or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android accounts for 92% of mobile malware, malicious apps increase 614%
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Android accounts for 92% of mobile malware, malicious apps increase 614% - Page 2

post #41 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Of the malicious apps tracked by Juniper, three out of five emanated from either China or Russia.Most Android malware could be avoided if users were running the latest operating system, but Juniper's data says only 4 percent of users are.

Or... simply not buying into the Android ecosystem in the first place.

This is the primary reason I won't even look at the Android devices. That and three year contracts will still be in place here until December. In a two year window, I could reasonably expect a device to updated to the latest version, but three, fat chance. There are Android devices that are sold new and updates are discontinued immediately.

My sister has gone through at least 3 mobile phones over the same amount of time I've opted not to purchase a smart phone, her new device is a Samsung Galaxy III (yes new in 2013.) I bought last bought a phone when the iPhone was new, but the device I bought beat all of the original iPhone's specifications (one of which was UMTS support.) I'll buy an iPhone when VoLTE is available on it, and not before. Prior to this I hung onto an EDGE device since it's introduction.

Now the funny thing is, since mobile devices are billed by the byte or minute, malware on these devices are of an extremely high concern and expense to their users. There is almost no reason not to update the software, and if the hardware/carrier's are refusing to do this, maybe the government might have to force them to. eg The hardware vendor must maintain updates to all hardware sold new for 7 years and the carrier is required to push these updates within 30 days. This might force the hardware vendors to better engineer their devices or better yet, standardize on one or two hardware/software profiles that they can better support instead of making one variant of each device for every carrier in the world. If Microsoft can support an operating system for 6 years (plus an additional 5 for extended support) so can the Android vendors.
post #42 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misa View Post


This is the primary reason I won't even look at the Android devices.

Look damn you, look...... mooooohhhwaaahaaaahaaaa!!!!!!

 

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #43 of 81
So... Android is SICK!
post #44 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

These malware reports don't take into account a lot of things. First of all google has implemented multiple safeguards on android. One of them on the playstore is called bouncer which is a program able to detect malicious software. The second part is the steps that is required to install an app from an unknown source. Seriously it is a lot of stuff you have to do.

 

 

blah, blah, blah

 

 

 

"I can get free stuff, look at all the suckers locked into Apple's walled garden paying for their stuff"

 

Mindless click.

 

= $$$ for malware

 

/s

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #45 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775 View Post

Apple should be shouting this data from the rooftops. It's time for an Apple vs Android commercial with the Android device sputtering with malware.
I second the motion! LOL!
post #46 of 81
So how many Android devices will be affected by "malware" according to Juniper's stats? One percent? 5%? 50%? Or is the problem really only Russia and China for the most part anyway and US/Western EU devices are highly unlikely to ever come in contact with any? What about Android owners who only use Google Play? Do only a few hundred malware cases emanate from there in a year or is it 10's of millions? Odd little story with scary percentages but not much in the way of real numbers.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #47 of 81
Whaddaya know... something they didn't copy.
post #48 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

So how many Android devices will be affected by "malware" according to Juniper's stats? One percent? 5%? 50%? Or is the problem really only Russia and China for the most part anyway and US/Western EU devices are highly unlikely to ever come in contact with any? What about Android owners who only use Google Play? Do only a few hundred malware cases emanate from there in a year or is it 10's of millions? Odd little story with scary percentages but not much in the way of real numbers.

 

My thoughts exactly.  Without actual numbers, geography, and naming of specific malware and third-party app stores, this data is severely lacking in substance.  It reads like it was written by an anti-virus company who wants to sell me their software.

 

The only part of the article that seemed to carry any weight in my mind was "Juniper also estimates that 77 percent of current Android threats could be eliminated if users were running the latest version of the platform."

 

To the best of my knowledge there isn't a current system to send out just security updates.  I can understand not updating old hardware to the newest OS, but security patches should still be issued when needed.  This system may not exist because there really hasn't been a major issue that needs addressing, but I'd prefer that Google, the Android manufacturers, and the cell phone companies be proactive about that instead of reactive.

post #49 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

So how many Android devices will be affected by "malware" according to Juniper's stats? One percent? 5%? 50%? Or is the problem really only Russia and China for the most part anyway and US/Western EU devices are highly unlikely to ever come in contact with any? What about Android owners who only use Google Play? Do only a few hundred malware cases emanate from there in a year or is it 10's of millions? Odd little story with scary percentages but not much in the way of real numbers.

