> Apple has full-disk encryption backed by the secure enclave so its not by-passable.
Any claims about security of apple hardware or software are meaningless. If you actually need a secure device, apple is not an option.
Any claims about security of apple hardware or software are meaningless. If you actually need a secure device, apple is not an option.
I don't think this is precise, but the constraints seem a bit vague to me. What do you consider to be in the list of secure devices?
The fact that Apple refuses to let users bring their own keys, choose their disc encryption, and verify that they are secure makes their platforms no more "safe" than Bitlocker, in a relative sense.
Early, you mention people defending Apple security in a relative sense.
Later, you mentioned Apple refusing user actions to verify security makes them no more safe in a relative sense.
Are you just talking about Apple employing security by obscurity?
I just want to understand your point better, or confirm my take is reasonable.
And for anyone reading, for the record I suppose, I do not consider much of anything secure right now. And yes, there are degrees. Fair enough.
I take steps in my own life to manage risk and keep that which needs to be really secure and or private off electronics or at the least off networks.