Barry Margolin wrote:

Security isn't binary, it's a continuum. No one is completely safe, but
if there's less information on your phone, the danger from the
government cracking it is lower. And if the phone has better encryption,
then you're more safe.

You bring up a logical but potentially fallacious argument.

It's sort of like saying pregnancy isn't binary, or that death isn't
binary, since there are stages to both.

More to the point, it's sort of like saying that a chain isn't only as
strong as its weakest link, where anyone who wants to break the chain will
simply attack the weakest link.

Hence, here's a philosophical question for you to ponder, given your
statement that security isn't binary.

Q: What is the relative immunity of successful penetration by an adversary
who is attacking two mobile phones, where both mobile phones have the exact
same weakest link?

Is that a binary answer, or not?