 

What about the best selling Android tablet and the best selling Android handset maker using Amazon and Samsung Hub respectively?

 

How do they access these alternative to Play repositories?

 

Does that not open them to anything?

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #50 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

 

My thoughts exactly.  Without actual numbers, geography, and naming of specific malware and third-party app stores, this data is severely lacking in substance.  It reads like it was written by an anti-virus company who wants to sell me their software.

 

The only part of the article that seemed to carry any weight in my mind was "Juniper also estimates that 77 percent of current Android threats could be eliminated if users were running the latest version of the platform."

 

To the best of my knowledge there isn't a current system to send out just security updates.  I can understand not updating old hardware to the newest OS, but security patches should still be issued when needed.  This system may not exist because there really hasn't been a major issue that needs addressing, but I'd prefer that Google, the Android manufacturers, and the cell phone companies be proactive about that instead of reactive.

 

For someone with "droid" in their username you sure aren't well informed about the differences between each version.

 

The ONLY secure version of Android is Jelly Bean. GB and earlier versions are terrible. Google attempted a fix with ICS, but it was a half-baked affair that meant nothing (think of locking your front door but leaving the key under the mat). You CANNOT fix an older version to plug these holes. They are an integral part of the core OS itself, and not something a patch could ever cure.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #51 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

So how many Android devices will be affected by "malware" according to Juniper's stats? One percent? 5%? 50%? Or is the problem really only Russia and China for the most part anyway and US/Western EU devices are highly unlikely to ever come in contact with any? What about Android owners who only use Google Play? Do only a few hundred malware cases emanate from there in a year or is it 10's of millions? Odd little story with scary percentages but not much in the way of real numbers.

 

Irrelevant. You don't create malware "for fun" - you create it to steal information or generate revenue. The fact that these people continue to produce new versions of "viruses" for Android shows there's money to be made and/or data to be stolen. You don't invest that much in so many pieces of malware to get "a few hundred" users.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #52 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

For someone with "droid" in their username you sure aren't well informed about the differences between each version.

 

The ONLY secure version of Android is Jelly Bean. GB and earlier versions are terrible. Google attempted a fix with ICS, but it was a half-baked affair that meant nothing (think of locking your front door but leaving the key under the mat). You CANNOT fix an older version to plug these holes. They are an integral part of the core OS itself, and not something a patch could ever cure.

 

What security issues in GB and ICS are you referring to that cannot be fixed with a security update?

post #53 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

These malware reports don't take into account a lot of things. First of all google has implemented multiple safeguards on android. One of them on the playstore is called bouncer which is a program able to detect malicious software. The second part is the steps that is required to install an app from an unknown source. Seriously it is a lot of stuff you have to do.



If users refuse to follow those steps, their OS is no longer open..
post #54 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck View Post

Stupidity accounts for 100% of malware installs.

 

-kpluck

Or just using the Google Play store...

 

http://bgr.com/2012/07/11/android-dropdialer-malware-google-play/

 

One of many many many such examples. I can't image the number of remote deletes Google has had to do.

post #55 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

 

What security issues in GB and ICS are you referring to that cannot be fixed with a security update?

 

ASLR for starters.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #56 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

ASLR for starters.

 

 

I don't see why there couldn't be a security patch for ASLR, but I certainly don't expect you to take the time to go into the fine details (feel free if you want to though because I love learning).  Surely if it were a major concern a patch could be made instead of implementing things differently in the next full OS update, right?

 

That said, lets say that the ASLR issue truly can't be fixed thru a software update.  I still believe that a security patch system for anything that may come up that is patchable could be beneficial so I'm not sure what your original point is.

 

Either way, thanks for responding with an actual issue.  I enjoyed reading about ASLR and ROP attacks (yes, I'm strange like that).


Edited by DroidFTW - 6/26/13 at 6:42pm
post #57 of 81

The last statement on poster is the biggest crap since I've heard Microsoft saying: "oh, you know, but this version is very safe, almost bulletproof...." 

 

THe least malware on latest version is logical: few are using it, when it become mainstream version, guns will be pointed at it.

Whatever they do with it, it will never be safe unless completely rewritten and apps sandboxed. Oh, but then fandroid morons can't claim anymore how "closed" Apple is ?!?

post #58 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by poksi View Post

The last statement on poster is the biggest crap since I've heard Microsoft saying: "oh, you know, but this version is very safe, almost bulletproof...." 

