ACTUALLY! Android is more private than the iPhone!

Summary

Este guion expone cómo la tecnología, específicamente el iPhone, jugó un papel crucial en las protestas de Hong Kong, permitiendo comunicaciones encriptadas y organización. Sin embargo, la sumisión de Apple a las demandas del gobierno chino limitó el acceso a aplicaciones esenciales, convirtiendo los dispositivos en herramientas de vigilancia. Se destaca la flexibilidad de Android como una alternativa más privada, capaz de operar sin las restricciones impuestas por los ecosistemas cerrados de Apple. Este análisis subraya la importancia del control sobre la tecnología para la privacidad y cómo las elecciones de plataformas pueden impactar en la libertad de los usuarios.

Takeaways

• 📱 La tecnología en las protestas modernas es una herramienta táctica clave para los ciudadanos, pero también puede ser utilizada para suprimir disturbios con precisión.
• 🔒 Los usuarios de iPhone en Hong Kong perdieron el control sobre sus dispositivos cuando Apple comenzó a cumplir con las solicitudes del gobierno chino para censurar aplicaciones.
• 🚨 La entrega de control de los datos de iCloud de los usuarios chinos a Beijing transformó al iPhone en una herramienta de vigilancia.
• 🛡️ Android se presenta como una mejor opción para la privacidad, permitiendo a los usuarios instalar y ejecutar aplicaciones eliminadas de la Play Store.
• 🗽 Android es un sistema operativo de código abierto bajo la Licencia Apache versión 2.0, ofreciendo mayor control sobre la privacidad sin depender de los servicios de Google.
• 🍎 Apple controla estrictamente la instalación de aplicaciones a través de la App Store, recopilando grandes cantidades de datos, incluso si los usuarios optan por no compartir analíticas.
• 🔐 La seguridad de los dispositivos es importante, pero la privacidad también implica control sobre la recopilación y vinculación de datos personales.
• 🔍 Tanto Apple como Google realizan niveles similares de recopilación de datos en sus servicios, sugiriendo precaución al utilizar los servicios de ambas compañías.
• 👤 GrapheneOS se destaca como una opción de sistema operativo basada en Android centrada en la privacidad, disponible solo para dispositivos Pixel.
• 📊 Apple y Google han avanzado en seguridad, utilizando herramientas de aprendizaje automático y chips de seguridad para proteger los datos procesados en el dispositivo.

Q & A

¿Cómo influye la tecnología en las protestas modernas según el guion?

La tecnología juega un papel crucial en las protestas modernas, sirviendo tanto como herramienta táctica para organizar, movilizar y documentar eventos por parte de los ciudadanos, como medio para que los gobiernos supriman el descontento público con precisión.

¿Qué ventajas ofreció el iPhone a los manifestantes de Hong Kong?

El iPhone proporcionó herramientas para la comunicación cifrada, la monitorización de la presencia policial y la movilización de multitudes. A través de Airdrop, permitió compartir de manera anónima imágenes y archivos que serían censurados en otras plataformas en China.

¿Cómo reaccionó Apple ante las solicitudes del gobierno chino respecto a las protestas de Hong Kong?

Apple comenzó a ceder ante las solicitudes del gobierno para censurar aplicaciones que habilitaban o apoyaban las protestas, limitando el acceso a mensajeros cifrados, aplicaciones VPN y una aplicación para monitorear a la policía llamada Hkmap.live.

¿Qué consecuencia tuvo el control de Apple sobre los datos de iCloud de los usuarios chinos?

Al darle a Beijing control total sobre los datos de iCloud de los usuarios chinos, el iPhone, que una vez fue elogiado por respetar la privacidad, se convirtió en una herramienta de vigilancia.

¿Por qué se considera que Android es una mejor opción para la privacidad que el iPhone?

Android permite mayor control sobre el dispositivo, incluida la instalación de aplicaciones de fuentes terceras incluso si son eliminadas de Google Play Store, ofreciendo una plataforma más abierta para la privacidad y la autonomía del usuario.

