The leak corroborates the feature activates automatically in crowded spaces.
It also suggests users will have the option to choose which aspects to restrict and which ones to allow.
The Galaxy S26 Ultra’s design may lack any radical changes, but the display is set to feature a significant upgrade that would make privacy-focused screen protectors obsolete. For the Ultra next year, Samsung is developing a built-in solution to dim the display or hide its contents in specific scenarios, which could represent a significant step forward from the existing anti-glare solution.
Last month, we learned about an upcoming Samsung feature, currently referred to as Private Display, which could block peeks from unwanted onlookers, especially at specific angles. What’s truly marvelous is that Privacy Display is integrated electronically, which means it can be toggled on or off, or its intensity set to different levels. More excitingly, Privacy Display may be triggered automatically in certain events, and we’re now seeing potential UI for this implementation.
Based on a purported One UI 8.5 leak by @achultra on X, the Galaxy S26 Ultra will enable an option for Privacy Display to activate automatically in crowded spots or public places. According to the shared screenshot, Privacy Display can be set to turn on automatically in spaces such as elevators or public transportation.
Don’t want to miss the best from Android Authority?
Additionally, Galaxy S26 Ultra users might also be able to choose what content is visible when Privacy Display is toggled on. Currently, there are options to view the screen lock options, including PIN, pattern, or password. You would also have the option to hide specific images with privacy protection enabled. Likewise, the feature extends to notifications and picture-in-picture.
We might see changes to the interface leading up to the actual launch. With a substantial number of references in One UI 8.5‘s code, we don’t suspect Samsung will drop it — unless there are any quality control issues. We also hope to learn more about its other capabilities as we approach the next Galaxy Unpacked event.
Thank you for being part of our community. Read our Comment Policy before posting.
It’s not the best of times for smartphone users who care about their privacy. In recent years, awareness of the massive behind the scenes tracking by apps and operating systems has increased, thanks also to documentaries such as The Social Dilemma and scandals such as the Cambridge Analytica affair.
The most privacy-conscious users have responded by installing privacy-focused Android forks such as GrapheneOS, CalyxOS and LineageOS on their mobile devices, or by buying de-Googled smartphones such as those provided by the European manufacturer Murena.
Yet despite their technical superiority and growing user base, the future of these more secure and less data-hungry alternatives is under threat from multiple fronts.
The EU’s Age Verification Debate
The most concerning menace, perhaps, stems from a well-intentioned effort by the European Commission to introduce, as part of the forthcoming European Digital Identity Wallet (EUID), an age verification tool, ostensibly to protect minors from harmful content exposure.
The system is still under development, and there is no definitive solution yet, but the initial architecture proposed for the tool raised a big red flag. It relied heavily on Google’s Play Integrity API, which requires devices to be Google-certified and apps to be downloaded from the Play Store.
This effectively excludes de-Googled Android forks despite their robust security architectures, meaning that their users, if this solution ended up being implemented, would not be able to access all platforms that require an age-verification check.
After the issue was raised and discussed on GitHub and other online forums, the developers of the tool removed explicit references to Google’s API from its documentation; instead, the project now vaguely references OWASP MASVS compliance (Mobile Application Security Verification Standard), leaving the choice of which verification system to adopt open.
However, without an explicit provision forbidding the adoption of proprietary verification systems, this change risks being largely cosmetic; due to ease of use and convenience, as well as Google’s dominant market position, lawmakers will likely opt for the more well-known and widespread proprietary mechanism.
Users of GrapheneOS in Italy, and Revolut clients already had a taste of what that would look like. In Italy, the government has launched the IO app, which allows citizens to interact digitally with the public administration by paying fines and taxes, accessing documents, downloading certificates and much more. Unfortunately, or by design, the app uses the Google Play Integrity API, effectively banning those using custom Android ROMs from accessing the services on mobile. Same goes for Revolut.
These kinds of choices raise questions about digital sovereignty and technological choice in Europe. Does it make sense to brag about European digital sovereignty efforts when, to access public services, citizens are forced to rely on the proprietary infrastructure created by an American company?
Pixel Problems
For privacy-focused developers the problems do not end here, as they face additional pressure from Google’s evolving approach to Android development. The company has begun withholding critical technical resources that custom ROM developers have historically relied upon and that were part of the reason why Pixel devices were the go-to hardware for these alternative platforms (in fact, GrapheneOS can only be installed on the latest Pixel models).
Specifically, Google has stopped publishing device trees and kernel histories for the Pixels.
Device trees are detailed configuration files that enable alternative operating systems to function properly on Google’s hardware. These files describe how software should interact with specific device components, from cameras to security chips.
Without device trees, GrapheneOS developers must reverse-engineer configurations from previous Android versions, working with incomplete information and precompiled binaries. This significantly complicates development and slows the release of updates that keep the system secure.
Google also stopped publishing complete kernel modification histories and new binary drivers, further hampering independent development efforts.
With Pixel devices becoming less open, and installing other operating systems on them more difficult, it’s unsurprising to learn that GrapheneOS developers are in talks with some OEM manufacturers to make their own devices.
The Criminalization Of Privacy
Another insidious challenge facing users of privacy-focused Android forks, is their mischaracterization as a tool for criminals. Law enforcement agencies, including Catalonia’s police, have singled out Google Pixel devices running GrapheneOS as preferred tools for organized crime due to their strong encryption and anti-forensic features.
While it’s true that criminals exploit privacy tools, lumping legitimate users—activists, whistleblowers, and privacy-conscious individuals—into the same category is dangerously reductive. GrapheneOS developers have repeatedly emphasized that their mission is to resist mass surveillance, not facilitate illegal activity. Yet the narrative persists, fueling calls for backdoors and further restrictions.
All of the above should worry mobile users who value their privacy and are wary of constant tracking. Custom, privacy-focused Android ROMs, represents a rare bastion of security and user autonomy in an ecosystem increasingly dominated by corporate and government control. But between EU regulatory overreach, Google’s closed-door policies, and law enforcement’s suspicion of privacy tech, their survival is far from guaranteed.
