I disagree. You can‘t keep data away from others when it isn‘t safe. Security doesn‘t necessarily imply privacy (as demonstrated by your argument), but making something private is impossible without making it secure. How can you hide something in your house when it doesn’t have a lock and anyone can just walk in? Likewise, how is your phone private if, say anyone can unlock it?
> True, depends on the phone though, some of them cannot be locked again and there's no way to completely fix those phones with a better ROM.
Then you shouldn‘t use those phones for a secure setup. I think we can agree on that. But the author of the article used a phone that is capable of locking the bootloader with alternate ROMs.
> How can you hide something in your house when it doesn’t have a lock and anyone can just walk in? Likewise, how is your phone private if, say anyone can unlock it?
Security requires privacy. A phone without privacy is insecure by design, insecure because it leaks data.
And the biggest danger to consumers nowadays isn't a bootrom exploit but that their location, card payments and data profile is sent to advertisers.
> True, depends on the phone though, some of them cannot be locked again and there's no way to completely fix those phones with a better ROM.
Then you shouldn‘t use those phones for a secure setup. I think we can agree on that. But the author of the article used a phone that is capable of locking the bootloader with alternate ROMs.