 

THe least malware on latest version is logical: few are using it, when it become mainstream version, guns will be pointed at it.

Whatever they do with it, it will never be safe unless completely rewritten and apps sandboxed. Oh, but then fandroid morons can't claim anymore how "closed" Apple is ?!?

 

So you're saying that the malware and viruses go where the most users are?  1devil.gif

 

Jokes aside, I think the more logical explanation is that security issues arise in all operating systems.  Newer versions of the operating systems address these concerns and put in safeguards and are therefore not vulnerable to those exploits.

post #59 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

 

So you're saying that the malware and viruses go where the most users are?  1devil.gif

 

Jokes aside, I think the more logical explanation is that security issues arise in all operating systems.  Newer versions of the operating systems address these concerns and put in safeguards and are therefore not vulnerable to those exploits.

 

Malware and viruses go there where the holes are the bigger and victims are in plenty.

 

Are you familiar with sandboxing?

post #60 of 81

Android IS malware :)

post #61 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by philgar View Post

There are tradeoffs made between iOS and Android, however the consensus on this forum seems to be that malware on android is a HUGE problem.  The truth is that a small number of android devices have malware, and most of them got it from third party stores.  A story saying that malware on android increased by X% isn't really news unless you know what the base number is.  If ONE virus came out that attacked unjailbroken iOS devices, the percentage increase in malware would likely be infinite... Even if only a single phone got infected.

 

As for why someone would want an open and uncontrolled platform... I do.   I'm moving away from iOS because I'm sick of Apple's "our way or the highway" attitude. I don't have unlimited faith in apple, and I think that apple's primary reason for doing anything is to make more money for themselves.  I also don't appreciate the sentiment heard around here that Apple deserves money for every application that runs on iOS.  That iOS is the reason people are buying a device, and that all further purchases need to go through apple.   My phone is MY device, I should have the right to do what I want with it.   I should be able to rent a movie from an amazon application if I want to, and there should be no reason apple would get a percentage of the profits for my doing this.  A controlled platform can work okay when conflict of interests don't exist, but apple clearly has those.  They want to monetize my device forever, and want to lock me in to their hardware.  With Android, I can change to another manufacturer at a later date and use their hardware with my existing software.  Sure, I'd have to continue to use android, but honestly, after switching from iOS to android, the differences are relatively minor.   Unless you're a zealot about it, you can't really say one interface sucks and the other is far superior.  They do things slightly differently, and they both borrow from each other.  As far as ease of use goes, it's a tough call.  As long as the play store is preinstalled on the android phone, they're pretty equal.

 

Phil

I agree you should stick with Android so that your choices aren't limited so that you can do as you please. I myself prefer Apple's walled garden approach and will stay with iOS and iPhone as it just works for me.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #62 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

Sounds like Windows all over again

one of the problems with an OS that's too open.

post #63 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misa View Post


Or... simply not buying into the Android ecosystem in the first place.

This is the primary reason I won't even look at the Android devices. That and three year contracts will still be in place here until December. In a two year window, I could reasonably expect a device to updated to the latest version, but three, fat chance. There are Android devices that are sold new and updates are discontinued immediately.

My sister has gone through at least 3 mobile phones over the same amount of time I've opted not to purchase a smart phone, her new device is a Samsung Galaxy III (yes new in 2013.) I bought last bought a phone when the iPhone was new, but the device I bought beat all of the original iPhone's specifications (one of which was UMTS support.) I'll buy an iPhone when VoLTE is available on it, and not before. Prior to this I hung onto an EDGE device since it's introduction.

Now the funny thing is, since mobile devices are billed by the byte or minute, malware on these devices are of an extremely high concern and expense to their users. There is almost no reason not to update the software, and if the hardware/carrier's are refusing to do this, maybe the government might have to force them to. eg The hardware vendor must maintain updates to all hardware sold new for 7 years and the carrier is required to push these updates within 30 days. This might force the hardware vendors to better engineer their devices or better yet, standardize on one or two hardware/software profiles that they can better support instead of making one variant of each device for every carrier in the world. If Microsoft can support an operating system for 6 years (plus an additional 5 for extended support) so can the Android vendors.

It's the device mfg.  Here's what happens.

