I also slightly editorialized the title, since it is extremely non-descriptive of article contents.
I also slightly editorialized the title, since it is extremely non-descriptive of article contents.
What % of Android devices have their bootloader unlocked or root enabled? Or have the ability to enable signature spoofing for MicroG? I doubt that malware targeting such weaknesses would be economically profitable to develop, considering also that the typical hardcore user is less likely to just install random Play Store or unverified APKs .
This seems a list of security weaknesses against _targeted_ attacks - the inclusion of "evil maid" attacks is exemplary. If somebody gains physical access to my phone, by far the greatest risk to me is that they will steal it and immediately wipe it, not that they will install bootloader malware and put it back.
So yeah, if you're e.g. a professional user and might be the target of industrial espionage, follow the author's advice to the T (going with GrapheneOS or not depends on whether your company trusts Google with your business data). Graphene > Google > Lineage > Linux. If you just don't want to have your personal data tracked by Google and want better control over the apps you install, Graphene > Lineage > Linux > Google.
Which is the most common security risk for common people let's be realistic. Yeah they are we could say ""protected"" by the trusted boot but in reality the google & manufacturer blobs sending their data somewhere are their main security threat, much more than any other kind of attacks.
If any significant number of people had switched, we’d have seen announcements by Purism and Pine.