¿Cuál es la principal crítica a las empresas de tecnología como Apple en el contexto de privacidad?

La crítica principal es que estas empresas buscan encerrar a los usuarios en sus ecosistemas, limitando el control sobre sus propios dispositivos y recopilando grandes cantidades de datos, lo cual atenta contra los derechos de privacidad de los usuarios.

¿Qué ventajas de seguridad se mencionan del iPhone?

El iPhone es reconocido por recibir actualizaciones de seguridad durante un período prolongado, lo que es crucial para proteger la privacidad y seguridad de los usuarios.

¿Cómo pueden los usuarios de Android evitar la recopilación de datos por parte de Google?

Los usuarios de Android pueden evitar la recopilación de datos no iniciando sesión en una cuenta de Google, usando aplicaciones y servicios alternativos a los de Google, e incluso instalando versiones de Android centradas en la privacidad como GrapheneOS.

¿Qué significa que la privacidad es situacional y contextual?

Significa que el nivel de amenaza a la privacidad de una persona puede variar significativamente según la situación y el contexto, por lo que las necesidades de privacidad y seguridad pueden cambiar en diferentes entornos.

¿Cuál es la lección principal sobre la privacidad y el control de la tecnología según el guion?

La lección principal es que la privacidad depende del control que los usuarios tienen sobre sus datos y dispositivos. La falta de control expone a los usuarios a riesgos, y es imperativo que puedan tomar decisiones informadas sobre su privacidad.

Outlines

00:00

📱 Tecnología en las Protestas: El Caso de Hong Kong y el iPhone

Este párrafo analiza cómo la tecnología, específicamente el iPhone, juega un papel crucial en las protestas modernas, permitiendo una comunicación encriptada y una organización rápida. Sin embargo, también se destaca cómo Apple cedió ante las demandas gubernamentales de China, limitando herramientas como mensajeros encriptados y aplicaciones para monitorizar la policía, lo que convirtió al iPhone en una herramienta de vigilancia en contra de los usuarios. La conclusión es que el control de Apple sobre el iPhone les quitó a los usuarios la privacidad y la autonomía, evidenciando la pérdida de control sobre sus propios dispositivos.

05:05

🔓 Android vs iPhone: Control y Privacidad

Este párrafo contrasta Android con iPhone en términos de privacidad y control. Señala que, mientras Apple restringe el uso del iPhone a su propio ecosistema, Android permite mayor flexibilidad y control al usuario, ofreciendo opciones como eliminar apps preinstaladas y usar sistemas operativos alternativos como GrapheneOS. Aunque Android no está exento de fallas, proporciona una experiencia más privada y personalizable en comparación con iPhone, que recoge datos extensivos y limita la capacidad del usuario de elegir aplicaciones y servicios fuera de su ecosistema cerrado.

10:08

🔒 La Ilusión de Privacidad en Apple y Google

En este párrafo, se critica la recolección de datos tanto de Apple como de Google, argumentando que ambas compañías tienen prácticas similares de recolección de datos en sus servicios, aunque Google accede a una gama más amplia de categorías de datos. También se cuestiona la efectividad de las características de privacidad de Apple, como la Transparencia de Rastreo de Aplicaciones y las Etiquetas de Privacidad, argumentando que estas son engañosas y no abordan el problema fundamental del rastreo de datos por parte de Apple. Se resalta que Android, a pesar de sus deficiencias, ofrece más transparencia y opciones de control a los usuarios en comparación con iPhone.

15:10

🔐 Android: Una Plataforma de Privacidad Personalizable

Este párrafo enfatiza la capacidad de personalización de Android en términos de privacidad y seguridad. Se discute cómo Android, al ser un sistema operativo de código abierto, permite a los usuarios eliminar apps de Google y otros bloatwares, y utilizar alternativas centradas en la privacidad. También se menciona a GrapheneOS como una opción de sistema operativo enfocado en la privacidad, disponible solo para dispositivos Pixel. La narrativa subraya que, aunque Apple y Google tienen sistemas operativos seguros, Android ofrece más opciones para adaptar el dispositivo a diferentes niveles de amenaza y necesidades de privacidad.