 

samsung spits out a bunch of different model phones running Android OS 2.x.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.x and 4.2.x.  All using different processors, etc.   When Google releases an updated release, Samsung will decide to update which ever models they see fit.  If they decide not to update it, then whatever software runs on it is is it.  A lot of Samsung models won't get a software update and some will.  What Samsung does is add some other features like Touch Whiz, or some other phone specific feature.  Once Samsung does their little modifications, then they have to get the cell carrier's approval.  This process can take 4 to 6 months, and by the time they do this, there might be at least one or so more minor updates.

 

The Nexus models don't go through this mess.  The Nexus models are similar to the way Apple does their releases, the major problem is that there aren't many devices to choose from and they seem to only get updated so long.  The other problems is that they might not be as fully featured as what Samsung or HTC put out on the market.

 

Here's how they work.

 

HTC Nexus One  Discontinued

Android 2.1 Eclair upgradeable to 2.3.6 Gingerbread

 

Samsung Nexus S  Discontinued

Android 2.3 Gingerbread upgradeable to 4.1.2 Jelly Bean

 

Samsung Galaxy Nexus  Discontinued

 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich upgradeable to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean

 

LG Nexus 4

4.2 Jelly Bean upgradeable to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean

 

So, the early two model Nexus phones can't be upgraded to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean, whereas the more recent models, you can.

post #64 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

one of the problems with an OS that's too open.


How can an OS be to open, that's like saying cocaine is to white.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #65 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

 

HTC Nexus One  Discontinued

Android 2.1 Eclair upgradeable to 2.3.6 Gingerbread

 

Samsung Nexus S  Discontinued

Android 2.3 Gingerbread upgradeable to 4.1.2 Jelly Bean

 

Samsung Galaxy Nexus  Discontinued

 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich upgradeable to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean

 

LG Nexus 4

4.2 Jelly Bean upgradeable to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean

 

So, the early two model Nexus phones can't be upgraded to 4.2.2 Jelly Bean, whereas the more recent models, you can.

Every phone you listed has a 4.2.2 ROM over at XDA. Even the original HTC G1 has a 4.2.2 ROM available. It's easy to do and your phone can live one for at least 5 years.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #66 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Every phone you listed has a 4.2.2 ROM over at XDA. Even the original HTC G1 has a 4.2.2 ROM available. It's easy to do and your phone can live one for at least 5 years.

Do you honestly think that most users are going to do this?  NO.  Only maybe the phone geeks might do this, but most of them will just buy a new phone.

 

Are they approved and supported by the mfg of the device and carrier?

post #67 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


How can an OS be to open, that's like saying cocaine is to white.

An OS can be open enough to install in a variety of hardware from a technical, legal, and "supported" standpoint, and there is open from a being modifiable.  With iOS there are certain types of malware that just can't be written. Then you have the availability of malware.  In Apple's case, they do whatever they are doing to prevent malware apps from being made available on their App Store, which discourages malware apps, there are also certain types of malware that just simply can't be written due to how Apple developed their OS.  At least, this is what one of the security firms had mentioned in a report I read about 4 months ago.

post #68 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Every phone you listed has a 4.2.2 ROM over at XDA. Even the original HTC G1 has a 4.2.2 ROM available. It's easy to do and your phone can live one for at least 5 years.

 

 

Do these ROM upgrades add all of the same features?  Example.  Let's say you bought a S3 and you can only get 4.1.1, and you put this 4.2.2 ROM upgrade, will it have all of the features that Samsung put in the S3 or are these ROMs more like a Nexus 4.2.2?  And are they supported by the device mfg and carrier?

post #69 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Do you honestly think that most users are going to do this?  NO.  Only maybe the phone geeks might do this, but most of them will just buy a new phone.

 

Are they approved and supported by the mfg of the device and carrier?


If not they should, that is if they want to continue using their phone with the newest Android version. Carriers only support the phone for 2 years, as well as the manufacture. After that your on your own, so if you want to keep the phone longer, XDA is the way to go. It's very easy to do now, there are apps that install a custom recovery, after that it's as easy as downloading a new ROM and clicking install.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #70 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

 

 

Do these ROM upgrades add all of the same features?  Example.  Let's say you bought a S3 and you can only get 4.1.1, and you put this 4.2.2 ROM upgrade, will it have all of the features that Samsung put in the S3 or are these ROMs more like a Nexus 4.2.2?  And are they supported by the device mfg and carrier?


