> But the heterogeneity of systems is what provides practical security and systems like iOS are the opposite of that.
This may be the first time someone tried to argue the fragmented nature of Android makes it more secure.
It is true that iOS, being as uniform as it is, can present a plum target. The difference is that this also means that with one fell swoop Apple can mitigate vulnerabilities for a billion devices--and they do.
One of the primary reasons to buy an iPhone is Apple's commitment to update support for many, many years. All phones will have vulnerabilities. That is inevitable. The most important part is manufacturer commitment to promptly fixing them when they're found.
> States probably have dragnet surveillance and devices like iPhones make this far easier than it should be.
The cost of these exploits makes it unlikely that it's truly dragnet. You don't want to risk burning your expensive exploit by going after literally everything. The wider you cast the net, the more likely you are to be found, your exploit patched, your infrastructure compromised. Again, platform security is not about being impenetrable--it's about imposing costs high enough to limit the number of players and the corresponding damage.
Android isn't the alternative draft to iOS, it is similar in significant properties. Alternatives would be relatively open PC systems for example. That diversity grows with more uncommon operating systems, which are currently endangered by MS secure boot btw, which would put PC in the same boat as mobile systems.
This isn't about favorites, I own Apple devices myself, although only MacOS and I don't expose by ID to Apple. Doing so is a major risk for the case your OS gets compromised.
As with Windows PCs in the past, you become a target with popularity.
With dragnet surveillance I mean that state actors scoop up every source they can get their hand on. It doesn't need justification because they already moved the goalpost to wanting to access encrypted information. Als the other sources aren't even questioned anymore.
This may be the first time someone tried to argue the fragmented nature of Android makes it more secure.
It is true that iOS, being as uniform as it is, can present a plum target. The difference is that this also means that with one fell swoop Apple can mitigate vulnerabilities for a billion devices--and they do.
One of the primary reasons to buy an iPhone is Apple's commitment to update support for many, many years. All phones will have vulnerabilities. That is inevitable. The most important part is manufacturer commitment to promptly fixing them when they're found.
> States probably have dragnet surveillance and devices like iPhones make this far easier than it should be.
The cost of these exploits makes it unlikely that it's truly dragnet. You don't want to risk burning your expensive exploit by going after literally everything. The wider you cast the net, the more likely you are to be found, your exploit patched, your infrastructure compromised. Again, platform security is not about being impenetrable--it's about imposing costs high enough to limit the number of players and the corresponding damage.