6 ms·
> I don't understand why they can't compare android vs iOS. Matthew Green et al already did: https://securephones.io https://securephones.io > If you're a jou
by ignoramous 5y ago
> I don't understand why they can't compare android vs iOS.
Matthew Green et al already did: https://securephones.io https://securephones.io
> If you're a journalist or dissident then you or your benefactors should be able to purchase a mobile endpoint security monitoring service that will actively monitor for exploitation and prevent known threats based on good intel.
I am actively building one such open source app (for Android). We are half-way there. One my friends was editor-in-chief at a big media company and his frustrations made it clear to me that they were sitting ducks. Though, securing folks in high risk profession is not easy, at all. But one ought to start somewhere. And it is clear, the eventual solution needs to be external to the phones themselves.
- faeyanpiraat 5y agoWhy not make a phone which is secure by default?
- ignoramous 5y agoEasier said than done because of the attack surface, but I do think the industry will respond given Androids are the most widely-deployed, always-connected, computers in use out there. I don't think just securing the hardware is enough (though, even that isn't fully done), the software itself remains hard to tame. Add to the fact that folks (including attackers) can "install" arbitrary things on their Androids, the problem gets only worse. Then, there's the social and legislative aspects as well. For example, no one can raid your home without a search warrant, that's illegal. Similar thing needs to exist in the digital space. This at least thwarts illegal spyware, if not the law enforcement themselves from snooping about people's digital lives.
- faeyanpiraat 5y agoOkay so the real issue here is that people want convenience, which requires "N" number of features, which results in an attack surface of "too large to make it secure".