The only difference here is that Microsoft's malware problem trumped its vast advantage in third party developer support over Macs.
Android is a hobbyist platform that doesn't have an advantage of any sort. iOS has the advantage, but Android has the malware.
That's probably the largest hobby group in the history of hobbies. Parking must be a bitch at their monthly get together and it would totally suck if it was your turn to bring the doughnuts, yeah I need 50 million Glazed, 20 million Old Fashioned, 60 million jelly filled, 30 million with sprinkles and 10 million Bear Claws, I'm late so can you make it quick.
Malware and viruses have been on windows and now android, Apple is and has been in both these markets and has always seemed to miss the problems, could it be that apple makes its own hardware?
So then tell all the fandroids to stop crowing over being able to side-load third party apps. You can't have it both ways. Either Google Play is the only valid place to get apps or it's not.
Actually you can. Google Play is not the only valid place to get apps. So is the Amazon App Store which gives one free paid app per day. So are reputed vendors of products like SwiftKey and Swype. So is FDroid from which you can get open source apps like AdBlocker. So are a number of extremely useful apps on XDA. An app I recently installed was WifiKill (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1282900) which Google removed from the Play Store for obvious reasons. But could be very useful for you on your own network. I had to sideload the app. Even though I often sideload apps, the setting is always off. I turn it on to load the app and then turn it off again.
get a clue - that's how most China consumers do it, and many other developing world countries too. they prefer local services for many reasons including cultural relevancy and peer familiarity as well as getting pirateware free. they have as little to do with Google and Google Play as possible. and that's where hundreds of millions of cheap Android phones are being sold, so the potential for malware infestation is huge.
we live in a first world bubble here. malware doesn't.
Are those forks of android considered android anymore? As far as Google is concerned, when a third party uses the AOSP codebase to build an OS that doesn't use Google Play, the OS becomes entirely that party's product, and the third-party assumes all responsibility for supporting that OS. Google uses the term Android to refer to devices that can access Google services. You don't see Google referring to the Kindle Fire as an Android device, for example.
The relation between Google and those non-Google play forks is somewhat like the relation between Apple and any other OS based on Darwin. Like Google, Apple releases the fundamentals of OS X as Darwin for anyone to freely use, but it does not sanction or support any Darwin-based OS besides OS X and iOS. Those other projects are on their own.
Unfortunately, the same goes for the iPhone, too. In China, many iPhone users rarely use the App Store and instead use third-party websites that have leaked distribution keys to install apps via Safari. What stops these third-party websites from distributing malware to Chinese iPhone users?
but the difference is these are either flat out illegal, like KuaiYong, or require jailbreaking, which means knowing risk-taking by those iPhone users. whereas the Android malware vector can use technically legitimate app stores too (even tho many offer pirated apps) and does not require rooting, thus easily entrapping the unsuspecting.
to see the real world outcome of that vulnerability, let me direct your attention to some hard facts reported by no less than Android Authority:
it reports that NQ Mobile has reported that in 2012 about 11.5 million Android phone worldwide had "real" malware - 1.1 million of which are in the USA! (they screwed up their math and report a higher number of 1.4 million, but hey, it's an droid fan site so ...). 25% of the total was in China, 20% India, 18% Russia, 10% Saudia Arabia and USA ...
and this total was triple 2011's. how do you think it's going this year?
Are those forks of android considered android anymore? As far as Google is concerned, when a third party uses the AOSP codebase to build an OS that doesn't use Google Play, the OS becomes entirely that party's product, and the third-party assumes all responsibility for supporting that OS. Google uses the term Android to refer to devices that can access Google services. You don't see Google referring to the Kindle Fire as an Android device, for example.
The relation between Google and those non-Google play forks is somewhat like the relation between Apple and any other OS based on Darwin. Like Google, Apple releases the fundamentals of OS X as Darwin for anyone to freely use, but it does not sanction or support any Darwin-based OS besides OS X and iOS. Those other projects are on their own.
but the difference is these are either flat out illegal, like KuaiYong, or require jailbreaking, which means knowing risk-taking by those iPhone users. whereas the Android malware vector can use technically legitimate app stores too (even tho many offer pirated apps) and does not require rooting, thus easily entrapping the unsuspecting.
to see the real world outcome of that vulnerability, let me direct your attention to some hard facts reported by no less than Android Authority:
it reports that NQ Mobile has reported that in 2012 about 11.5 million Android phone worldwide had "real" malware - 1.1 million of which are in the USA! (they screwed up their math and report a higher number of 1.4 million, but hey, it's an droid fan site so ...). 25% of the total was in China, 20% India, 18% Russia, 10% Saudia Arabia and USA ...
and this total was triple 2011's. how do you think it's going this year?
