Gabb vs Pinwheel vs Bark vs PuroPhone: The Honest Comparison

When we started building PuroPhone, we did something most companies don't: we actually researched the competition. Not their marketing — their actual security vulnerabilities.

What we found was disturbing. Every claim below is sourced. Click the links. Verify it yourself.

Gabb Phone: The Hackability Problem

Gabb markets itself as "the phone parents want and kids love." But head over to XDA Forums, and you'll find active discussions on how to hack Gabb phones.

One user wrote: "I'm currently using a gabb phone to type this comment. I found a way to get on the internet." Another: "I hacked my Gabb Z2 to run full android 10. It's pretty easy with a windows computer. It takes around 10 minutes."

Then there's the spam call problem. According to Hiya's official blog, Gabb's customer service was receiving "up to 400 spam-call-related complaints a week." That's not a typo — 400 complaints weekly about spam calls reaching children.

Gabb's own blog even admits that factory reset removes parental controls: "Initiating a factory reset on their device to restore factory settings, which removes all settings (including parental controls)."

Pinwheel: The Backdoor Admission

Pinwheel's approach is different — they curate a list of "safe" apps. But read their own documentation carefully.

From Pinwheel's FAQ: "We've made sure to remove any access to web browsers on the phone. However, some apps require their built-in web browsers to work."

Wait — apps have built-in browsers? That's a backdoor to the entire internet.

Their apps page even warns about this: "We also detail potential loopholes that allow access to the open Internet or social media." They know it's a problem. They document it. And they ship it anyway.

Pinwheel also has a "Play Store mode" that can be enabled, giving access to Google Play. And their own "App Pre-configuration guide" shows how to bypass security with a disclaimer: "This process will bypass Pinwheel's security system."

Bark Phone: Full Play Store Access

Bark takes a monitoring approach rather than blocking. From their support documentation: "Toggle Allow App Store to On" — meaning kids can see and request access to the full Google Play Store.

Pinwheel's own comparison page notes: "On a Bark Phone, kids see all of the apps available in the Google Play Store (including social media apps), but they need parental approval to download them."

The problem? Kids see everything. They know what's available. And approval processes can be socially engineered ("everyone else has it") or bypassed when parents are distracted.

Plus, Bark locks you into their carrier. You can't bring your own SIM.

The Factory Reset Problem (All of Them)

Here's the biggest issue that affects Gabb, Pinwheel, and Bark equally: factory reset removes parental controls on all of them.

Gabb admits it on their blog. BrightCanary's analysis confirms: "Kids can also remove Bark by doing a factory reset on their phone."

This is the fundamental flaw of software-based restrictions. No matter how good the parental control app is, if a factory reset wipes it clean, your child can start fresh with an unrestricted device.

How PuroPhone is Different

PuroPhone uses built-in protection — Android enterprise security that's enrolled at the system level before first boot.

Factory reset protection: If someone factory resets a PuroPhone, it becomes unusable until re-enrolled. The device is "bricked" from the user's perspective.

No developer mode: The 7-tap trick to enable developer options is removed entirely. No ADB. No USB debugging. No backdoors.

No app backdoors: Apps don't have "built-in browsers" because only whitelisted apps run on the device.

No Play Store: Kids don't see a catalog of apps they can request. Only what you approve exists on the phone.

No carrier lock-in: Bring your own SIM. Use your existing family plan.

The Bottom Line

We're not asking you to take our word for it. Every claim in this article links to primary sources — the companies' own documentation, XDA Forums posts, third-party reviews.

The question is simple: do you want a phone that looks safe on the marketing page, or one that's actually safe?