or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google's Schmidt says Android more secure than the iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's Schmidt says Android more secure than the iPhone - Page 3

post #81 of 213

Ok, it's official. He is delusional.

post #82 of 213
I think I found a snippet of video on this but I may be wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZztC7xwLB8
post #83 of 213
Steve Ballmer II
-JD
-- "If Apple wasn't so greedy, they would build G6's and give them away!"
Reply
-JD
-- "If Apple wasn't so greedy, they would build G6's and give them away!"
Reply
post #84 of 213
This is hilarious. It reminds me of the old Win Doze days. The propaganda was that windows could "do more" because it was on more machines. It took years for people to figure out it was so full of holes and virus attacks and crashes, unlike a Mac.
post #85 of 213
How much bs does this scumbag think he can get away with ?,!
post #86 of 213

I don't see what all the fuss is about.  Android devices are absolutely secure...as long as you never install an app or connect to the Internet. 

 

Eric is right...he is always right.  Google it!

 

Sheesh!

post #87 of 213
  • osmartormenajr and everyone else or whose spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend that tried(s) Android:

The ironic and funny thing is that a few months ago, Appleinsider wrote an article saying how Android's security issues are analogous or yet worse when compared to a Windows desktop operating system.  One thing that contributed to this was not knowing who or where to download an application/program from since there are lot of people taking credit for the original creator's work on it.  Talk about having a poor quality photocopier!  Eric Schmidt, go talk to your older and dumber brother Bill Gates and try to pick up more than just a few pointers for what not to do when copying other people's work.

 

post #88 of 213
He wasn't lying, he was using a Jedi mind trick - "these are not the droids you are looking for"

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #89 of 213

Just glad a person living in denial is out of Apple's board.

 

 

Of that I am truly happy.

post #90 of 213
I have a Galaxy Note2 and an iPhone5, and never had a malware attack on any of them. I am sure if Android is more secure than IOS, it is only marginal.
post #91 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie View Post

I have a Galaxy Note2 and an iPhone5, and never had a malware attack on any of them. I am sure if Android is more secure than IOS, it is only marginal.

 

What Eric's talking about "Android the OS" being secure is flawed. It's like saying I built an OS, and the OS is secure, but it can be breached because of 'n' number of other applications that can be installed on it.

Security as a whole on the platform is what the general point out as weak.

And this has to do with the overall implementation of Android as a whole. Hence security flaws could arise from licensee implementations of a certain feature, a licensee's own App Store, or any other third party guys implementation of certain things.

 

At the end, irrespective of whose fault it is, in general fingers get pointed at "Android". And this is were iOS has it's advantage cause Apple controls everything from end to end..

 

Similar to the saying "Too many cooks spoil the broth", is true with Android platform. Too many vendors / licensee / App Stores / Internet App side loading you have in short a system that's prone to more loop holes. So Eric's point of view that Google's OS as such is secure is pointless. They should have kept an end to end closed system like Apple's then to claim such a fact.

post #92 of 213

Android isn't even my second choice of smartphones, of all my Steve Ballmer bashing, I'd totally pick Windows Phone over Android, I really don't want to install anti-virus on my mobile device, what Google should do is make an Android defender like service like Microsoft so their users don't have to go through the hassle of maintaining that stuff.

 

 

Schmidt, not a trust worthy guy, slimy.

post #93 of 213
Clearly he hasn't exercised his Ph.D. since before leaving SUN.
post #94 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Clearly he hasn't exercised his Ph.D. since before leaving SUN.

 

How does one exercise his PhD?

 

Schmidt is a dweeb. But he is also whip smart. He rarely says anything that is far off the mark. I think, in this instance, what he is saying is that given the number of Android devices out there, the security record is not bad at all.

post #95 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

No, if Sergey Brin said it then it'd be from the horses mouth.

True. When Schmidt says it, it comes from the horse's other end.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #96 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by murman View Post

Android isn't even my second choice of smartphones, of all my Steve Ballmer bashing, I'd totally pick Windows Phone over Android, I really don't want to install anti-virus on my mobile device, what Google should do is make an Android defender like service like Microsoft so their users don't have to go through the hassle of maintaining that stuff.

Actually they have. The latest reports based on real Google Android app install numbers show only .001 percent of those were malicious apps attempting to get past the baked in defenses. Assuming the numbers are accurate, and no one is yet disputing them so far as I can tell tho they've been invited to, that equates to possibly 15,000 malicious app installs sneaking past built-in Google Android safeguards out of the 1.5 Billion total installs studied. That's a pretty tiny number. And before anyone says "yeah, but that's just from the official Play Store" it isn't. Those stats include unofficial side-loaded apps too, an area where Google still offers malicious app protection. Now of course if a user decides to ignore the big red warning screen presented by Google when they attempt to load a malicious app and proceeds anyway, well there's no protection from stupid and those folks aren't part of the .001% stat.