Keywords

💡Tecnología

La tecnología es descrita como una herramienta táctica clave en las protestas modernas, utilizada tanto para organizar masas rápidamente como para capturar momentos fuera del alcance de las cámaras de televisión. Este término resalta la doble fila de la tecnología, donde, aunque facilita la comunicación y la organización entre los ciudadanos, también puede ser aprovechada por los gobiernos para suprimir el descontento público con precisión. Un ejemplo claro es el uso del iPhone por los manifestantes de Hong Kong para compartir información y comunicarse de manera cifrada.

💡Privacidad

La privacidad se enfoca en el control sobre los datos personales y cómo su pérdida expone a los individuos a riesgos. La narrativa del vídeo subraya que la privacidad es fundamentalmente sobre tomar control sobre lo que sucede con nuestros datos, ilustrado por la situación de los usuarios de iPhone en Hong Kong, quienes perdieron este control y, por ende, su privacidad frente al gobierno.

💡Censura

La censura se refiere a la práctica de suprimir información considerada sensible o no deseada por ciertos poderes, como gobiernos o corporaciones. En el contexto del vídeo, Apple censura aplicaciones que permiten la comunicación cifrada y el acceso a información no filtrada, limitando así la capacidad de los ciudadanos de Hong Kong para organizarse y proteger su privacidad.

💡Android

Android es presentado como una alternativa a iOS de Apple, con un enfoque en la privacidad gracias a su naturaleza de código abierto. Permite a los usuarios instalar aplicaciones desde fuentes externas al Play Store de Google, ofreciendo así una mayor flexibilidad y control sobre la privacidad y los datos personales. Esta característica de Android se contrapone a la naturaleza cerrada de iOS, que restringe las aplicaciones a las disponibles en la App Store de Apple.

💡Ecosistema cerrado

Un ecosistema cerrado se refiere a un entorno de software y hardware donde el control sobre aplicaciones, servicios y funcionalidades está limitado por el proveedor del sistema, como Apple con iOS. Este concepto es crucial para entender cómo las restricciones impuestas por estos ecosistemas afectan la privacidad y el control del usuario sobre sus dispositivos, destacado en el vídeo por las limitaciones de Apple en cuanto a aplicaciones y servicios.

💡Recopilación de datos

La recopilación de datos se menciona en el contexto de cómo tanto Google como Apple recopilan información sobre sus usuarios, incluso si estos optan por no compartir análisis. Este concepto subraya la importancia de la transparencia y el consentimiento en la gestión de datos personales, así como los riesgos asociados a la privacidad cuando las empresas no respetan estas normas.

💡Seguridad

La seguridad es destacada como una característica importante de los dispositivos móviles, especialmente en términos de actualizaciones que protegen contra vulnerabilidades. Sin embargo, el vídeo argumenta que, aunque es una condición necesaria para la privacidad, no es la única consideración. Este balance entre seguridad y privacidad es crucial para entender las diferencias en cómo Android e iOS abordan ambos aspectos.

💡Libertad de elección

La libertad de elección se refiere a la capacidad de los usuarios para tomar decisiones sobre sus dispositivos y servicios, como instalar aplicaciones de fuentes no oficiales o cambiar aplicaciones predeterminadas. En el vídeo, esta libertad es contrastada entre los usuarios de Android, que tienen más opciones, y los de iPhone, cuyas elecciones están más restringidas por las políticas de Apple.

💡Identificabilidad

La identificabilidad se relaciona con la capacidad de vincular información a individuos específicos, aumentando así el riesgo de privacidad. El vídeo discute cómo las políticas de Apple y Google en cuanto a la recopilación de datos pueden comprometer la anonimidad de los usuarios, destacando la importancia de sistemas que permitan el uso sin necesidad de identificación personal.