You can have it anyway you want it. Samsung packages can be installed seperatly, which is a better solution then just installing them all. I'm sure there are a couple that you will never use and if you find that you did want one that you didn't install, then just go back and install it.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #71 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Every phone you listed has a 4.2.2 ROM over at XDA. Even the original HTC G1 has a 4.2.2 ROM available. It's easy to do and your phone can live one for at least 5 years.

 

Of course it sounded neat to be able to run unsupported software on a device, but most of the time you've got unexpected result. Having a unsupported product from the mfg maintained by a community group is never good from a developer perspective.

post #72 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


You can have it anyway you want it. Samsung packages can be installed seperatly, which is a better solution then just installing them all. I'm sure there are a couple that you will never use and if you find that you did want one that you didn't install, then just go back and install it.

You know what that sounds like?   A pain in the ass.  Sorry, but all of this stuff you have to do just to "keep" your Android phone a little longer or to put the latest OS that the mfg won't release seems like a lot of extra work.   Yeah, I don't think most people are going to do that.   every time someone says they "rooted" their phone, it takes me about a half an hour to stop laughing.  I can't help it either, it's an automatic response.

post #73 of 81
So let me break this down.

In the first square, it states that Malware grew at a staggering rate. Well no shit. THe platform grew as well (and I mean mobile computing). THieves look for the best target or newest target so of course the amount of scum will grow.

next square. Really? we shouldnt click on links that we get from people we don't know? Hasnt this been going around for 20 years? If you are still dumb enough to do it, you deserve to lose 20$

next. yes, Android users are more susceptible to malware. First, there are more of them out there now. You always design your virus/phishing scam to cast the widest net. More chance for success. Also, Android is the easiest to get your teeth into from a virus writer point of view, mostly because of side loading.

next, wow, a billion devices? kinda surprises me.

Next, if you are dumb enough to go to anything other than the Google Play Store or Amazon, you are asking for it. Seriously. You get nothing for free. If you find another app on a different store for free you are going to either pay for it through ads (best case) or malware (worse case)

Your right sorta on this one. Older devices should get updated and from here on out I think they will. Hardware has sorta plateu'd so there are not any more of those huge jumps. Also, security patches should be put out for older versions if you are not going to update them to the latest full version. Even MS puts a few years worth of support in for older versions of windows.

OTH, the 4% figure is total BS. Jellybean is the latest version. Ice Cream Sandwich was the one before. Both are secure. JB had a 30 % install base in the report from june, ICS had a higher number but still in the 30's so for FFS lets say that they both have 30%, that gives you a 60% user base that is secure. A FAR FUCKING CRY from 4%. Even if you throw out ICS you are off by a shit ton of % points.

Lastly, the older OSs are dead as can be, they just havent fallen over yet. New apps are only being designed for ICS and up. People are coming to the end of the 2 year cycle and will be upgrading out of GB soon.

tl;dr version

What a bunch of FUD that article is
post #74 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by piizzadude View Post

In the first square, it states that Malware grew at a staggering rate. Well no shit. THe platform grew as well (and I mean mobile computing). Thieves look for the best target or newest target so of course the amount of scum will grow.

Nah, that's not how it works.

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 #75 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by piizzadude View Post

So let me break this down.

In the first square, it states that Malware grew at a staggering rate. Well no shit. THe platform grew as well (and I mean mobile computing). THieves look for the best target or newest target so of course the amount of scum will grow.

next square. Really? we shouldnt click on links that we get from people we don't know? Hasnt this been going around for 20 years? If you are still dumb enough to do it, you deserve to lose 20$

next. yes, Android users are more susceptible to malware. First, there are more of them out there now. You always design your virus/phishing scam to cast the widest net. More chance for success. Also, Android is the easiest to get your teeth into from a virus writer point of view, mostly because of side loading.

next, wow, a billion devices? kinda surprises me.

Next, if you are dumb enough to go to anything other than the Google Play Store or Amazon, you are asking for it. Seriously. You get nothing for free. If you find another app on a different store for free you are going to either pay for it through ads (best case) or malware (worse case)

Your right sorta on this one. Older devices should get updated and from here on out I think they will. Hardware has sorta plateu'd so there are not any more of those huge jumps. Also, security patches should be put out for older versions if you are not going to update them to the latest full version. Even MS puts a few years worth of support in for older versions of windows.

