I just lost a whole five paragraph post. Anyway, the gist of it would be the same as why Comodo ought not to develop an OS (found here for your convenience).
I’m siding with John and Eric here.
The problem here truly is not whether Comodo can do it or not, but if it is at the very least practical and at most, necessary. Of course, throwing the link above would be just far too lazy of me and it leaves a whole slur of questions and assumptions left unanswered, so let me explain myself a bit more (again. Can’t get over it). If we put it in the context of the mobile platform rather than a full-pledged OS, we have a few scenarios that would differ which most importantly includes, but may not be limited to:
But this is less with the apps and more of with the hardware itself. Now as you all might be aware of by now, Android does not necessarily have support for all hardware features. That means that developing a mod would necessarily mean that some hardware feature would be foregone should they attempt to try the ROM which may even be necessary like for example the wifi module which some processors handle differently compared to others. Meaning, you get this wrong and you lose basic functionality.
Is it even practical to have it available? See, the main difference with the other mods we have available round the net to Comodo (or any other similar brands) is that they are either hobbyists or are phone developers themselves who mean to incorporate features on their line of phone models. So you’re asking Comodo one of two things here. (A)They gather a team and develop for no profit at all while still maintaining the commercial value of the program and the brand, or (B)to get into the business of hardware, too.
Or maybe I’m making it too complicated. Basically, what I’m saying is that the difference is business. Comodo’s a company and their name will literally and figuratively be slapped on that product whether they want to or not. So any issue they may encounter despite the gravity will affect the Company’s name.
But the scope of the project’s practicality is not limited to the business aspect of it, there’s also the question of necessity. What does the ROM have to offer to make it any more secure (as is the business of Comodo) than what it already has? This is where I’d really like people who would be requesting for this to focus on. Do you have any recommendation of a feature that would make the mod more secure than the default that could not be applied at an application level and at most at root level i.e. a feature that really requires you to code another variant? We’d actually be more convinced at the proposal and support it if they would tell us this. I’m no security expert any more than I am a technology expert (heck, I majored in humanities), but I am quite certain there’s not much to add there.
Let’s put this in this thread’s context. OP said “own browser, launcher, encryption, secure DNS, system control, no bloatware, and so on” (and you can’t be any more vague than that). All those can be applied on an application level, so in essence, all that you’re requesting is simple “integration and branding” which is cosmetic at best. At the lowest-level it would still suffer from the same vulnerabilities and more if we are to take into account compatibility with hundreds of phone models. Worst, there won’t be official support for them. So if you brick your device, that’s money invested sitting like stone on a beach. I mean, how can you provide support for it? And it’s precisely for this very reason too that phone manufacturers would be wary of establishing partnership to create custom hardware and maybe even some firmware for a device that would only appeal to very small niche. The most often reason anyone wants a custom rom is one of two things: 1)optimization and 2)bleeding-edge features, but not security.
The only security features I could think up of that would really benefit users (and take this with a grain of salt, I’m no expert at these matters) would be information spoofing or privacy management which you can mitigate by denying permissions or at least access to internet), file system encrytion (which is readily available), System Restore-like functionality (an integrated nandroid creation and restoral but I think that’s too much) or anomalous behavior blocking via neural networks (which is the only thing i could think of that can be implemented most effectively at kernel-level, but that’s gonna compromise compatibility). I can’t see any reason why there should be a need to create another one when practically everything else has been made readily available by other more established alternatives. I can’t help but think once again that this request is simply because it’s Comodo. It’s flattering for Comodo, I’m sure, but still…
Ah heck, I’m rambling too much aren’t I? Well, every other reason why they shouldn’t is quite practically the same reason as why Comodo doesn’t need to make an OS. But if you really must insist, I advise to do few more readings on android security (admittedly I’m only basing it on what I’ve pried from it which honestly isn’t much at all), some bit of linux security (my basis which I must also admit is mostly stock knowledge now) and PrivatOS (the reason I’m even more convinced of its impracticality).