no they are not, targeted attack of someone who is capable of using Pegasus is going to be successful regardless a consumer device u choose to use.

"No they are not?" I deserved more than that.

Iphones are a standardized attack surface. Apple prefers vulnerabilities not to be found than to be discovered and patched, leading to NSO holding on their discovered vulnerabilities for longer.

An android device with no modem (baseband) is definitely more secure. Throw in a hardware switch for camera, mics, and wifi, which iphones will never have.

Android is an even larger attack surface when political people don't take any of the precautions you mention, which they most likely won't. The President of the United States does indeed have a specialized phone that is modified by WH staff to either be only for phone calls or only for twitter/news (which means 2 phones)[0], but they're still iPhones. As long as there's not some 0-authorization 0-click vulnerability in the things used (as in, reportedly, neither iphone did texts), it'll be secure enough, but that's still limiting its usage and isn't want any politician is going to do. Just stick to a desk phone for secure comms.

0: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/trump-phone-securi...

Could anyone deactivate texts on an iphone or did they get a special iOS version from Apple?

Texts or iMessage?

Texts shouldn't be difficult, just disable on the carrier end. MDM might be able to restrict it further just in case. With iMessage you can just not sign in to an Apple ID. Or use MDM.

they need an actual functional phone. You can't be a journalist and not have a fully functional phone that access the internet whenever needed. I'm sure they use burners for sensitive stuff, but what are they supposed to use for their regular work, calls with the school, car navigation, ...

There are portable hotspots, you know....

I am assuming you use a killswitch VPN to your trusted network. NYT for this journalist.

My proposed setup is 3 devices: hotspot, android device without baseband, dumbphone. Hotspot would be the weak link here, security wise, but is easier and cheaper to replace. Nothing on dumbphone would be encrypted.

If I were a journalist, I would consider this alternative to being hacked. Remember he even knew there were at least attempts to hack his devices, years in advance.

They are just biting the "apple is the most secure alternative" propaganda.

iMessage can run over data, right? It sounds like the bugs exploited here were iMessage and WhatsApp holes, not weird mystery-baseband flaws (which are harder to patch but only ever affect a fraction of the phones you want to sell the ability to compromise). So similar Android exploits would just go right through the hotspot and compromise the Android device that does everything.

The only way out of this mess is actually correct code on actually correct hardware. Maybe you have to run Linux and Android at the top to run existing apps, but somewhere below there you need a supervisor that makes security guarantees that are actually true. You can't just port a monolithic C kernel onto hardware that's struggling to be faster than the competition and call it good.

Journalists need to buy communications equipment that doesn't come with that "NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE" line in the EULA. Sadly, it is not for sale.

Just use a dumb phone and a garmin like journalists did in the early 2000s?

How do you communicate with your sources?

Texts from a burner? Disposable email address? Dead drop notes? Lurking in the shadows of a parking structure? Plenty of options that don't require a smartphone. Not like journalism was impossible before the iPhone.

What!? You’re statement is really wrong. Android tablets on hotspots only??? What?

When disagreeing with someone, it's usually courteous to explain why you think they are wrong.