In a nutshell there's been a lot of changes to Google Android security over the past year or so with features like AppVerify via Google Play Services rolled out as far back as Gingerbread 2.2 and now protecting upwards of 95% of all active Google Android smartphones. That's something AI has never bothered reporting so readers here being unaware of it isn't surprising. While Schmidt's statement was as best an unfortunate choice of words and at worst an outright lie the scary reports of runaway malware on the Android platform are way overblown according to the most recent statistics. The scareware stories flowing from anti-malware companies and repeated by the "I hope it's true" crowd are mostly a collection of FUD Facts IMO.
http://qz.com/131436/contrary-to-what-youve-heard-android-is-almost-impenetrable-to-malware/
Edited by Gatorguy - 10/8/13 at 6:01am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #97 of 213

The iPhone is FAR more secure... for a few reasons.

The iPhone and iOS in general, is far more secure than Android simply by design. Having a closed (or shall we say, controlled) ecosystem allows Apple to immediately close security holes, like the bug that was detected in the first release of iOS 7. There will always be vulnerabilities in a computer system, as long as the device is turned on. What's important is that Apple has enough control of their environment that they could fix the issue and have an update available to EVERYONE extremely quickly. That passcode lock bypass was acknowledged (in fact, before the official release of iOS 7), and has already been patched, so I don't think many of you had someone bypass your lock screen with that method! Also, the integration of the WORLD'S FIRST truly usable (because it is SOOOO much faster and more accurate than any other consumer-grade version of fingerprint scanning ever available) fingerprint scanner on the new iPhone 5s makes THAT particular iPhone FAR more secure than any other phone or computer on the market. Every CIO in the world should pay notice and if they truly care about the security of their company's data, should be buying their employees the iPhone 5s for the time being. Eric Schmidt is a dumb putz. I will happily be receiving my iPhone 5s today in the mail. Thanks Apple, for building in technology that will actually make my phone work better. I don't want to wave my hand over my phone to answer it.. I do however, want it to unlock simply by picking it up and touching my thumb to the home button. No more passwords, awesome!!!! :) :) :) 

 ....and don't even try to say that some German hacking team bypassed the fingerprint scanner.. that method is so elaborate and costly and requires someone have so much access to you to be getting copies of your fingerprints!! if someone has the ability to get that close to you and enough money to print out 2400dpi prints onto skin-like polymer, you have bigger problems and really need to invest in full-time security staff!
post #98 of 213

So many comments and no mention to the classics - 2006 Microsoft co-president Jim Allchin suggested that Windows Vista is so secure that it does not need any antivirus. Eric couldn't beat that. You know, there are people so stupid that if they participate on stupidity contest, they wouldn't win. Even there they land on second place. 

Help Macalope, he's fighting alone. 
Reply
Help Macalope, he's fighting alone. 
Reply
post #99 of 213

When I saw the orange-clothes in the Thumbnail image it reminded me of prison-garb, which all thieves should wear.

Good choice.

 


Speaking of Orange, it's always been an "Apples to Oranges" comparison (hey I'm good today) to compare 96 different flavors of Android, many years-old and obsolete, that don't even all run the same stuff, against essentially 1 (or 2 or 3) version of iOS in a championship pedigree that can largely run (mostly-)all the same Apps.


No shame, these guys.


HEY!  GM IS KILLING FERRARI ON MARKET SHARE!  The Chevy Cruze is clearly a better car than the 458 Italia!

post #100 of 213

#Flawgic

post #101 of 213

More secure? Is it because the Android platform has more malware is that how security is judged?  The more malware types, the more secure?  Hmmm...  Interesting logic.

post #102 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Actually they have. The latest reports based on real Google Android app install numbers show only .001 percent of those were malicious apps attempting to get past the baked in defenses. Assuming the numbers are accurate, and no one is yet disputing them so far as I can tell tho they've been invited to, that equates to possibly 15,000 malicious app installs sneaking past built-in Google Android safeguards out of the 1.5 Billion total installs studied. That's a pretty tiny number. And before anyone says "yeah, but that's just from the official Play Store" it isn't. Those stats include unofficial side-loaded apps too, an area where Google still offers malicious app protection. Now of course if a user decides to ignore the big red warning screen presented by Google when they attempt to load a malicious app and proceeds anyway, well there's no protection from stupid and those folks aren't part of the .001% stat.

