Absolutely not. But if anything bad happens, or you are attending a protest and suddenly getting investigated for rioting, you might have second thoughts.

I do not condone or endorse illegal activity. That does not mean your use of GrapheneOS might not be used against you if you use it at an inopportune time. There is currently almost no discussion online about this, so it’s worth a mention.

Edit: I forgot to mention some obvious context in my head. Think journalist, in Russia, using GrapheneOS for “safety.” In such a situation, probably a terrible idea.

> There is currently almost no discussion online about this, so it’s worth a mention.

A mention, not a core argument against use.

In my reading, your core point is an old argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument

The kind of over-cautious cowardice you are displaying is what drives societies to become conformity-enforcing police states.

"You're painting your fence beige instead of white? Are you sure that's a good idea? What if there's a crime committed in the neighborhood - beige-fenced deviants are the first that the police will look at!"

People have been trying to stick Linux and the AOSP for the same reasons, but it's quite obviously never worked. Linux and Android are not popular because they are superior security tools, they are popular because they are free and accessible. Governments play poker, they don't want you to know what their hands look like. Condemning any particular software is the equivalent of folding their hand; it's an admittance of defeat. It won't happen unless they face a hopelessly equipped adversary, like Huawei.

GrapheneOS is likely not a secure system, but neither is any smartphone OS. I'll compliment anyone taking steps towards transparency that makes governments and global-scale corporations tremble at the knees.