3 ms·
> Let's say, if I was a bank, I can understand why I would want to block such devices. So as a bank, you would be forcing your customers into the duopoly of th
by fsflover 4mo ago
> Let's say, if I was a bank, I can understand why I would want to block such devices.
So as a bank, you would be forcing your customers into the duopoly of the American megacorps. Thankfully, there are banks that do not do this.
- microtonal 4mo agoNice strawmanning! Obviously I want banks to support alternatives, but I can understand if they only want to support secure OSes. Some banks support GrapheneOS remote attestation besides Google Play Integrity at the strong level.
- fsflover 4mo agoBy your reasoning, 99.9% of people use awfully insecure OSes on desktop and servers. And yet, the world hasn't collapsed. My bank account is not hacked regularly, too (actually, not at all).
- skorp01 4mo agoThis is a personal anecdote and you are making up an absurd conclusion. No one said things would collapse. Security can be evaluated objectively, and the better the security, leads to fewer instances of exploitation. I'm certain the actual data around InfoSec would support that idea.
- fsflover 4mo agoMy point was about the word "awful", or, as many GrapheneOS supporters say here, "atrocious" security. This is definitely an overstatement. Otherwise, you're not wrong.