In a nutshell there's been a lot of changes to Google Android security over the past year or so with features like AppVerify via Google Play Services rolled out as far back as Gingerbread 2.2 and now protecting upwards of 95% of all active Google Android smartphones. That's something AI has never bothered reporting so readers here being unaware of it isn't surprising. While Schmidt's statement was as best an unfortunate choice of words and at worst an outright lie the scary reports of runaway malware on the Android platform are way overblown according to the most recent statistics. The scareware stories flowing from anti-malware companies and repeated by the "I hope it's true" crowd are mostly a collection of FUD Facts IMO.
http://qz.com/131436/contrary-to-what-youve-heard-android-is-almost-impenetrable-to-malware/

So, this threat report from F-Secure is BS?

http://www.f-secure.com/static/doc/labs_global/Research/Mobile_Threat_Report_Q1_2013.pdf

post #103 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by stylorouge View Post

My Nexus is very secure never had problem with it. I'm sure too that iPhone is very secure as well.

 

You know that is the same logic my mom uses, she thinks because a bad thing did not happen to her she thinks she is doing all the right things. Until I explain that unless the bad thing was not going to happen to her it does not mean her actions kept is from happening.

post #104 of 213

Okay I figure out the reasoning behind Schmidt comment.

 

Schmidt and Google thinks Android is more secure because they are spying on what the users are doing so they know exactly what you are up to, therefore this is more secure since Apple is not watching over you. It is the big brother view of security.

post #105 of 213
I wonder how many android devices actually get malware that are stock, not rooted and Unknown sources Is never checked in the settings. Is there a pie chart for that on the web?
post #106 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

What kind of drugs do they take over @Google? Must be some really good shit.

 

Many major brand mobile apps not secure on Android, says study

http://www.csoonline.com/article/738947/many-major-brand-mobile-apps-not-secure-on-android-says-study

 

Corporate Android Apps Not All Secure

http://www.esecurityplanet.com/mobile-security/corporate-android-apps-not-all-secure.html

 

Millions of Android users vulnerable to security threats, say feds

http://www.zdnet.com/millions-of-android-users-vulnerable-to-security-threats-say-feds-7000019845/

 

Android OS Is Least Secure Platform for Aircraft Electronic Flight Bags

 

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ainalerts/2013-09-03/android-os-least-secure-platform-aircraft-electronic-flight-bags

 

Android Security Vulnerability

http://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2013-08-11-android

 

 

etc., etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,

 

But, but, but Eric Schmidt is the Chairman of the Board of Google, he's supposed to be honest and since he gave absolutely no independent research to back up his statement, we are just supposed to automatically believe him and take him at his word.  

 

There are people out there that will believe Schmidt because they only listen to Google people and completely dismiss all 3rd party research.

post #107 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

So, this threat report from F-Secure is BS?

http://www.f-secure.com/static/doc/labs_global/Research/Mobile_Threat_Report_Q1_2013.pdf

Based on the latest reported real numbers and definitions, yeah pretty much serving as more scareware.
Edited by Gatorguy - 10/8/13 at 6:40am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #108 of 213

He comes from the school of thought that says "If my lie is outrageous enough and I say it with a straight face, people will believe me."

post #109 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca Rini View Post

I wonder how many android devices actually get malware that are stock, not rooted and Unknown sources Is never checked in the settings.

Reportedly a potential .001% of app installs.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #110 of 213

I wonder if Eric was talking about Jelly Bean or Android as a whole? Since Jelly Bean is the only version of Android that you could reasonably call "secure" as all previous versions (including ICS) have severe security holes in the base OS itself which were only fully plugged in Jelly Bean.

 

Funny how none of the Android apologists (or these "security experts" who make these reports) want to separate out Android by version and simply try to shift the goalposts by talking about the number of Apps they have "apparently" discovered.

 

If these "experts" aren't even aware of the architectural differences between GB, ICS or JB and how they relate to security, then how can they be trusted?

post #111 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by stylorouge View Post

My Nexus is very secure never had problem with it. I'm sure too that iPhone is very secure as well.

 

If you leave your bike outside in your front yard everyday and nobody steals it, that would not mean it is secure. It just means you have been lucky. 

 

Android inherently is less secure than the iPhone because Android has no vetting process for evaluating the security of apps it runs. Apple on the other hands checks every app in the app store to look for things like malware. Even Apple gets bitten sometimes, but over all that process alone makes the iPhone much more secure. 

post #112 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by stylorouge View Post


I actually had more problems with my iPhone than android. Maybe I'm lucky.

 

You have had security problems on your iPhone, or are you moving the goal posts in the discussion to include any type of problem?

 

Thompson

post #113 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stylorouge View Post

My Nexus is very secure never had problem with it. I'm sure too that iPhone is very secure as well.

 

If you leave your bike outside in your front yard everyday and nobody steals it, that would not mean it is secure. It just means you have been lucky. 

 

Android inherently is less secure than the iPhone because Android has no vetting process for evaluating the security of apps it runs. Apple on the other hands checks every app in the app store to look for things like malware. Even Apple gets bitten sometimes, but over all that process alone makes the iPhone much more secure. 

 

I have an Android phone. The thing is rooted and running Cyanogenmod but that's irrelevant.

