• Mobile platforms like android and iOS (more specifically GrapheneOS), are leagues ahead of desktop operating systems in terms of security because of these strict policies. and besides, you are treating untrusted code as untrusted code. I don’t see the flaw in that logic.

        sure, they could use more apis for accessing system directories and stuff like that securely, but that’s not really in scope. this is for end users. not field deployment on an sbc for something.

        • Odd choice to use GrapheneOS if you don’t care about security

          Not really. People’s threat models differ, some just want to escape Google’s spyware without also requiring your device be a portable iron mountain. Some may also just want the additional control GrapheneOS provides for restricting permissions of apps, or their unique play store handling etc.

          GrapheneOS has a ton of positives besides its security IMO.

          For me it’s just a little saddening that their secure focus conflicts with extending the life of mobile devices. Although really that’s something that probably won’t change unless we get a truly open source mobile platform, with firmware development out in the open.

      • that’s fair I suppose, I wasn’t saying not to use it, just that it is worth noting. these strict security policies are what makes mobile platforms much more secure than desktop platforms. I typically use my phone for security sensitive tasks because of this, so I tend to care a lot more about this stuff. if you have any banking info or password managers stored on the device, be careful.

        I’ll admit, it is pretty unlikely anything to happen, though. always just better knowing.