• markstos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Rooted mobile devices are a reasonable signal they been have hacked and security features might be disabled or work as expected.

    It just banks, a lot of corporate security polices don’t allow rooted devices, as they could bypass mobile device management policies for devices owned by the company.

    With laptops it’s a different story. Whether users have Mac, Linux or Windows, there’s a reasonable chance they have admin access too, so checking for root access is not such a useful signal there.

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      So just warn the user that it’s their own responsibility and all claims are waived, instead of just saying “no” ?

      • markstos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There is parallel with masking. The bank values the safety of the whole rather than the freedom to root for an individual. You stand to lose only your own bank balance. The bank stands to lose the funds of every rooted phone that contains a banking app exploit targeting them.

        • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I mean, they get that anyway with malware and security exploits. Except that rooted phones usually have a root manager, which asks for permission if an app wants to do more. And i don’t think the root user listening into the app/their own account should be a problem; because in this case the problem is with the banks’ security practice.

          Well, at least my bank doesn’t care about root or safety net.