or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ACLU: Android fragmentation creates privacy risk
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ACLU: Android fragmentation creates privacy risk - Page 3

post #81 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Why don't you back this up with actual data?

"BadNews"
post #82 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

Shame on them! I only searched the major carriers.

http://m.att.com/shopmobile/wireless/devices/sharp/fx-plus-black.html

Even major carriers.
post #83 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

Again, AppleInsider shows a misguided, misleading title.


The title should be "Telcos expose their users to privacy risk".  Androidness is unrelated, since the problem lies with having old, unupdated versiosn running because the telcos don't care.

I'll still run an iPhone because I prefer the ease of use/excellence/attention to details, but Android is a good system, with a safe (Linux) foundation, and it's pretty irritating to see AppleInsider again title "Android fragmentation evil whatevah".


I'll tell you a secret, AppleInsider. An iPhone (original) with the original OS is also running security risks. No updates --> DANGER. Blame the telcos, not Android.

 

So you are saying Samsung, Sony and HTC all have updates for their old phones just waiting at the telcos to push the updates? I doubt it.
post #84 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

And around we go. That was the ONE example which started this particular exchange. "One" is less than "many" and even less than "some".

One that encompasses an order of magnitude larger impact than all iOS impacts. All I had to provide. QED.
post #85 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

 

QED? You really are clueless, aren't you? If you look at my original link to the forbes article, the iOS exploit they describe is quite similar to BadNews. So, try again.

Yep. QED. The related to article never indicated download rates and did not allow sending of expensive spam SMS.

 

Sorry try again. I provided the order of magnitude you requested especially since the iOS was both iOS and Android.

 

I will leave as an exercise for you to find all the other malware alerts in both Google Play Store and the App Store since you don't seem to understand how to use Google, Bing or DuckDuckGo.  They are great tools for those that are not afraid to learn.

post #86 of 97
I answered you question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

I didn't start the discussion, so the exercise is all yours. On the other hand, why don't you ask DuckDuckGo to find a clue for you?

I answered your question. If you want to learn more, I leave that to you. My guess you really don't want to learn.
post #87 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

He is saying that telcos are involved in the process. Apple (in the days of Jobs) had telcos over a barrel, so could, and did, dictate the terms of the contract. Samsung/Sony/HTC/etc did not, so there is no question that the vendor updates get hung up for months more at the carrires. The situation would not be perfect without this problem, but it would certainly be better.

How could Apple have the telcos over a barrel? Apple never sold a phone before the iPhone. You would think the major vendors would have a say in upgrading a phone rather than a newbie.
post #88 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

How could Apple have the telcos over a barrel? Apple never sold a phone before the iPhone. You would think the major vendors would have a say in upgrading a phone rather than a newbie.

Truly amusing how Android fanatics make any excuse to support their flawed logic such as the poster to whom you responded.

Personally, I can't imagine foregoing security and stability so I could install a screen saver.
post #89 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Based on your comment you've inferred that it's because of telcos iOS gets updated. That surely isn't the case. Apple updates their OS on their devices, typically all at the same time while supporting about 3 years of product releases. So does it really make sense to blame the telcos and let the vendors go free on supporting updates? I certainly don't think so. I also don't think it's fair to let Google off scott free for creating an unsafe environment. It would be like me opening a shop that isn't staffed and expecting customers abide by an honour system where they put money into the register themselves. Would you really excuse me from blame when people don't pay for the merchandise or steal what money some people did pay? Of course you wouldn't so why not blame Google for their bad decisions?

No, I was very unclear again sorry... 

 

It's because of telcos that Android doesn't get updated: Google pushes the updates all right, so they're not to blame. Apple's level of control is, in my opinion, too high (even though, as a user, it's fine for me, but the dichotomy of being a user and a power-user cannot escape you).

 

I think it's more to have a business where you let others sell clones of your product and call it the same (Android), where it might be better to have that named Android-ATT or Android-Samsung, depending on who's the last to alter the software, or something like that?

 

Telcos and vendors share an interest in grabbing your information, which is why they cooperate, and Apple plays another ballgame, because of the high desirability (and they already know all about you anyway, since you tell them... Apple knows more about me than I do). 

 

I don't know if I'm any clearer, but in a nutshell: I agree that Apple is superior in their update schedule, I do find it a bit irritating that they force some of them on me (to get security updates, I actually need to move to an iOS that makes my phone slower?), and I disagree that telcos are not responsible for the situation on Android, since it's pretty much like saying that Debian would be responsible for ATT distributing a computer with Debian 2.0 on it. 

 

In two sentences: 

You distribute un-updated software, putting the user at risk, you should be responsible of the potential damage. As a country that is a prime hacking target, the United States of America should recognize the risk that their telcos are putting on their citizens (think identity theft, financial information, but also business intelligence).

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #90 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

That's a dangerous statement to make without further conditions.

Well, why TS?

iPhone 1 with no security updates is hackable, that seems to me to prove my point? If it doesn't, maybe I'm overlooking something obvious... 