 

I use a dozen of popular apps and all of them are available on iOS. I browse a lot through Chrome and also use twitter or facebook. Please explain to me how I am at risk of something. Also, I do not need an AV for windows 7 (when I used to have an Windows machine).

 

How can I get virus or malware? Never saw any android user getting it. I'm not saying that Android is more secure than iOS.

I'm just saying that iOS and OSX are amazingly secure, but Android is very close and that's almost the same risks ( 0 ) for normal users. Not only that, I can assure you that anyone that has the nerve to say that Android is "insecure" is ignorant and totally delusional.

 

What some stupid analysts or bloggers decide to write is shit to me. Or are we going to listen to these pseudo-jornalists only when they bash Android instead of Apple?

 

Most users here need to acknowledge something: Yes, Apple is the innovator of the world, but Android is absolutely fantastic. This isn't a matter of opinion. You can either agree with it or be ignorant and a fool.

There's more to the world then Apple. Yes, their products and innovations are unmatched, but that only caters to a few % of users. The others need choice, too.

post #114 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

If you leave your bike outside in your front yard everyday and nobody steals it, that would not mean it is secure. It just means you have been lucky. 

Android inherently is less secure than the iPhone because Android has no vetting process for evaluating the security of apps it runs. Apple on the other hands checks every app in the app store to look for things like malware. Even Apple gets bitten sometimes, but over all that process alone makes the iPhone much more secure. 

Google doesn't scan apps for malware? You might re-check that for accuracy.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #115 of 213

OK, Glass

post #116 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

So, this threat report from F-Secure is BS?

 

In short, yes. They're reporting on the number of malware apps they found in the wild, not on the number that actually get installed and caused harm. Most security companies do this; it lets them cite scary sounding numbers to try to frighten users into buying their snake oil products. 

 

Google just reported data showing that approximately 0.001% of installed apps cause harm (summary article | full slide deck). You should look at slide 17 of that presentation. For example, look at the recent "master key" issue that the tech press hyped to no end (including AppleInsider). According to Google's data, no apps with this malware are in the Play Store, and less than 8 in 1 million apps from unknown sources have it at all.

 

It's amazing what looking at actual data will do. Just think how much more productive this forum would be if the commenters bothered to read about the statistics rather than filling three pages with "zomg! schmidt is full of it!!!!1111" comments.

 

Of course, you're welcome to challenge this data. Google is hardly a disinterested party. But you're going to have to show evidence of actual harm to actual users, not just reports about scary-sounding number of malware available somewhere, out there, on the Internet.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Android inherently is less secure than the iPhone because Android has no vetting process for evaluating the security of apps it runs. Apple on the other hands checks every app in the app store to look for things like malware.

 

That's just demonstrably wrong. Google's Play Store uses Bouncer which scans all uploaded apps for malware. Google Play Services also checks apps on the devices when they're installed; it even checks side-loaded apps.

post #117 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post
 

 

In short, yes. They're reporting on the number of malware apps they found in the wild, not on the number that actually get installed and caused harm. Most security companies do this; it lets them cite scary sounding numbers to try to frighten users into buying their snake oil products. 

 

If they want to make a scary sounding numbers in order to let users buy their products, why don't they also add iOS app into their lists???

 

From human history tells us a very simply logic....

 

Closed System --> fewer problems and less popular

Opened System --> many problems and more popular


Edited by KC_150 - 10/8/13 at 8:28am
post #118 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_150 View Post

If they want to make a scary sounding numbers in order to let users buy their products, why don't they also add iOS app into their lists???

Perhaps because Apple wouldn't allow some of their anti-virus apps to be sold in the Appstore in the first place? I think I remember a couple of them going round with Apple about their apps.
Edited by Gatorguy - 10/8/13 at 8:37am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #119 of 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post
 

 

That's just demonstrably wrong. Google's Play Store uses Bouncer which scans all uploaded apps for malware. Google Play Services also checks apps on the devices when they're installed; it even checks side-loaded apps.

 

And which virus scanner software on your PC (for example) has a 100% success rate at detecting everything? Think about that long and hard.

 

Google's position is only valid if you assume (which would be a very ignorant thing to do) that they have the ability to detect every single type of malware/attack that comes through. History has proven that this is just not possible.

 

And as I pointed out above (and people seem to want to ignore) is that there are significant differences between the vulnerabilities of GB, ICS and JB. What does Google say about this? How come they only want to talk about "discovered Apps" and not the OS itself?

post #120 of 213

Wall Street Cheat Sheet ran the story and included another Schmidt line that brought on some laughter.  Here it is:

 

Schmidt danced around further questioning on his assertion and ended the session by saying that, “You will be happier with Gmail, Chrome, and Android more than you can possibly imagine,” which caused the audience to laugh again.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google's Schmidt says Android more secure than the iPhone