💡ROMs personalizadas

Las ROMs personalizadas son versiones del sistema operativo Android modificadas por terceros para ofrecer características o configuraciones distintas. El vídeo menciona estas ROMs como una opción para aquellos que buscan una experiencia más privada y segura, ilustrando la flexibilidad y apertura de Android frente a la naturaleza cerrada de iOS.

Highlights

Technology plays a dual role in protests, aiding organization and suppression.

iPhones were used in Hong Kong protests for encrypted communication and monitoring.

Apple complied with government requests to censor apps supporting Hong Kong protests.

Chinese users' iCloud data control was given to Beijing, undermining privacy.

Tech companies lock users into ecosystems, limiting control over their devices.

Android offers more privacy than iPhone due to its open-source nature.

Android allows installation of apps from third-party sources, bypassing official app stores.

Apple's strict control over app installation and data collection exposes users to surveillance.

Android's flexibility enables users to de-Google their devices for privacy.

Privacy-focused Android versions like GrapheneOS offer enhanced security.

Apple's privacy marketing contrasts with its extensive data collection practices.

Google and Apple both exempt themselves from third-party ad tracking rules.

Android's permission system provides more transparent app data access than Apple's.

Privacy is contextual and situational, with different threat models for different scenarios.

Regulatory scrutiny in Europe may force Apple to allow alternative app installation sources.

Transcripts

In any modern-day protest, technology defines the battleground. For the citizens in the

streets, it's a key tactical tool that can organize masses quickly and capture moments

outside of the view of TV camera lenses. But the very same technology can be leveraged

to suppress public unrest with surgical precision. Whoever is in control of the technology gets

to determine the outcomes. As a case study, take Hong Kong protesters

and the iPhone. [0] As a weapon of choice, the iPhone provided

the citizens with a plethora of tools for encrypted communication, monitoring police

presence or mobilizing crowds. With Airdrop, Apple users could swiftly and anonymously

share images and files that would otherwise be censored on other platforms in China. [1]

Unfortunately, it didn't take long for Apple to start submitting to government requests

to censor apps enabling or supporting the protests. Slowly but surely, Hongkongers were

losing access  to encrypted messengers, VPN apps, and a police monitoring app Hkmap.live.

[2 - 4] Since Apple gave Beijing total control over

all iCloud data of Chinese users, the once hailed privacy-respecting iPhone was retrofitted

into the most inimical surveillance machine. [5]

The main takeaway from the Hong Kong story is that iPhone users were never in control

of their devices. Apple took that control away from them and gave it to the government

in order to stay in business. When Hongkongers lost their privacy, it was easy for the government

to crack down on them one by one. [6 - 8]

Privacy is ultimately about taking control over what happens to your data. The less control

you have,  the more exposed you are. This is in defiance with the trend in almost all

consumer electronics today.  Most companies, much like Apple, are trying

to lock users into their ecosystems. And in doing so they are stripping users away from

more and more controls over their own devices. It's as simple as restricting where users

can download apps from to an only place controlled by the platform. Or not allowing users to

change default apps for messaging or browsing. Or not giving users an option to fully utilize

their devices without self-identification to the company. All of these restrictions

are legally protected by licenses that pay no regard to end-user rights. 

This is why Android, despite all of the flaws of Google that develops it, is today a fundamentally

better choice for your privacy. If Hong Kong protesters leveraged the full capability of

the open source operating system, they still would have been able to install and run apps

even if Google deleted them from Play Store. It is perhaps this realization that can explain

why over the course of the Hong Kong Protests, the iPhone has been dethroned from its dominant

market share in the city. [9] Android is not perfect. But for most any person

today, from the most vulnerable dissidents to any regular Internet user, Android is more

private than the iPhone. And here's how.