Besides, "dangerous" it is not. Stupid, it might be, but I don't fear making a fool of myself, worst case I learn something ^^

Dangerous... will AppleInsiders send armed thugs to beat me up? I don't think so :D

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #91 of 97
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post
iPhone 1 with no security updates is hackable, that seems to me to prove my point?

 

Nope, it proves mine. You had to give a condition.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #92 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

No, I was very unclear again sorry... 

It's because of telcos that Android doesn't get updated: Google pushes the updates all right, so they're not to blame. Apple's level of control is, in my opinion, too high (even though, as a user, it's fine for me, but the dichotomy of being a user and a power-user cannot escape you).

I think it's more to have a business where you let others sell clones of your product and call it the same (Android), where it might be better to have that named Android-ATT or Android-Samsung, depending on who's the last to alter the software, or something like that?

Telcos and vendors share an interest in grabbing your information, which is why they cooperate, and Apple plays another ballgame, because of the high desirability (and they already know all about you anyway, since you tell them... Apple knows more about me than I do). 

I don't know if I'm any clearer, but in a nutshell: I agree that Apple is superior in their update schedule, I do find it a bit irritating that they force some of them on me (to get security updates, I actually need to move to an iOS that makes my phone slower?), and I disagree that telcos are not responsible for the situation on Android, since it's pretty much like saying that Debian would be responsible for ATT distributing a computer with Debian 2.0 on it. 

In two sentences: 
You distribute un-updated software, putting the user at risk, you should be responsible of the potential damage. As a country that is a prime hacking target, the United States of America should recognize the risk that their telcos are putting on their citizens (think identity theft, financial information, but also business intelligence).


Note that Apple's success in the handset market is tied to this planning. They are responsible for their decisions just as Google is responsible for theres.

It was soon after the iPhone 3G was launched that Apple became the most profitably handset vendor in the world. All handsets, not just smartphones! The world! And in their 2nd year on the market! It wasn't just for having superior HW and SW, it was about focusing on the end user over the telcos. In other words, they made the end user the customer not the telcos. Google takes this one step even further away from the end user by making the HW vendor the customer.

There is absolutely no one stopping anyone else from doing what Apple has done. I've stated many times that those that "copy" Apple never seem to copy the aspects Apple can't legally protect; the things that make people keep coming back to Apple.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #93 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

It's because of telcos that Android doesn't get updated: ... snip...

 

All the telcos do these days is sometimes include their own apps.  That wouldn't stop an OS update.

 

Now, having to retest devices again... THAT would definitely make telcos think twice.  Testing costs time and money, and naturally they would only want to do that for the biggest sellers, if even them.


Edited by KDarling - 4/22/13 at 7:28pm
post #94 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Nope, it proves mine. You had to give a condition.

Sorry, but you misread me, i'm afraid, TS.

---->

Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


An iPhone (original) with the original OS is also running security risks.

 

I did not add any condition whatsoever. If you nowadays take a brand new iPhone (first version), that sat in a box for several years, and don't install the updates, hence "An iPhone (original) with the original OS" (as I said), you're running a security risk. It proves my point, fair and square: any OS (phone, or not) that decides to forego SECURITY updates runs a SECURITY risk. It's so undebatable I don't even understand why you would "give a condition". Then again, I may be missing something obvious, I never claimed to be a brilliant guy.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #95 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

All the telcos do these days is sometimes include their own apps.  That wouldn't stop an OS update.

 

Now, having to retest devices again... THAT would definitely make telcos think twice.  Testing costs time and money, and naturally they would only want to do that for the biggest sellers, if even them.

Agreed, makes perfect sense especially if instead of one device a year they have a waterfall of phones...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #96 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Note that Apple's success in the handset market is tied to this planning. They are responsible for their decisions just as Google is responsible for theres.

It was soon after the iPhone 3G was launched that Apple became the most profitably handset vendor in the world. All handsets, not just smartphones! The world! And in their 2nd year on the market! It wasn't just for having superior HW and SW, it was about focusing on the end user over the telcos. In other words, they made the end user the customer not the telcos. Google takes this one step even further away from the end user by making the HW vendor the customer.

There is absolutely no one stopping anyone else from doing what Apple has done. I've stated many times that those that "copy" Apple never seem to copy the aspects Apple can't legally protect; the things that make people keep coming back to Apple.

We definitely agree on that, I was just disputing the "logic" of blaming Android (hence Google) for handsetmakers/telcos having customized software for customized hardware that they do not apply Google's security updates to.

 

Apple's obviously the financially sound strategy (unless you're Wall Street, but their logics are outworldy).

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #97 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

Then again, I may be missing something obvious, I never claimed to be a brilliant guy.

Someone should use that as their signature (not you specifically lightknight). It's similart to a sig I am contemplating on using: "Hit-or-miss AI poster PhilBoogies' opinion isn't shared by everyone and is simply posting for the sake of discussion."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ACLU: Android fragmentation creates privacy risk