Yes -- the Chinese websites are indeed illegal but do not require any form of jailbreaking. Did we really need to link to the article that seems to directly provide links to pirate sites though?
In other words these applications are being distributed on third-party app stores in China. This is akin to crying wolf about malware being distributed via Cydia. So stick to Google Play and you will be fine then.
Don't know much about it but if I ever go Android I will opt for a Google made phone with the latest pure O/S & stick to Google Play
Sure it's Open in the sense that anyone can use the AOSP code. But the code does not come with any support. The primary benefit of open source is to reduce duplication of labor. A company which uses the AOSP codebase does not need to write its own kernel. But it's that company's responsibility to incorporate the latest upstream patches into its project.
[quote]Earlier this month, the popular app was caught harvesting users' entire phone books for upload into the social network's vast graph, without notice, and subsequently "sharing" information with other users "having some connection to them" on the site. [/quote]
From the article YOU wrote and linked to:
[quote]The firm stated, "the first time you launch the Facebook application, even before logging in, your phone number will be sent over the Internet to Facebook servers. You do not need to provide your phone number, log in, initiate a specific action, or even need a Facebook account for this to happen."[/quote]
So exactly how does uploading the user's phone number translate to "harvesting users' entire phone books?" If you're going to make shit up, at least have the brains not to link to an article that shows you're making shit up. Especially an article you wrote. Dumbass.
The amount of malware on Android to iOS is like 1000 to 1. Yeah, one might slip through the cracks, but if this is an actual malware app, it'll be taken down. Have you read the quarterly reports coming out of f-secure, Symantec, McAfee, and others? Last month Android based malware jumped dramatically on the different types of malware. The reports I've seen discuss the type of malware not the number of people effected because that's hard to tell but they are tracking the number and types of malware.
Apple does have a strict policy, but obviously, they might miss one if its a new type they haven't seen.
99% of Supermarkets *COULD* substitute horse meat labeled as beef!!!!!
A few stores in Germany, the UK, and Sweden were found where horse meat had been substituted for beef.
Since this *COULD* happen at 99% of supermarkets everyone should panic and stop shopping at supermarkets because it is *NOT SAFE*
Obviously security firms like Symantec, and people that make their living by harvesting emotions of their fan base more so than logic- like DED-have a vested interest in finding the one problem child and exaggerating it to seem like the norm.
Until all these hypothetical problems reach a point where they are affecting even a fair amount of users, they'll remain a non-issue to actual Android users and more of a source for wishful schadenfreude on Apple fans' part.
Google does need to take them seriously because once they do actually start affecting people other than the tiny percentage ones that are both
1) Smart enough to disable all necessary security features on their phone and yet also
The 'bigger' known stores are not foolproof, but they have the equivalent of an 'fda inspected' stamp on what they are selling.
You still have the option to go shopping in the shady part of town with rats and where chicken and dogs mysteriously disappear and buy from the superdupercheap beef store there if you really want to.
Given an alternative option of being locked in a prison and only being able to pick out what they are offering- even if what they are offering is generally very very good- I'll choose freedom.
The other downside to the prison system is when something actually *does* get through the lockdown- it generally affects *ALL* the inmates.
Unfortunately, the same goes for the iPhone, too. In China, many iPhone users rarely use the App Store and instead use third-party websites that have leaked distribution keys to install apps via Safari. What stops these third-party websites from distributing malware to Chinese iPhone users?
Nothing. Just like the Chinese can electrocute themselves with their own faulty knockoff power adapters.
The point, however, is that in both cases the iOS device is not being used as its designed to be used.
Android is designed to sideload apps from any source; the fact that its core OS fails to flag signing problems is transient issue (but hard to fix). The larger problem is that virtually every serious difference in Android, compared to iOS, a flaw. Google created an insecure platform under the guise of being open. It ignored risks and is now left with a mess of issues. Beyond that, Google's design for permissions invites abuse of users' privacy and security. So even without the bugs, Android has a core design flaws. It's not designed to be good, it's designed to propagate ads ad collect market data.
99% of Supermarkets *COULD* substitute horse meat labeled as beef!!!!!
No need to launch into irrelevant hysterical nonsense. Android is flawed, and Google has no way to fix the problem globally.
So when Android fans brag about how many 10 millions of phones were sold in China and India, they have to stop and admit those huge volumes are contaminated and are unlikely to ever be fixed. People are actively being exploited because Google deployed a flawed OS without regard for users' security.
