• [deleted]

  • Edited

For security, the Pixel 8 with stock rom. If you care about privacy more, then the eol pixel 5 with graphene.

    • [deleted]

    raccoondad Because author specifically said that the pixel 8 is running Stock.

    [deleted] For security, the Pixel 8 with stock rom. If you care about privacy more, then the eol pixel 5 with graphene.

    The final objective of security is privacy.

      • [deleted]

      bookreader No. They are entirely different concepts.

        [deleted] Privacy can be seen as a subset of confidentiality which can be seen as one of the main goals of security.

          • [deleted]

          • Edited

          lambd Everything can be seen how you want. But security's final objective is not privacy. You can have both ideally, but they are very different.

            [deleted] What I explained is based on the CISSP.
            Privacy is often one of the goals of security but not always, we are aligned on that.

              • [deleted]

              lambd Yes.

              Privacy is the PURPOSE of security, so you feel free to look at this however you like, but you can't separate them. Security without privacy is not security at all. Privacy without security is being delusional.

                Privacy and security have some relation in terms of confidentiality, but it's neither the same, nor a superset, nor a subset.

                See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_security :

                While similar to "privacy," the two words are not interchangeable. Rather, confidentiality is a component of privacy that implements to protect our data from unauthorized viewers.

                • Edited

                Yes, security and privacy are two different things, but in practice, you can combine the two for better results. In both cases, one without the other, you increase the attack surface, without security, your privacy cannot be trustworthy, without privacy, your security is overrated.

                This thread has devolved in nothing more than semantic argumentation. I think OP has received enough of a reply, and we don't need to keep this thread up for people to debate for the next week.