Why are iPhones considered better for privacy/security?

krysor

I think I saw a post by GrapheneOS saying iPhone is by default more secure (and private?) than the stock android (not sure whether they also meant the Google pixel phones). GrapheneOS is in a different league entirely however.

CalmBird

krysor Perhaps you're referring to this?: https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/1861459225672601767#m. They do state that Pixels and iPhones have far more secure hardware and firmware than non-Pixel Android devices. But again, this is a baseless claim.

CalmBird

WestQuester AOSP is indeed missing Storage and Contact Scopes which is a privacy improvement on Apple's front. Thanks for that one.

krysor

CalmBird not sure if baseless...

For example I've never seen Apple nor iOS claiming they support nor implement Memory Tagging Extension.

In the cellebrite thread posted in July 2024 it seemed like only the pixels from series 6 onwards with some 2022 patch were not vulnerable. Even the most recent iPhone however...

WestQuester

To kind of summarize what I was getting at above:
With Apple I have been promised that my data is private and secure. I'm taking that on trust but so far the track record has been really, really good, by design and in practice.

With GrapheneOS I have something that is even more private and secure and I don't have to rely on the company. But I give up a ton of convenience and features that Apple has, unless I start installing some of the Google stuff.

With Google I have a company that has all but sworn to do everything in their power to collect as much data on me as possible. Once I let them onto GrapheneOS, I don't know what's happening. Less than other Android systems for sure, but are there things I don't know about?

So which do you pick? The devil with the good track record, or the devil that you think you might be able to control? Or neither and give up a ton of usability and convenience?

CalmBird

WestQuester off topic, which one you chose and trust is up to you. I suppose that with "Once I let them onto GrapheneOS" you mean Sandboxed Google Play Services, but they are sandboxed for a reason.

c86 is right about trusting only 1 company and having no delay in (security) updates. They also make their own hardware and have a really good track record. Android sideloading is optional though so that doens't really matter. I think the former is the most important part though and think that that is mostly what makes them more secure than alternatives. I was kind of hoping that someone that someone had a list like this but for iPhones, but maybe that wasn't realistic.

fph

WestQuester With GrapheneOS I have something that is even more private and secure and I don't have to rely on the company.

I mean, you still have to rely on the company being trustworthy: they have root on your phone and can push updated with arbitrary code.

c86

CalmBird

In regards to your device support question, the minimum for Apple is the device being supported for updates. Once that ends, obviously you're definitionally insecure. I would say there is an onus on the user to understand chips provide more potential security as they update/evolve. Such as the Silicon Mac chips allowing for more security than their predecessors. Following this, I would say a user that can use iPhone but requires higher security would need to track said updates and make a decision when to upgrade device's earlier than their end of life.

To touch on ADP and and lockdown. The former obviously just moves the encryption key to the user for iCloud storage for several Apple services. The benefit is unreadable data for those services.

The latter provides additional security by removing some code and files from being executed on the device under a single toggle. GOS provides these benefits just with the OS among more (readable on their website). But they also allow individual toggles to restrict code execution (user choice or app specific) as desired. Ie. the Exploit Protection toggles, sensor toggles, Java vs Java JIT in Vanadium

Lilac6044

CalmBird You are comparing two different biometric methods though. I am not arguing that Iphones in general are more secure, simple that their face ID is more secure than androids offering.

CalmBird

I don't know if it's appropriate to ask this in the same discussion, but it might also be interesting to know how the hardware of newer iPhone generations compares to older generations, security wise? BeerIsGood, for example, says that the A14 Bionic chip and above supports memory tagging, the A15 Bionic chip and above supports JITBox and the newest A18 chip supports Secure Indicator Light (SIL). Are there any other improvements other than these?

c86

CalmBird

Perhaps this will provide more data for your queries

https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

CalmBird

CalmBird
Is Apple's new C1 modem (found in the iPhone 16e) any more secure than their older Qualcomm modems? I suppose yes, since they make it themselves, but I can't find anything about this.

CalmBird

c86 thanks for the link. I still don't know the actual data about iOS, but this still is helpful for comparing.

c86

CalmBird

These guys do a lot of security research and development towards Apple and are on my feeds along with GOS devs

https://mysk.blog/

DeletedUser421

CalmBird I’m guessing that they can at least fix flaws faster, because they wont have to wait for Qualcomm to send out security updates. I assume that’s how it works most of the time, but I don’t know for sure.

I imagine that their switch away from Broadcom WiFi will have a larger impact, because all iPhone 17 models and iPads will supposedly switch to Apple WiFi, whereas only 17 Air will get the Apple C1 modem.

spiral

CalmBird

Face ID seems much more secure than fingerprint, in my opinion.

One example: your Pixel secured by fingerprint could be unlocked by fingerprint while you're asleep (or even after you've passed away), whereas Face ID on iPhone is set by default to require the user to look directly at the phone for it to unlock, making it much less likely to be unlocked without your explicit consent.

Of course, this is why GoS gives us the option to secure the fingerprint with a secondary passcode, which as far as I can tell mitigates the above scenarios.

CalmBird

This article linked by madaidan was also quite informative: https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2017/03/05/secure-computing-for-journalists/.

grayway2

Lilac6044 i don't know for you but I have zero trust in Face ID. I tried it and sometimes you unlock the phone when you don't really want it.

Fingerprint without second factor pin is also dangerous.

One of the biggest threat is kids. They are literally grabbing your hand and fingers and try to unlock your phone. No prior warning.

phone-company

If you've ever been in a war, you know face ID would kill you by night

Usul

I use GrapheneOS on a Pixel 9 Pro and iOS (26 beta) on an iPhone 16 Pro. Although iOS is considered better in terms of privacy, there are some use cases that pose problems for me :

It is known that iOS bypasses VPNs (is this also the case with Graphene OS? I don't know).
VPNs like Proton or Mullvad do not have split tunneling on iOS. My banking app does not work when a VPN is active on iOS... and since there is no split tunneling, I have to disable the VPN if i want to connect to my bank account. By doing so, all other applications running in the background are left exposed without a VPN.

userofgos

Usul have you tried using private space without VPN for banking apps? It works great for me.

Usul

userofgos Private space on iOS ? (of course it works on GrapheneOS).