If you want to only talk about Android in the U.S. and only the Google Play store, then we can do that too. In that case:
- Android is a minority platform
- It has a crap selection of apps
- Even the "reputable" by vendors such as Facebook and Samsung are exploiting its defective design to distribute spyware and privacy violating apps.
It's that simple. So decide for yourself if you want to argue that Android is supreme for having so many flawed units deployed globablly, or if you want to want to admit that Android is a minority tinkering platform for hobbyists with a lot of time on their hands to doodle with widgets and ROMs.
Would you like to briefly describe the current extent and negative repercussions of malware on Android?
Do a Google search on the subject.
Most of the people affected are regular people without a lot of money to deal with cleaning up and securing their phone on a daily basis just because Gogole did a crap job of rolling out a me-too platform in a bid to deploy a marketing-driven spyware platform under the rather arrogantly righteous banner of being "open."
It's exactly like Windows PCs a decade ago, when pretentious nerds prattled on about how there wasn't any problem with malware because they knew how to run scanner software several times a week and didn't mind losing 10% of their CPU performance to virus management. Meanwhile regular people had to deal with an unnecessary problem because their platform vendor was incompetent.
Beyond that, Google's design for permissions invites abuse of users' privacy and security. So even without the bugs, Android has a core design flaws. It's not designed to be good, it's designed to propagate ads ad collect market data.
There are many reasons to show permissions immediately prior to installation time. This is when user is actively reviewing information about the application, developer, and functionality to determine whether it matches their needs and expectations. It is also important that they have not yet established a mental or financial commitment to the app, and can easily compare the application to other alternative applications.
Some other platforms use a different approach to user notification, requesting permission at the start of each session or while applications are in use. The vision of Android is to have users switching seamlessly between applications at will. Providing confirmations each time would slow down the user and prevent Android from delivering a great user experience. Having the user review permissions at install time gives the user the option to not install the application if they feel uncomfortable.
Google seems to assume that users treat software purchases as business decisions.
Comments
That's probably the largest hobby group in the history of hobbies. Parking must be a bitch at their monthly get together and it would totally suck if it was your turn to bring the doughnuts, yeah I need 50 million Glazed, 20 million Old Fashioned, 60 million jelly filled, 30 million with sprinkles and 10 million Bear Claws, I'm late so can you make it quick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
DED seems quite desperate to engineer this into a big issue and stir up a panic.
Exactly this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJones
So then tell all the fandroids to stop crowing over being able to side-load third party apps. You can't have it both ways. Either Google Play is the only valid place to get apps or it's not.
Actually you can. Google Play is not the only valid place to get apps. So is the Amazon App Store which gives one free paid app per day. So are reputed vendors of products like SwiftKey and Swype. So is FDroid from which you can get open source apps like AdBlocker. So are a number of extremely useful apps on XDA. An app I recently installed was WifiKill (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1282900) which Google removed from the Play Store for obvious reasons. But could be very useful for you on your own network. I had to sideload the app. Even though I often sideload apps, the setting is always off. I turn it on to load the app and then turn it off again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
get a clue - that's how most China consumers do it, and many other developing world countries too. they prefer local services for many reasons including cultural relevancy and peer familiarity as well as getting pirateware free. they have as little to do with Google and Google Play as possible. and that's where hundreds of millions of cheap Android phones are being sold, so the potential for malware infestation is huge.
we live in a first world bubble here. malware doesn't.
Are those forks of android considered android anymore? As far as Google is concerned, when a third party uses the AOSP codebase to build an OS that doesn't use Google Play, the OS becomes entirely that party's product, and the third-party assumes all responsibility for supporting that OS. Google uses the term Android to refer to devices that can access Google services. You don't see Google referring to the Kindle Fire as an Android device, for example.
The relation between Google and those non-Google play forks is somewhat like the relation between Apple and any other OS based on Darwin. Like Google, Apple releases the fundamentals of OS X as Darwin for anyone to freely use, but it does not sanction or support any Darwin-based OS besides OS X and iOS. Those other projects are on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJones
So an even smaller group of devices?
