> So... phones where a corporation has root are more secure that phones where the owner has root, you say?
You're putting words in my mouth that I explicitly rejected when I said "that does not include GrapheneOS".
Just to prevent the follow up "well actually GrapheneOS is an organization": they don't have any kind of root access to GrapheneOS phones. The only thing they can do is push system updates, which you can (1) reject and (2) verify if they are the same updates being pushed to all users, to avoid targeted attacks.
> Secure for whom? For the user? Seems obviously wrong. It's more secure for someone else to have power over you?
Yes, secure for the user. Sure, power users that very carefully review any system mods they install with root powers would have the same level of security as with a non-rooted phone.
But most people won't read the source code of root apps/extensions they install.
It's easier to tempt mobile phone users to install "cosmetic improvement/customization whatevers" that happen to require elevated privileges, than desktop Linux users.
It's well known that many Android apps bundle near-malware that slurps all data possible, and will ask for root privileges if that is detected.
The fact is that mobile phones tend to contain more sensitive data than desktop computers (and are thus significantly more secure by default than Linux/Windows computers). Contacts, private messages, photos, etc. It's a more valuable target, so more effort is put in developing malware for phones.