For most users, this is the everyday Android experience. In many ways, it is a perfect

emulation of the iPhone experience. You have your Play Store where you download apps from,

you have your email app, the Chrome browser, Google Drive, your search assistant, and perhaps

some other pre-installed apps. But this is not what Android actually is.

In its main form, Android is just a blank operating system. It is fully functional.

Capable  of connecting to the Internet, browsing the web, downloading apps, making calls and

sending messages. But there is no Google. No Play Store, no Google Search, nothing proprietary.

Android is licensed under the Apache License version 2.0. It is an open source license

that allows anyone to take Android's code for free, make modifications to it and redistribute

it. It is why there are so many different "skins" made by different manufacturers. [10,

11] But what it means for privacy-conscious users

is that they can fully use Android without being signed into a Google account or even

having any Google apps and services installed. They would still be able to download apps

from third party sources, just not from Google Play Store. They could still do cloud backups,

change the default messaging app, or do anything else they just wouldn't do it through Google's

products. If Google decided to restrict some essential privacy apps from the Play Store,

users could still get them directly from the developers. 

This simply isn't possible on the iPhone. The only way to install apps on any iOS device

is through the App Store, which Apple solely controls and collects tremendous amounts of

data from. Users have to be signed in with their Apple ID which is tied to their real

life identity, which means any download or purchase through the App Store is surveilled

by Apple and tied to specific individuals.  Latest security research found that Apple

does this detailed data collection even if users opt out of sharing analytics. [12]

For many regular users in a non-threatening situation, downloading apps from an official

app repository is going to be the most secure option. But when the threat level changes,

such as during a protest or for vulnerable individuals, other options should be open.

On the iPhone, it isn't the case. Users cannot make that choice.

The only way to restrict Apple from collecting your data is to remove your Apple ID from

the iPhone. And you have the option to do that. But you can no longer do anything on

that phone. You won't be able to download apps, send messages or use cloud backups.

[13] On Android, you do need a Google account to

use Google apps. But if you don't want to do that, you can find an alternative for any

Google service out there and use it without any major issues on your Android phone.

Both Google and Apple are ecosystems. Google's ecosystem is their services. Apple's ecosystem

is their services, their devices, their apps and their operating systems. Apple controls

everything on the iPhone. On Android, users are allowed to take  that control back from

Google.

The biggest advantage of the iPhone are security updates. Their phones have had the longest

support for security patches and Android phones are only now slowly catching up. This is a

major issue and while Google does match Apple's update practice with Android and Google's

own hardware, most Android vendors are falling behind quite drastically. [14, 15]

Security, is an important privacy prerequisite. However, it isn't the only one, nor the major

one. [16] Most people's immediate privacy exposure is

linkability and identifiability. Getting hacked is on the list, but probably not at the top

for most people. [17] Linkability is connecting any two data pieces

together based on relevant categories. It can be as minor as connecting the dots between

people sharing common interests, or it can be as excessive as identifying individuals

by different data points. Likewise, most online services require that

users out themselves to the providers, surrendering any trust to the companies behind them. No

system that doesn't give users the freedom to use it without identifying themselves should

be considered a private system. [18] Both Apple and Google engage in very similar

levels of data collection in their respective services. Google does have a search engine

and YouTube which Apple doesn't have, and overall, Google has access to more categories

of data. But one to one, Google Services and Apple equivalents should be both avoided with

the same level of precaution. [19, 20]

Here is a practical example that brings this issue home for everyone. Geofence warrants

are a frequent policing tool whereby a local law enforcement can go to Google and Apple

and request information on all devices or accounts that were present in a specific place

and time. It isn't uncommon for hundreds or even thousands of devices to be swept up under

one such request. [21 – 24] But these requests easily lead to abuse, profiling

and unjust police overreach. Innocent people are often accused of crimes they never committed

simply because they ended up in these dragnet surveillance requests. [25]

The only way to avoid this on the iPhone is to have the phone in airplane mode and have

location services disabled. You can also do that on Android and it would be sufficient.