And my galaxy S3 and any phone that installs Jay Freeman's app (Substrate) or Xposed or ReKey available on the Play Store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
Unfortunately, the same goes for the iPhone, too. In China, many iPhone users rarely use the App Store and instead use third-party websites that have leaked distribution keys to install apps via Safari. What stops these third-party websites from distributing malware to Chinese iPhone users?
you mean KuaiYong and other serivces:
http://www.techinasia.com/list-5-ios-iphone-ipad-jailbreaking-piracy-tools-china-2013/
but the difference is these are either flat out illegal, like KuaiYong, or require jailbreaking, which means knowing risk-taking by those iPhone users. whereas the Android malware vector can use technically legitimate app stores too (even tho many offer pirated apps) and does not require rooting, thus easily entrapping the unsuspecting.
to see the real world outcome of that vulnerability, let me direct your attention to some hard facts reported by no less than Android Authority:
http://www.androidauthority.com/1-4-million-real-malware-infections-204748/
it reports that NQ Mobile has reported that in 2012 about 11.5 million Android phone worldwide had "real" malware - 1.1 million of which are in the USA! (they screwed up their math and report a higher number of 1.4 million, but hey, it's an droid fan site so ...). 25% of the total was in China, 20% India, 18% Russia, 10% Saudia Arabia and USA ...
and this total was triple 2011's. how do you think it's going this year?
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf
Are those forks of android considered android anymore? As far as Google is concerned, when a third party uses the AOSP codebase to build an OS that doesn't use Google Play, the OS becomes entirely that party's product, and the third-party assumes all responsibility for supporting that OS. Google uses the term Android to refer to devices that can access Google services. You don't see Google referring to the Kindle Fire as an Android device, for example.
The relation between Google and those non-Google play forks is somewhat like the relation between Apple and any other OS based on Darwin. Like Google, Apple releases the fundamentals of OS X as Darwin for anyone to freely use, but it does not sanction or support any Darwin-based OS besides OS X and iOS. Those other projects are on their own.
hey, It's Open!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
you mean KuaiYong and other serivces:
[redacted]
but the difference is these are either flat out illegal, like KuaiYong, or require jailbreaking, which means knowing risk-taking by those iPhone users. whereas the Android malware vector can use technically legitimate app stores too (even tho many offer pirated apps) and does not require rooting, thus easily entrapping the unsuspecting.
to see the real world outcome of that vulnerability, let me direct your attention to some hard facts reported by no less than Android Authority:
http://www.androidauthority.com/1-4-million-real-malware-infections-204748/
it reports that NQ Mobile has reported that in 2012 about 11.5 million Android phone worldwide had "real" malware - 1.1 million of which are in the USA! (they screwed up their math and report a higher number of 1.4 million, but hey, it's an droid fan site so ...). 25% of the total was in China, 20% India, 18% Russia, 10% Saudia Arabia and USA ...
and this total was triple 2011's. how do you think it's going this year?
Yes -- the Chinese websites are indeed illegal but do not require any form of jailbreaking. Did we really need to link to the article that seems to directly provide links to pirate sites though?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
hey, It's Open!
Sure it's Open in the sense that anyone can use the AOSP code. But the code does not come with any support. The primary benefit of open source is to reduce duplication of labor. A company which uses the AOSP codebase does not need to write its own kernel. But it's that company's responsibility to incorporate the latest upstream patches into its project.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
iOS has the advantage, but Android has the malware.
I wonder how that's going to work out.
Would you like to briefly describe the current extent and negative repercussions of malware on Android?
From the current article:
[quote]Earlier this month, the popular app was caught harvesting users' entire phone books for upload into the social network's vast graph, without notice, and subsequently "sharing" information with other users "having some connection to them" on the site. [/quote]
From the article YOU wrote and linked to:
[quote]The firm stated, "the first time you launch the Facebook application, even before logging in, your phone number will be sent over the Internet to Facebook servers. You do not need to provide your phone number, log in, initiate a specific action, or even need a Facebook account for this to happen."[/quote]
So exactly how does uploading the user's phone number translate to "harvesting users' entire phone books?" If you're going to make shit up, at least have the brains not to link to an article that shows you're making shit up. Especially an article you wrote. Dumbass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me
Apple has strict review. Nothing like this will ever happen.
Oh. Wait
http://www.macworld.com/article/2037099/ios-app-contains-potential-malware.html
The amount of malware on Android to iOS is like 1000 to 1. Yeah, one might slip through the cracks, but if this is an actual malware app, it'll be taken down. Have you read the quarterly reports coming out of f-secure, Symantec, McAfee, and others? Last month Android based malware jumped dramatically on the different types of malware. The reports I've seen discuss the type of malware not the number of people effected because that's hard to tell but they are tracking the number and types of malware.
Apple does have a strict policy, but obviously, they might miss one if its a new type they haven't seen.
99% of Supermarkets *COULD* substitute horse meat labeled as beef!!!!!
A few stores in Germany, the UK, and Sweden were found where horse meat had been substituted for beef.
