Without verification by Google. I am very much capable of verifying the origin and trustworthiness of the apps I install.

Orcs? He has mixed up his fiction.

He doesn’t need to.

No the scammer will simply point out that the warning is about scammers and not him, your friendly MS tech that called to help solve a problem you didn’t have.

Scams don’t rely on tech.

And creepily walk it forth step by step.

Evidence that any significant percentage of people, never mind the majority, is getting scammed? Then how many of them via app installs?

Then make the wait period a week, a month. Have this privilege expire every so often etc.

Try to pull warranty shenanigans if you ever went through the process.

A true Tesla them, no?

It’s a single shot, picked to showcase the technology. Even here the ear’s outline is messed with.

But more importantly the material/texture being replaced is wrong. Its way too bright and sharp. It’s no more realistic than the original, it simply has different drawbacks and frankly looks jarringly out of place. It also fucks up the eyes’ tracking and the water ripples on the ground.

And the world is slightly a better place.

No. He was a soldier, volunteered to be one and put his life on the line. The girls didn’t.

Because not only the donors but a big part of the Dem’s base, even here on lemmy that is an outlier, are pro-war.

Where did I say a malware injected GrapheneOS image will pass hardware attestation?

The problem is that an unmodified GrapheneOS image may also not pass hardware attestation if the app developer has not whitelisted GrapheneOS’s key.

Also I hope GrapheneOS would simply inform the user or refuse to boot if the image does not pass attestation. In that case an app itself requiring attestation, based on it’s own list of accepted keys, has no security value, only gatekeeping potential.

Hardware attestation verifies that the phone and the OS its running on are real and not an emulator or a fake malware laced version.

No, it verifies that the phone is running an approved OS. If the app developer does not add your OS’ keys it will fail. This included GrapheneOS.

We have been web banking for decades on platforms without hardware attestation. The potential for anti-competitiveness abuse is not worth it.

It also does not protect the user. If your system is actually compromised they can simply replace the app, not allow it to run etc. I don’t see how it protects the user if they chose to run an emulator, what exactly is the threat to the user there?

The EU is not doing anything in this, it’s some private companies.

It should do something though, forbid banks and other essential services from imposing arbitrary requirements for providing service.

Even GrapheneOS is not as insane to suggest ebanking should be restricted to locked down platforms.

EU should ban banks from requiring hardware attestation and other “security” excuses to refuse serving people.

No it says they any scanning must be in the context of sex crimes. It’s otherwise prohibited.

Iran has a population of 90 million. How many people do you think have died to make a significant difference?

Yes the best thing is for regulators to forbid banks from serving you for “security” reasons.

GrapheneOS is right, but again I can’t help but note them again attacking small Android manufacturers with unfounded allegations.

Comparatively their language on Google is very timid. Obviously they are not actually competing against Google in the mainstream part of the market.

Safe in the hands of the only country that has used nuclear weapons?