But at that point your phone would just be a very expensive brick in your pocket. On

Android though, you have more options. One way is to remove Google account from your

phone and use privacy-respecting alternatives in its place. [26]

A more certain method would be to entirely delete pre-installed Google and other bloatware

apps from your Android phone and then use privacy-preserving alternatives. [27, 28]

The third option is to use a privacy-focused offshoot of Android such as GrapheneOS. This

is in fact, the most private and secure option. [29]

But it is only available to Pixel devices. None of these options are too difficult even

for the most non-technical user. You might have to learn a thing or two, but at least

you have options. The point is, both Apple and Google data collection

should be equally avoided. But only Android is open enough to allow for the user to decouple

their phone from the company that made it. 

Which brings me to another point. Privacy is fluid. You are never gonna find two people

with the exact same threat model. You are not even gonna find one person with the same

threat model in all different situations. Your privacy threat level is gonna vastly

differ from when you are with your family versus when you are at your workplace. Even

at your workplace, your privacy risk will likely change if you decide to join a union.

Privacy is situational and contextual. For some situations, it might be reasonable to

use an Apple device. But it is by no means a private experience and you have to operate

under that realization. [30, 20, 31] On Android, you have the option to adjust

your privacy level in any direction and at any point. You can do this by deleting Google

from your phone, removing pre-installed apps or changing your defaults. Or you can install

a custom version of Android like GrapheneOS or something else according to your needs. 

On the iPhone, you are pretty much stuck to one threat model dictated by Apple's enforced

defaults. Recently, Apple came up with the Lockdown mode, which is a very convenient

feature that significantly enhances your security. It's useful for targets of advanced persistent

threats like nation state hacking groups. [32, 33]

None of the Lockdown security features do anything about the data collection conducted

by Apple. You are still forced into Apple's default services, all usage data is still

being collected. [30, 13, 34, 35] Lockdown makes your iPhone more secure. But

if you need to have a phone with that level of security, you are much better of with GrapheneOS.

I have talked about GrapheneOS in the past many times so I won't repeat myself here but

GrapheneOS trumps iPhone in all security features and unlike the iPhone, GrapheneOS is also

anonymous. [29, 36]

Apple has been really great at marketing themselves as a privacy company. And much of that is

just a ruse, but that's for another time. With respect to the iPhone though, Apple has

marketed the living hell out of the two best selling privacy features they have - the app

tracking transparency and privacy nutrition labels. But none of these are actually achieving

anything what they claim to be. [37] The App Tracking Transparency is the popup

prompt with the "Ask app not to track you". This is a powerful statement because how can

you ask someone not to track you? The way the iPhone does it is actually very simple.

Too simple in fact. All it does is it removes the ability for the app to use your advertiser

ID, which Apple built into everyone of its devices by default. Saying that this limits

tracking is incredibly deceitful in the common understanding of the word. [38]

Tracking is whenever someone collects information about your activities, behavior, or usage

over a period of time. Tracking can be done solely within a service or even outside and

across multiple third parties. But this is not how Apple defines tracking. In their terms,

tracking is only when a developer links the data they collect from you with the data they

obtain from data brokers. That's such a specific case that it wouldn't apply to the vast majority

of tracking that's occurring to most people. But this definition does immunize a lot of

what Apple is doing. Because Apple is 100% tracking everything you do on their services.

They just don't use the standard definition of tracking.

[34] On Android, you can also limit this kind of

"ad tracking" by simply disabling your advertiser ID in the settings. And it would do exactly

the same - developers will still collect the same amount of data about you, they just won't

be able to use your ad ID. That's all. [39] What's most important to say about this ad

tracking on both Android and the iPhone, it's that none of that applies to Google's and

Apple's own advertising networks. For that, you have to go to the settings in your Google

account and Apple ID. [40, 34] It is very misleading from both of these companies

to exclude themselves from the rules they apply to third parties. But that's what it

is -  a market consolidation sold to you as a privacy feature. [41, 30]

Apple has been celebrated into high heavens for its "nutrition labels". And it's great

and all except Apple will never actually tell you what any of the apps you install have

technical access to. [42] On Android, you can see this technical info

in the permission manifest, as it is mandatory for all developers to declare what permissions

they require before a user installs their app. It is a far more precise method of telling

you what the app will be able to collect than letting developers arbitrarily explain those

parameters in "nutrition labels". [43] Google has jumped on the trend and started

doing the labels too. But if you actually want to know what the app does, you want to

look for the permission list. You can only do this on Android, not the iPhone. 

