>Citing Google's blog post for Android security is not very convincing. So instead of believing metrics gathered from Google's SafetyNet telemetry from 1.4 bil

>Citing Google's blog post for Android security is not very convincing. So instead of believing metrics gathered from Google's SafetyNet telemetry from 1.4 billion devices you would rather believe scaremongering blog posts that have no concrete data to back up their claims? >If Android is so secure, why are we seeing (often more frequently than) weekly headlines on Android security woes, often containing something like "millions of devices affected" (and often enough, no fix in sight)? Do you really think it's that easy to exploit an Android phone? Once you have an exploit you must then chain it with other exploits to get around all of the Android security mitigation's in place. And then there's the fact that every OEM creates their own version of Android so not every exploit will work on every device or OS version - you can thank device and OS fragmentation for that one. So this is why bugs like Stagefright never panned out to be the security armageddon that these click bait blog sites all wanted you to believe. Just because an exploit is discovered doesn't really mean it's being exploited in the wild.