Hidden Chromium browser discovery: Is Light Phone truly minimalist or just Android with restrictions?

[ronan]

I recently saw a discussion on the Light Phone Discord where a user accidentally discovered they could access a full Chromium browser on their LP3. The bug happened when they placed their phone on a Cash App NFC card, which triggered the browser to open to the Cash App website. A Light Phone team member later confirmed this is Chromium 133.0.6888.0 included in the AOSP base.

This discovery has me genuinely questioning what I've purchased. I initially believed Light Phone was built on a heavily stripped-down Android, something closer to a barebones Linux system with just the essential drivers and a minimalist interface.

Finding a complete, modern web browser inside makes me realize this might just be standard Android with a restricted launcher - not the fundamentally different device I imagined. This isn't a rant or complaint, but a philosophical question: if all the typical Android components remain under the hood, does this truly fulfill the minimalist promise?

I expected something built from the ground up with minimalism in its DNA, not just minimalism as a layer on top of a standard smartphone OS. I'm curious how others feel about this distinction and whether it matters to your experience with the device.

[spacecactus]

First, let me say thanks for creating this forum - I really don't care for Reddit and I'm excited to have an alternative.

"I expected something built from the ground up with minimalism in its DNA, not just minimalism as a layer on top of a standard smartphone OS"
Personally I didn't - I figured it would be largely stock AOSP. What concerns me about this news is the possibility for security issues. Granted, most users are not going to be doing any sensitive/personal work on the hidden Chromium browser. However, I searched for that build of Chromium and it was released in December 2024. I think it's safe to assume that Light will be focused on making their launcher/lightOS app more full featured and bug-free, rather than focused on updating the underlying AOSP. If there are "holes" that allow apps hidden from the user to be opened, I see a low but non-zero probability of viruses and exploits somewhere down the line. While you might think that doesn't matter on a phone that you just call and text with, presumably most users will be connecting the phone to their computer via USB to transfer photos (and maybe music down the line), not to mention the possibility of being infected with a botnet or something that will consume your power/battery in the background. The risk of this will increase if Light's version of AOSP is allowed to get further out of date.

I'm not a software developer, just slightly more savvy than the average bear, but you don't need to be targeted by state-level agencies to be concerned about this. It's a risky cyber world out there. It seems like the easiest solution would be further locking down the user's account/removing software autonomy depending on how you look at it. Prevent any non-authorized apps from running unless you were logged in with special/root access permissions. As someone who tries to support free and open source products I don't care for this approach, but in a phone that is deliberately restricted and marketed as such it doesn't bother me greatly.

Also on a funny (to me) note, I could see the "are color photos INTENTIONAL?!?!?!?!?!?!" crowd succumbing to their scrolling addiction by carrying around a NFC card to access to web browser while crying that they don't want to do it. Hopefully this is not a widespread issue, it seems like there's a lot of riled up users from the tarriff delays and major bugs/unexpected Android warts are not going to do Light any favors.

[ronan]

I completely understand your security concerns with the hidden Chromium browser. You raise some excellent points about potential vulnerabilities if the underlying AOSP doesn't receive regular security updates while Light focuses on their launcher/LightOS.

You're right that even on a minimal phone, security matters. The possibility of malware that could drain battery or potentially spread to connected devices is something worth considering. I hadn't thought about the USB connection as a potential vector for security issues, but that's a valid concern.
Your suggestion about further locking down access seems reasonable. If they're going to have a restricted phone by design, ensuring that unauthorized apps can't run without special permissions makes sense.

I also appreciate your perspective on AOSP expectations. I think my reaction stems from hoping that "minimalist" meant minimalist at all levels - not just the UI but the underlying system as well. For me, it's about philosophical consistency and the elegance of having only what's truly needed.
That funny note about the "color photos" crowd is spot on! I can totally imagine someone reluctantly carrying around an NFC card to "accidentally" access the web while complaining about wanting more digital minimalism.

This discovery has definitely made me think about what I'm really looking for in a minimalist device. While I still love the concept of the Light Phone, I'm now questioning whether its implementation aligns with my personal definition of minimalism.

[real life enjoyer]

My two cents would be to email light directly. You'll likely get a response that would give you more clarity, either for good or bad. I personally think that in the current world of dumbphones there isn't a better choice than Light. There are definitely more secure phones than LPII & LPIII but they all come with the distractions that don't justify having the security for me.

[Pib]

How would you feel if Light came forward and announced they would remove the browser?

[ronan]

How would you feel if Light came forward and announced they would remove the browser?

If Light announced they would remove the browser completely, I'd have mixed feelings. On one hand, it would show they're listening to user concerns and committed to their minimalist philosophy, which I'd appreciate.

On the other hand, it would feel a bit like addressing the symptom rather than the cause. My core question isn't just about the browser itself, but about the fundamental approach to creating a minimalist device. Is Light Phone built with minimalism as its foundation, or is it just Android with restrictions?
That said, removing the browser would at least address some of the security concerns raised here, and would be a step toward greater philosophical consistency with their marketed vision. It would show they're willing to make difficult choices in service of true minimalism.

What I'd really like to see is more transparency about their design decisions and philosophy. I'd appreciate Light communicating clearly about where they've made conscious choices to strip down the system versus where they've simply restricted access to standard Android features. This would help users like me better understand what we're investing in and whether it aligns with our personal definition of digital minimalism.

[Chicken]

When I was first introduced to the LightPhone2 I thought it was some kind of custom android ROM, like they have created these minimal apps and removed all the other stuff.
And reading more I learned that it's basically a Launcher with Widgets in it.

On XDA there's thousands of Launchers, a lot have crapped removed and a minimum of apps but they all still have the default android interface/settings.

I always wondered why nobody has tried to create a minimal rom that removes all the unnecessary stuff and skin the basic apps so they have the same look and feel.
Something worth to explore

[ronan]

And debug mode + adb sideloading now works

https://x.com/ericmigi/status/1910847309434192126

[Chicken]

I would say, this is the perfect opportunity for you to see how to make a custom rom

[ShinRyusei]

And debug mode + adb sideloading now works

https://x.com/ericmigi/status/1910847309434192126

This was something you could do with the LP2, except it was so weak that the android layer was barely functional. The chromium browser is pretty crazy, but yeah the Light Phone has always been like that. The LP3's higher spec parts just make it more obvious/apparent.

Even if they built a super minimal custom ROM, it wouldn't stop people from rooting it and doing all this stuff, so all of that changes nothing for me. It's usually way too much of a hassle to switch back and forth for it to tempt me.