Recently, Apple expanded end-to-end encryption in iCloud backups to finally include messages,

notes and photos. This isn't enabled by default, and it doesn't include all sensitive data.

Contacts and calendar data still remain open. But it's at least better than what it was

before. It is in fact better than Google Drive. However, iCloud is still hardly a privacy

solution, because Apple doesn't encrypt any metadata and requires user authentication

with identifiable credentials - which is the Apple ID. While encryption makes the content

of the data secure, the metadata surveillance still leaves the user exposed to indetifiability,

linkability, non-repudiation and detectability threats. These threats expose hoards of usage

data for Apple to monetize, analyze and profile. All of which Apple does with the data they

collect and they already laid out plans to expand this practice even further in the future.

[44, 13] The best course of action to take is to disable

any proprietary cloud integration on your device and opt for a privacy-preserving cloud

service that also protects or at least doesn't process your metadata. Only then can you have

full control.

Android's biggest strength is that it's not just one operating system. It's a platform

on top of which anyone can build their spin-off. Android has many so-called "custom ROMs",

which are simply different iterations of the operating system focused on different goals.

Naturally, this spawned privacy-focused Androids that offer a private-out-of-the-box experience.

GrapheneOS has for the longest time been the one carrying the crown and it seems like it

will remain so far-off into the future. The OS comes with significantly enhanced privacy

and security features with a clear goal of making a perfectly anonymous device with security

parameters able to withstand 0-day exploits. [29]

These options are nonexistent on the closed-source iPhone. Your iPhone will never be anonymous

because Apple will always collect your hardware identifiers and tie them to your Apple ID.

On Android, you can permanently remove Google from accessing those identifiers with GrapheneOS. 

It is important to mention that both Google and Apple have built two of some of the most

secure consumer-grade operating systems one can get. They are both far beyond their desktop

competition in terms of security. There have been trends in the recent years

to keep more and more data processing on the device. Apple and Google are both leveraging

AI learning tools such as federated learning or differential privacy to protect some user

data. Google Pixel phones and iPhones are shipped with security chips that make it impossible

for anyone in the world to unlock a phone without user authentication. Google and Apple

have essentially made impenetrable devices. Your stock Android and iOS experience is becoming

more secure year by year. [45 – 48] But little of that matters for your privacy

the moment you go online. Apple and Google are both are in the business of monetizing

the customer's use of their devices. And that's where both platforms tend to abuse their position

to dictate what apps and services Android and iPhone users default to. But only one

platform allows for divergence from that model.

This is the reason why only Android has NewPipe, an app that allows you to watch YouTube videos

without ads and tracking. Or multiple repositories of free and open source apps and many privacy

tools that would be banned from the App Store and Google Play store for violating their

policies. This is why only Android has the option to install apps without the platform

knowing about your identity and usage. This is a level of control that simply cannot

be replicated on the iPhone. Apple has been in a hot water recently as dinosaur regulators

are finally realizing iPhone users are the only ones not allowed to install apps from

sources other than the App Store. So maybe in Europe, Apple could be forced to open up

the iPhone a little bit. And that would be great. But they will fight tooth and nail

to make sure that doesn't happen. 

Control does not guarantee privacy. But it is an absolute imperative. Privacy cannot

be given. It can only be taken. It's a sad lesson to learn from the real world. Whether

it's Hong Kong, China, or anywhere else in the world - history is written by those in

control.