/e/ is quite similar to LineageOS for MicroG, and is largely built on it.
Both are “Google free”.
Main differences are:
/e/ uses it’s own apps store (Apps) with a privacy app rating and most off Gapps available. (using clean apk repo)
LineageOS for MicroG uses default F-Froid store (that you need to configure). Aurora store can be installed though.
LOS for MicroG uses Trebuchet launcher.
/e/ uses default Bliss launcher, look and feels a little more like IOS.
/e/ uses “Magic Earth navigation”, the only “non open source” default app.
LOS for MG does not provide a default navigation app
/e/ is “ready to use”.
LOS for MicroG you have to configure a few things in MicroG settings, DAVx5 and F-Droid repositories.
/e/ gives you access to the /e/ cloud services (1GB free, or paid solution with much more)
/e/ will enable OTA Android upgrades in the future.
Not sure about LOS status
/e/ benefits from large communities user groups in many languages.
LOS has a main user group in English.
/e/ has an automatic installer software available for a few devices.
LOS needs to be installed manually anyway.
/e/ offers devices for sale on its website as well as a customer service. (brand new name: Murena)
/e/ can sometimes be a little more instable and buggy than LOS, especially on beta builds.
Does this mean, if I simply things a little :
((LineageOS for microG)-Google)+/e/ Cloud Services + /e/ SSO + /e/App Store + /e/ Everyday use Apps = /e/OS ?
If that’s true, then I’m going to switch to /e/OS very soon
Well, this is to much mathematics to me
But basically it’s about that…
Yes, I recommend you to try, it runs pretty well in overall.
For officially supported devices, OTA updates are available for LOS4Microg
Indeed, but I meant skip from an Android version to a higher (ex: 10 to 11)
/e/ is working enabling this feature via OTA.
LOS does not yet provides this feature, if you want to upgrade to a higher version you have to download it and install it via TWRP.
Sorry - my mistake. There is indeed no support in L4M for OTA upgrade to a higher Android version. TWRP (or some other recovery) is the only way
I stumbled into /e/ by coincidence without knowing about Lineage-OS before.
What I love most about /e/ is the cloud service. I love this for contacts and agenda. I think that will keep me with /e/ for the years to come
Is /e/ prerouted by Magisk?
I use (LOS for microG) a very few apps from Playstore via Aurora - therefore I do need an Adblocker and a Firewall (AFwall+). What is the solution here for that case?
No. /e/OS is not rooted. It can be rooted using Magisk, but that is not necessary (or desirable IMHO )
If a firewall / adblocker is part of /e/ I could live without root-access. But is it?
Advanced Privacy - know all about it
Or search the forums. Been many a discussion regarding those tools (firewalls, adblocking, tracker blocking, etc.). Nowadays you can get most, if not all, of those capabilities without root.
These articles are not as easy to understand for me. If I see that right, I do have a different use case. Maybe one simple example instead of a general question:
I do have an app that needs to communicate via WiFi to a device in my home network. Both device and app would send message to the internet (out of my LAN) to vendor and wherever.
In my router I can set device to be gated in LAN, but how can I do that with this app? I need WiFi, but only LAN. Can this be restricted out of the box (how?), do I need special tools (which one?) or do I even need root to do so?
Til now I had to root my phone and install a FireWall. I would avoid rooting.
Not sure if you are referring to the InviZible Pro articles or something else.
I have used AFWall pretty much since Android 4 up to 9 and haven’t really used anything else until fairly recenly. Using InviZible as an example, its firewall allows/disallows for connections through different networks (LAN, WiFi, cellular, roaming) not unlike AFWall as briefly mentioned here… InviZible – Firewall
If you were not referring to the InviZible articles then check out these to see if it fits the bill for various situations. It can do quite a bit without root, in VPN mode.
InviZible – Help
Thanks for the info. I think AFWall can be setup for different network, at least for Wifi, LAN and cellular and I am pretty sure for Roaming too.
But you are right InviZible seems to have even more functionality.
Drawback in bothes cases is root. I have to take a closer look to InviZible to see whats working without root. Blokada also works without root but both tools only if in VPN mode. The thing is, I do need the VPN mode for VPN. Not always but it would be some restriction to choose either this or that.
Best thing would be imho, to include this kind of tool into /e/, so that no external tools (that need root) are required. That would be my picture of a OS that cares about privacy.
I remember once to read about iodes OS that should contain that (just what I read about), But - it is not FOSS, so it is not trustworthy imho.
Yes, /e/ includes an addblocker in the browser.
Advanced privacy aims to do much of what you want.
/e/ does not require or expect root.
It is in the specific apps that you use that privacy leaks are likely to occur imho.
I wonder if you are asking these questions hypothetically before installing /e/?
Anything else will repeat what is already said reading from the top of the thread!
I don’t talk about ad-blocker (which only works in browser). And yes, I try to check things ahead. It is not difficult to change the ROM, but to configure it and recover all data is some work - it’s not wrong to think about before.
I am sorry, but your post doesn’t answer my specific question. Or to be more specific - you say it is not possible. The example I mean is a heater system that can be controlled by WLAN. But I don’t want the app sending data out of my home, to vendor or anywhere.
I am not an export and maybe things can be solved anyhow by changing data by adb root. But its very clear and for each understandable to enable or disable a checkbox for each app in AFwall.
It is a pity that these things are not part of an OS. Having this on board userfriendly without need to root would be a strong argument towards /e/. Nevertheless, I appreciate steps done here.
Is it not done because it is technically difficult? Is it to be expected some time?
Hi @starbright nothing at all wrong with thinking ahead; I just had the sense we could not see your real issue.
With the subject of connection to the internet of things, it is more clear.
I would not recommend /e/ over Lineage + MicroG and TrackerControl to firstly learn how “dangerous” this might be! If you have the skills to achieve this with root, and you hoped that Advanced privacy might help, I would suggest you delay the move right now.
I really cannot see how this could be free of hazard using a mobile phone.
Edit, inspired by this nice post, Connecting /e/ to the "internet of things" - #2 by smu44 I would add that I think that the security of your Android mobile phone is going to be in the hands of your home “hub”.
If that is already handed over to an “untrustworthy corporate name”, I would not be happy to connect my mobile to it.
A hub where you already control security (like a Raspberry pi for instance) I would be more happy to experiment, on the basis that the necessary data sharing is being done by a discrete protocol.
Not sure I completely understood you right - maybe my English is to bad.
For now I will stay with my “rooted LOS for microG - AFwall” but will watch the development. I really appreciate the way you started to go. Maybe once it becomes true that Firewall becomes part of OS (not just via VPN).
As I see it now: Privacy as you at /e/ look at it is to much narrowed down to trackers and avoid tracking apps. Just for practical reasons (as in my example) that can’t be avoided all time.
So just to put this differently; I expect that you might be able to control your risk of data leaks, in your communications with your heating system, because this data transfer (when correctly managed by your private hub) will be in very small packets which are expected to be unable to call anything except their own “system control” network.
(This would not apply if you have Google thermostats. )
Also in defense of /e/ the approach of tracker limiting, in my experience is more educational and allows the opportunity for good user control, as compared with software that attempts to mimic a real firewall. (I have no experience of AFwall.) As I am not sufficiently well informed about the today very new Advanced privacy, I make no attempt to tell you how I might score it out of 10 for effectiveness.)