OTH, the 4% figure is total BS. Jellybean is the latest version. Ice Cream Sandwich was the one before. Both are secure. JB had a 30 % install base in the report from june, ICS had a higher number but still in the 30's so for FFS lets say that they both have 30%, that gives you a 60% user base that is secure. A FAR FUCKING CRY from 4%. Even if you throw out ICS you are off by a shit ton of % points.

Lastly, the older OSs are dead as can be, they just havent fallen over yet. New apps are only being designed for ICS and up. People are coming to the end of the 2 year cycle and will be upgrading out of GB soon.

tl;dr version

What a bunch of FUD that article is

There are two aspects of looking at malware.  The number of attacks and the different TYPES of malware.  Sure, if there is more devices to attack, when some malware gets released, it will affect more devices, but I think these reports are talking about the different TYPES of malware.  

 

According to F-secure labs, here are THEIR numbers.  Please don't shoot the messanger.

 

In Q1 2012  There were 47 Android based malware families and variants.

In Q2 2012  There were 46 Android based malware families and variants.  So not much change from those two quarters.

in Q3 2012  There were 49 Android based malware families and variants.  That's just a slight increase in the number of families and variants.

In Q4 2012  There were 96 Android based malware families and variants.  That' s about a doubling of the different TYPES of malware.

In Q1 2013  There were 136 Android based malware families and variants.  That' s another increase of about 40% increase over the previous year.

 

What you are discussing is how many units it is affecting.

 

Symbian is also seeing some malware as well, but they don't represent as many phones do they?  It's not based on how many devices, it's based on how easy it is to create malware and how easy they are being distributed.  Obviously, Apple iOS is created where certain types of malware is impossible to create.  That was mentioned in one of the F-Secure reports.  The other aspect is that Apple has their procedures to discourage and eliminate Malware based apps from their App Store, which is where most iPhone/iPad users get their apps from, so if Apple does a good job in preventing malicious apps from being distributed, then they just simply won't get posted and the malware developers are discouraged from creating them in the first place.  Obviously, Google and others don't do a very good job in eliminating malware apps from being posted, and they may not take them down that quickly and the same goes for other Android based app stores.  Who's fault is that?  The Android App stores hosting sites and Google for creating an OS that is too susceptible to having malware created.

 

BOTTOM LINE.   Android = more malware = BIG BAG OF HURT.


Edited by drblank - 6/29/13 at 10:01am
post #76 of 81
"Obviously, Google and others don't do a very good job in eliminating malware apps from being posted, and they may not take them down that quickly and the same goes for other Android based app stores. Who's fault is that? The Android App stores hosting sites and Google for creating an OS that is too susceptible to having malware created."

I will not argue that there is a place between where Google is and where Apple is in the app screening process that Google needs to get to. It is too easy to slip a few malicious apps in there.

I will say though that they do a good job of getting them down right away. I think the last one (and there were only 3-4 times that I know of this happening) they were down within the hour.

THey never should have gotten there in the first place though.

You said "Android app stores" There are only two, Amazon and the Play Store. If you get your apps anywhere else you deserve what you get. As I said before, if there is a paid app on those stores and you find it free on a different one, you get what you pay for.
post #77 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by piizzadude View Post



You said "Android app stores" There are only two, Amazon and the Play Store. If you get your apps anywhere else you deserve what you get. As I said before, if there is a paid app on those stores and you find it free on a different one, you get what you pay for.

Doesn't Samscum have their own App Store?  How about Getjar, Slide ME, F-Droid, Appoke, Appia, App Brain, Aproov, Android Pit, Handster, Mobango, Opera Mobile App Store, Insyde Market, AppsFire, Baidu App Store (China), Yandex (Russia) and I'm sure there are others.

post #78 of 81
Samsung apps are in the Playstore

All the others, NO.

Yes they are app stores for android. Should anyone think of buying from them, NO. IF you do, you deserve what you get.

And Apple has the same stuff: http://alternativeto.net/software/app-store/?platform=iphone
post #79 of 81

F-Droid is a safe place to download AdAway which is no longer available in the Play Store.  All the other decent apps on F-Droid are also available through the Play Store so overall it's not that great or necessary.

post #80 of 81
Only 4% of Android phones are on the latest update.

You do know android doesn't need updates to have the latest features, right?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Android accounts for 92% of mobile malware, malicious apps increase 614%
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android accounts for 92% of mobile malware, malicious apps increase 614%