Since this *COULD* happen at 99% of supermarkets everyone should panic and stop shopping at supermarkets because it is *NOT SAFE*
Obviously security firms like Symantec, and people that make their living by harvesting emotions of their fan base more so than logic- like DED-have a vested interest in finding the one problem child and exaggerating it to seem like the norm.
Until all these hypothetical problems reach a point where they are affecting even a fair amount of users, they'll remain a non-issue to actual Android users and more of a source for wishful schadenfreude on Apple fans' part.
Google does need to take them seriously because once they do actually start affecting people other than the tiny percentage ones that are both
1) Smart enough to disable all necessary security features on their phone and yet also
2) Dumb enough to download apps from www.freeAppz4u/funFunSafe/haxorz.cn
then people will leave in droves.
The 'bigger' known stores are not foolproof, but they have the equivalent of an 'fda inspected' stamp on what they are selling.
You still have the option to go shopping in the shady part of town with rats and where chicken and dogs mysteriously disappear and buy from the superdupercheap beef store there if you really want to.
Given an alternative option of being locked in a prison and only being able to pick out what they are offering- even if what they are offering is generally very very good- I'll choose freedom.
The other downside to the prison system is when something actually *does* get through the lockdown- it generally affects *ALL* the inmates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
Unfortunately, the same goes for the iPhone, too. In China, many iPhone users rarely use the App Store and instead use third-party websites that have leaked distribution keys to install apps via Safari. What stops these third-party websites from distributing malware to Chinese iPhone users?
Nothing. Just like the Chinese can electrocute themselves with their own faulty knockoff power adapters.
The point, however, is that in both cases the iOS device is not being used as its designed to be used.
Android is designed to sideload apps from any source; the fact that its core OS fails to flag signing problems is transient issue (but hard to fix). The larger problem is that virtually every serious difference in Android, compared to iOS, a flaw. Google created an insecure platform under the guise of being open. It ignored risks and is now left with a mess of issues. Beyond that, Google's design for permissions invites abuse of users' privacy and security. So even without the bugs, Android has a core design flaws. It's not designed to be good, it's designed to propagate ads ad collect market data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood
99% of Supermarkets *COULD* substitute horse meat labeled as beef!!!!!
No need to launch into irrelevant hysterical nonsense. Android is flawed, and Google has no way to fix the problem globally.
So when Android fans brag about how many 10 millions of phones were sold in China and India, they have to stop and admit those huge volumes are contaminated and are unlikely to ever be fixed. People are actively being exploited because Google deployed a flawed OS without regard for users' security.
If you want to only talk about Android in the U.S. and only the Google Play store, then we can do that too. In that case:
- Android is a minority platform
- It has a crap selection of apps
- Even the "reputable" by vendors such as Facebook and Samsung are exploiting its defective design to distribute spyware and privacy violating apps.
It's that simple. So decide for yourself if you want to argue that Android is supreme for having so many flawed units deployed globablly, or if you want to want to admit that Android is a minority tinkering platform for hobbyists with a lot of time on their hands to doodle with widgets and ROMs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Would you like to briefly describe the current extent and negative repercussions of malware on Android?
Do a Google search on the subject.
Most of the people affected are regular people without a lot of money to deal with cleaning up and securing their phone on a daily basis just because Gogole did a crap job of rolling out a me-too platform in a bid to deploy a marketing-driven spyware platform under the rather arrogantly righteous banner of being "open."
It's exactly like Windows PCs a decade ago, when pretentious nerds prattled on about how there wasn't any problem with malware because they knew how to run scanner software several times a week and didn't mind losing 10% of their CPU performance to virus management. Meanwhile regular people had to deal with an unnecessary problem because their platform vendor was incompetent.
Don't hold back DED, tell us how you really feel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Beyond that, Google's design for permissions invites abuse of users' privacy and security. So even without the bugs, Android has a core design flaws. It's not designed to be good, it's designed to propagate ads ad collect market data.
Interestingly, here is how Google explains its decision to request permissions at install time vs run time (http://source.android.com/devices/tech/security/index.html):
Quote:
There are many reasons to show permissions immediately prior to installation time. This is when user is actively reviewing information about the application, developer, and functionality to determine whether it matches their needs and expectations. It is also important that they have not yet established a mental or financial commitment to the app, and can easily compare the application to other alternative applications.
Some other platforms use a different approach to user notification, requesting permission at the start of each session or while applications are in use. The vision of Android is to have users switching seamlessly between applications at will. Providing confirmations each time would slow down the user and prevent Android from delivering a great user experience. Having the user review permissions at install time gives the user the option to not install the application if they feel uncomfortable.
Google seems to assume that users treat software purchases as business decisions.