If you had any idea about how it works, you would not compare them. If you had any idea about how hard Apple makes security research, especially without a Mac, you would not compare them.
But you don’t know what it’s about. Being a consumer does not make you an expert.
Second off, I am fully aware of how difficult apple makes testing their product, given that they’re proprietary software and not using something easily reversed or cracked (encryption, not license keys of course) which is part of their defense for using a walled garden for security (security by obscurity isnt security though, and it’s only a matter of time before the public builds up enough of a knowledge base to not need docs from the manufacturer.
Private companies exist (plenty of em too) who’s sole purpose is to find exploits for “cops and police” to access perpetrators data.
I work in cybersec, I’m fully aware but thanks for making a random assumption about me, someone you don’t know, kinda hypocritical don’t you think?
Idk why I feel the need but here we are - I’m tired of people in this thread trying to switch gears and move goal posts. We’re talking about major consumer use of OS which means mainstream OS’s - apple has historically lower vuln rates. Partly due to obscurity, which will evaporate more as time goes on unless apple continues to change things behind the scenes which could get costly.
Google has their perverbial ass hanging out so that people can analyze it more easily for vulns (you’ll notice I said more easily, because people can and do test iOS for vulns all the fucking time) and will constantly have shit to patch. Which means more vulns are known more consistently whereas apple has phases where people are still figuring shit out. Which gives apple time to patch fairly quickly id say if you’d like to look at those specific metrics.
I’m not interested in words, I want you to point out numbers and metrics if you have them. Fact is that apple is, on average, more secure than a typical end-user android OS.
If you had any idea about how it works, you would not compare them. If you had any idea about how hard Apple makes security research, especially without a Mac, you would not compare them.
But you don’t know what it’s about. Being a consumer does not make you an expert.
When have I claimed to be an expert?
Second off, I am fully aware of how difficult apple makes testing their product, given that they’re proprietary software and not using something easily reversed or cracked (encryption, not license keys of course) which is part of their defense for using a walled garden for security (security by obscurity isnt security though, and it’s only a matter of time before the public builds up enough of a knowledge base to not need docs from the manufacturer.
Private companies exist (plenty of em too) who’s sole purpose is to find exploits for “cops and police” to access perpetrators data.
I work in cybersec, I’m fully aware but thanks for making a random assumption about me, someone you don’t know, kinda hypocritical don’t you think?
Idk why I feel the need but here we are - I’m tired of people in this thread trying to switch gears and move goal posts. We’re talking about major consumer use of OS which means mainstream OS’s - apple has historically lower vuln rates. Partly due to obscurity, which will evaporate more as time goes on unless apple continues to change things behind the scenes which could get costly.
Google has their perverbial ass hanging out so that people can analyze it more easily for vulns (you’ll notice I said more easily, because people can and do test iOS for vulns all the fucking time) and will constantly have shit to patch. Which means more vulns are known more consistently whereas apple has phases where people are still figuring shit out. Which gives apple time to patch fairly quickly id say if you’d like to look at those specific metrics.
I’m not interested in words, I want you to point out numbers and metrics if you have them. Fact is that apple is, on average, more secure than a typical end-user android OS.