It does not actually enforce least privilege everywhere, its application of SELinux is … well it’s better than what targeted policy does, but it’s designed to be unobtrusive not protective. The issue isn’t Android itself, as a concept it’s not awful. The issue is the reality of being a security professional and attempting to secure the edge which in this case is the users and their devices.

From a practical standpoint administering and protecting one device type on a fairly closed OS is significantly easier than one where the hardware landscape is so varied.

If you look critically at what it appears this action (the article, and what I am responding to) is for it is because the USERS being exploited is the threat vector. Android devices have significantly more documented malware out in the wild AS WELL AS many documented and active boot exploits.

My comments have nothing to do with what I like. This isn’t fanaticism. It’s practical reality.

A nation state actor likely doesn’t care what device you use because they can get the data they want elsewhere, your device is just a beacon at that point for where.