are telling a story and sometimes that's more important than doing journalism. So how do they tell the story? Wired interview both Daniel McKay's Rafino esteem and James Donaldson. But the whole story is told primarily through the lens of James Donaldson. Daniel Mccay's responses which were compiled together by him, his lawyer, Rafino as CFO and the project's community manager are delegated to a tertiary position. They are mentioned as an afterthought after Donaldson is given prime time in every paragraph. In many instances, McKay's responses are only paraphrased in parenthesis. For instance, Donaldson claims him and McKay began working on Cop OS together, but McCain claims in court filings that he had already began working on Android hardening OS before ever meeting with Donaldson. As another example, Wired further enhances Donaldson's narrative that copos was an equally split effort that Donaldson was taking on various jobs to pay for McKay so he could focus ### [5:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6dsshMYj9c&t=300s) Segment 2 (05:00 - 10:00) on the operating system. In reality, much of what McKay was working on was later adopted by Google into the mainstream Android project. For those upstream adoptions, Mikay would be directly paid by Google. Wired makes no mention of this. So when it came to finally tell the story of what made Daniel McKay leave cop OS, reality had already been distorted beyond recognition. Wired claims Donaldson and Mikay had different values on how to run the project. Mikay wanted to keep it as widely available as possible, while Donaldson wanted to attract business interest and revenue. To do that, Donaldson wanted to make Daniel McKay's open-source Android harding project close source and make money by selling it to defense contractors and some criminal organizations. I'll get to that later. After many tries and reluctance from Daniel McCain, Donaldson managed to convince McKay to change the license of Copper OS so that users would have to pay for it to install it and receive updates. Donaldson then just tells Wire that they immediately started receiving offers from Fortune 500 companies. WY just repeats that claim as a matter of fact, but McKay has disputed it. His team literally told Wired, "No, it's not accurate. " So, one of them is lying. McKay's team referred Wyatt to other witnesses who would collaborate his side of the story. Wy made no mention of this. McKay's team also told Wyard about McCrady, about how McKay met him before Donaldson and how McCrady and Donaldson eventually had conflicts that pushed McCrady to walk out. None of this is mentioned. McKay's team is also accusing Donaldson of stealing $300,000 of projects Bitcoin donations. Wired does not mention this. What happened in reality was that Donaldson wanted to make more money from the project in ways that ran counter to why Mikay was doing it in the first place. Donaldson started looking at defense contractors and criminal organizations as customers to Wired. He described those military contracts as the holy grail. On the other hand is McKay who wanted his security project to protect people from those Donaldson wanted to make business with. It's not like there is not enough reason to have that position. The US military industrial complex uses mass surveillance and cyber security tools to subject whole populations to their offensive military campaigns. But it is true that a military contracts are very lucrative. The point is this is not just some minor value difference on how to run a company. This is one side trying to hijack the other for money. According to McKay's team, Donaldson was willing to make profit from selling cops to criminal groups. One of those criminal organizations was Phantom Secure, whose developers actually served prison time for knowingly providing their service to cartels. But Donaldson was willing to go even further than that. He was willing to put the security of Corporate OS users at risk just to close a business deal with a potential customer. It happened when Donaldson came to Mikay with a request to give him access to the signing keys to Copper OS. These keys are necessary to keep the OS maintained and issue updates to users. In the world of cyber security, signing keys are sacrosyn. They're the most heavily guarded secret because whoever has access to those keys could also load malware to people's phones and the malware would be verified because it would be signed with the developer's keys. Users would never notice that somebody is trying to spy on them. It was then revealed that Donaldson wanted these keys for a potential customer who requested them for third party access to people's phones. This led McKay to think that Cop OS was compromised and Donaldson couldn't be trusted. So Daniel McKay had a choice. Hand over the signing keys, lose control over the operating system and expose users to the third parties spying on them or destroy the keys and prevent a hostile takeover. Mikay opted for the least bad option. He destroyed the keys and left corporate OS. The rest is history. McKay went on to start graphine OS. He vowed never to closely tie his project with any company. His security hardened operating system would be forever open source and he would make his living from donations. This would leave a mark on Daniel McKay. It would make him militant about his open source project now called Graphine West. He would defend against any false claims about it vigilantly so even if it meant burning bridges with other projects and bridges were burned and they burned in the most socially awkward manner imaginable. — I feel like things have been awkward between us. I'm okay with it being awkward between us. McKay is utterly dedicated to his project. He never learns to be this charismatic marketer. So every time he does defend his project, it comes off as cold, direct, and harsh. For certain people like Techlor, Louis Rusman or Kix OSDs, Mikay's personality is too much, and their online bickering produced these YouTube exposees portraying McKay as a deranged lunatic that can be trusted. Techlor made this video a few years back when him and McKay had a falling out because McKay didn't like Techlor's inaccurate reporting on Graphine OS. Techlor freaked out and just leaked the messages with McKay and made this character assassination video. Now, the drama I don't really care about. But the cardinal sin that Techlor did with his circle of friends was when they started ### [10:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6dsshMYj9c&t=600s) Segment 3 (10:00 - 12:00) to recommend against Graphino because of this interpersonal drama. They never cited any security concerns. They never provided any argument on security merit. It was simply because McKay vocally protested Techlor in a quiet socially unintelligent manner. So Techlor and his friends stopped recommending Gravine OS. A few years later, Louis Rman made a video about how he now uses Gravine OS. He then watched Techlor's video and commented informative and unfortunate underneath that video. Now McKay thought that this was an endorsement of Techlorur's character assassination attempt and he asked Rossman to delete his comment. Rosman doesn't like to be told what to do and he just leaks McKay's messages. Like Techlor, Rossman also starts recommending against Graphine OS. And that's where I draw the line. I'm not here to tell you have to like Daniel McKay and I'm not here to tell you that Daniel McKay is perfect in his communication methods, but I'm not going to let you pretend you can just discard his work because of his personality traits. Daniel McKay has done more for security and privacy than all of his critics combined. No other security project comes even close to what Graphin OS has done. Rafen OS has security hardening features unavailable anywhere else. It has a hardened memory allocator, harden SE Linux policies, hardened web view and web browser, hardened sandboxing and exploit protections, better defaults, better privacy. It is actually the only fully anonymous device in existence and it is the only phone capable of completely sandboxing Google without any privileged permissions. The list of improvements goes on for many pages. The fundamental problem, the cause for all of this friction that's happening is that most people do not understand any of the technicals I just mentioned here, but they do understand the drama. But it is these technical facts that should convince you that all these people who are disparaging Rafino and Daniel Mik's work are all wrong because they do not matter to the merit of security. Anyone recommending against a privacy project because of drama is a fraud and shouldn't be taken seriously. And despite his character flaws, Daniel Mccay has been a principled leader of his security project. He made the right decision to sever ties with Copra OS. keep his work open source. He made the right decision to repel corporate interest in his project and keep it nonprofit. This idea to repel corporate interests appeals to me too. I am inspired by Mikay's decision here because I too reject corporate interests. I refuse lucrative sponsors because they would introduce a conflict of interest to my privacy videos. The same can be said of those that sought to kill Mikay's character. So like McKay, I too am funded by donations on my Patreon. I think you should honor that. support Graphino and you should support my work too. People like us are fighting for your privacy and freedom with principles. What I do pales in comparison to what Daniel McKay does, but I'm giving it my all. The ball is in your --- *Источник: https://ekstraktznaniy.ru/video/49773*