Are you compromised /g/?

>>56976038

this is a non-problem as no one would seriously put sensitive information on a mobile eevice

>>56976038
>I want security to be designed in
American companies are not allowed to design in security.

He is right you know. In principle android should be better but really only the android source is open source not the development process. Its essentially the same thing as iOS.

>>56976126
Outright owning a phone isn't sensible.

How do you go from building custom roms from source to using justwerks untampered iOS in 2 sentences? If you want your phones to just work, you should not have fooled around with custom roms to begin with.
If you make a point about building from source, then ANY vendor firmware/OS is out of the question.

This post makes no sense

File: rght_6719_16_hd.jpg (594KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

594KB, 1500x1500px

>T E M P L E O S

The only thing google cares is datamining its users. Not like poorfags have any sensitive data worth protecting anyway.

Cyanogenmod does provide sha1 checksums.
And when you flash it, it automatically checks it, and aborts if they don't match.

That said, it is hard to tell if the software contains malicious features.
But since nobody works on making phone software great again, we don't have any alternatives.

>>56977316
unlike android device manufacturers, apple provides updates even for 5-year old phones. unmodified android devices eventually become insecure since they don't receive security updates after a year or so.

>>56977316
This, I wasn't totally disagreeing with him until he jumped off the crazy train. Its like saying "there could be infections in linux through some areas of exploit, so fuck it, I'm running windows xp!"

Nope

>>56977381
Apples security model is not great with many well publicized security flaws that existed for years with no attention. Either way, there are more secure phones then iOS and Android if security is a concern.

>>56976038
>I'll just trust a company, instead of something I can actually check myself

also
>science project
>le hobbyist argument

>>56976038
I've got an iphone 6s+, I'm nsa proof™

*sigh*
Every device is compromised.

>says they don't publish checksums for their downloads
>every official CM download has a checksum right fucking there under the download links
>INTO THE TRASH IT GOES

>>56976038
That is stupid as fuck logic. Also
> these guys don't even publish md5 checksums
And that would increase security how? If people are going to change the file, they'll change the checksum too

>>56976126
90% of people already do put out sensitive information whenever they use Google services. Or Amazon services or any other web services.

If the phone is connected to the internet, there is a 99.999% chance this is already happening.

>for years would point out in every single ROM thread that cyanogenmod had no security
>get completely ignored

/g/ cries about security unless their shiny new toys get in the way

>>56976038
>its impossible to edit sourcecode to be malicious
Is this guy retarded or just bad at puting stuff into words?