Update I have come to a decision. Thank you to all who contributed suggestions. Please feel free to keep the discussion going to help others.

  • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    You do realize that this is bullshit, right?

    Its typical fearmongering (in fact the same article too) that I have been sent a ton of times by low tech users that fanboy for graphene.

    There is no such thing as „physical port attacks“. It also works very different on phones then on computers. You can for example use i2c on an iphone to crack it open which somewhat straightforward to do but still has zero implications for daily use. The linux apps are desktop apps and as such dont have any chance to get through all of the open source community‘s eyes undetected.

    Its a completely backwards take that assumes using bad faith software written in the dark by proprietary vendors which just isnt real.

    • Lemongrab@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I only mentioned physical port attacks in a much larger list of things Linux MUST improve on. I am not a grapheneOS shill, nor did any of the supporting articles I sent relate to GOS, so I don’t really understand your response. Read through the links I posted and learn more about the operating system you use. I am NOT saying linux is dogshit, I very much love linux. Why not just educate yourself on this topic instead of assuming things from a place of ignorance or constructing a strawman. I spend multiple hours per day reading and putting into practice Linux hardening techniques, I am not just working with a surface level understanding of Linux security.

      Even open source is vulnerable. Two questions: do you examine all the commits on every app you use? Do you compile every update to the apps you use from source? Sandboxing is important because if an application is compromised it cant lead to privilege escalation or userspace spyware.

      • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I‘m not that bad at rhetoric either but I avoid it when I can.

        Your argument is empty. Privilege escalation attacks are plain old cves that get found, evaluated and fixed. You need access to the phone, mostly in an unlocked state to get anything to work like that, same as with a computer.

        I know a couple of pen testers and I would definitely know if there were large differences between operating systems securitywise.

        • Lemongrab@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          CVEs are often go mislabeled as normal bugs and dont get the attention needed. It also may take a bit for such vulnerabilities to make it downstream.

          A simple privilege escalation attack on basically every system goes as follows: add a function into the bashrc file of a users that runs a script, have the script intercept the users sudo credentials and pass the command on normally as if it was just the regular sudo command. Now you have root. Nothing here requires priveleges beforehand. Anything, be it a script, appimage, malicious binary, etc can follow those steps and gain root access by compromising the wheel user. Even without compromising a user, it could simply add a Systemd user service that keylogs (keylogging is still possible on Wayland without security hardening)

          A prerequisite of course is getting that file onto the user’s computer. There are a plethora of ways. Simplest way is to learn what applications the user installs, find the weakest link, and compromise them.

          There are of course much more sophisticated and better ways, some of which are detailed in the supporting links I sent. Every Security expert and researcher I have talked to can recognize that Linux has an outdated security model. The best links to read would be the hardening guide and “linux isnt secure”.

          • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I did quite some reading in my time, as I mentioned. The methods you are describing are riddled with ifs and buts. The reality is that even online systems arent hacked if they dont have obvious flaws like passwords in root ssh. on the other hand tools like john the ripper can break each and every common encryption given the right circumstances. Its no difference. Its all just marketing.

            • Lemongrab@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Neither of the methods I mentioned are hard. They have no 'if’s or 'but’s, only the same prerequisite as any bit of malware, get run. Do you know how to protect against either of the attacks I mentioned? You can poke some holes in them if you like.

              The attacks I mentioned (and even more in the articles and wiki’s for the “Security focused linux distros” I shared) are often not possible on Windows or OSX because of the hardening present on basically every other modern OS. Linux just makes it easy. I don’t really understand what you mean by “I did a lot of reading in my time”, Security research is continuous and you can never get to a point where you understand everything or anything. I learn new things everyday, I suggest you expand your horizons and learn more about the topic you have such confidence in. Nothing that I shared is a long read, there are no tricks and I am not trying to tell you to stop using Linux mobile. Just that it isn’t “secure”, or more specifically it isnt as secure (out of the box or even with moderate hardening) as OSX/Windows/BSD/Android. Default Linux IS more private than any closed source systems, but when compared to other open source OSes like DivestOS (deblobbed hardened AOSP), Kicksecure (Debian Linux), Secureblue (Fedora Atomic), or hardened BSD, it is missing out on a lot of necessary hardening policies/changes.