You don't think Apple is 100% successful at detecting everything either do you? None are failsafe and it appears Google may have solved the bulk of their potential malware problem over the past several months.
FWIW there's apparently claims from Homeland Security that Windows phone is more secure than either iOS or Android.
I never stated Apple was 100% successful. Nice try. However I will state that Apple's methods of checking Apps are superior to Google's even if Apple isn't 100% perfect either.
And again, this is just checking of Apps. We haven't even gotten to the architectural differences between Android and iOS.
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?
I'm not sure those are relevant to Google's numbers. Yes, it would be good if bugs in the OS could be fixed faster, but given the way vendors customize the OS and the certification processes that carriers insist on, I don't think that'll happen (Nexus/GE and CM devices aside). But if Google's security scanner blocks a malicious app from being installed in the first place, it doesn't matter as much, does it?
That's what we see with the master key bug. There are a great many devices out there with vulnerable ZipFile implementations, but Google can detect apps that try to exploit this and remove them from the Play Store or block them from third-party installs (at least on devices with Google Play Services installed). No, that's not 100% perfect (nothing is), but it's vastly better than the mainstream tech press (and many AI commenters) would have you believe.
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]if you don't install any app to Android, don't download anything from email or hyperlink, and don't visit any webpage which may link to malicious webpage, it is safer than an iPhone which does all of above! Lol
I never stated Apple was 100% successful. Nice try. However I will state that Apple's methods of checking Apps are superior to Google's even if Apple isn't 100% perfect either.
And again, this is just checking of Apps. We haven't even gotten to the architectural differences between Android and iOS.
Since you're stating Apple's method for checking apps is superior how does Apple check apps before they're approved? F-Secure (yes THAT F-Secure) says "Apple’s App Store is a monopoly. And that makes it more secure – not because of technology – but because of economics". In other words no one is going to waste a lot of time building a malicious iOS app they aren't going to make much money from, the possible exception being some political motivation rather than monetary. Should we believe F-Secure's comments on security?
Some of the same exact sources that AI has used to question Android security from a malware perspective also claim Apple's iOS has many more security holes than Google's Android. Is that referring to the architectural differences you mention and should we believe Symantec's comments on security? http://www.symantec.com/security_response/publications/threatreport.jsp
While iOS is almost certainly "more secure" than Android in most areas, Android is also not as malware infested and insecure as the antivirus companies like F-Secure and Symantec are trying to convince us to believe, and us includes AI readers.
Some of the same exact sources that AI has used to question Android security from a malware perspective also claim Apple's iOS has many more security holes than Google's Android. Is that referring to the architectural differences you mention?
While iOS is almost certainly "more secure" than Android in most areas, Android is also not as malware infested and insecure as the antivirus companies would like users (and AI readers) to believe.
With Mobile, It’s Not the Vulnerability that Will Get You
[...]
Today, mobile vulnerabilities have little or no correlation to mobile malware. In fact, while Apple’s iOS had the most documented vulnerabilities in 2012, there was only one threat created for the platform. Compare this to the Android OS; although only thirteen vulnerabilities were reported, it led all mobile operating systems in the amount of malware written for the platform.
The anti-exploit mitigations in android are no weaker than those of iOS. In fact, one could argue that they are somewhat stronger, since you get to see exactly what privileges a program wants before you even install it. However, if you choose to install apps from shady sources and turn off Google Play's verification tool, you are going to get burned. These are the users that malware writers prey on, particularly in other countries where people make extensive use of software sources in addition to, and possibly instead of, Google Play.
I never stated Apple was 100% successful. Nice try. However I will state that Apple's methods of checking Apps are superior to Google's even if Apple isn't 100% perfect either.
And again, this is just checking of Apps. We haven't even gotten to the architectural differences between Android and iOS.
And which virus scanner software on your PC (for example) has a 100% success rate at detecting everything? Think about that long and hard.
You never stated that Apple was 100% secure, but neither did derekmorr state that any virus scanner was 100% reliable. Your straw man begot the second straw man.
That aside, the 0.001% success rate of malware installation on Android is only one part of the security landscape. This tells you that Google's Play Services scanner is doing a decent job blocking malicious apps. And Play Services are independent of Android version, so it protects even the sad folks stuck on Gingerbread.
You're right though that there are differences in security between Android versions and that someone on Gingerbread is more vulnerable than someone on Jelly Bean.
Based on that we can make some guesses about who is getting infected by malware: mostly Gingerbread users (now 28.5% of active users) who choose to ignore the warnings from Play Services. Jelly Bean users (now 48.6% of active users) are inherently less vulnerable but may still choose to ignore the warnings and install a malicious app.
The anti-exploit mitigations in android are no weaker than those of iOS. In fact, one could argue that they are somewhat stronger, since you get to see exactly what privileges a program wants before you even install it.
If you have a Nexus device running 4.3x you can already control and fine-tune some of the permissions for specific apps even after they're installed. I've been doing so on a Nexus7. It's also likely to be an official and more easily accessed Android feature for everyone with the next Android version.
This is all based on a matter of perspective. For instance...the PERSPECTIVE is that Android has more security exploits based on the amount of malware, BUT...if you're getting your apps from the the Google Play Store, you're going to be fine. Download apps outside of it, and you run risks.
Similarly, the PERSPECTIVE is that the iPhone is more secure because Apple controls the App Store, yet...Charlie Miller warned Apple several times about malware-infected apps on the App Store, and Apple ignored him. He finally wrote and successfully uploaded proof-of-concept malware to the App Store just to prove a point. The result? Apple banned his account and tried to quietly sweep it under the carpet, just like every other bit of controversy that rears its head at Cupertino.
Based on that we can make some guesses about who is getting infected by malware: mostly Gingerbread users (now 28.5% of active users) who choose to ignore the warnings from Play Services. Jelly Bean users (now 48.6% of active users) are inherently less vulnerable but may still choose to ignore the warnings and install a malicious app.
I don't know if you can go that far with the data that we have. I'd love to see good, reliable data about which versions have what infections, etc. I'd also love to see how OEMs and carriers compare for patch responsiveness. There's far, far too much hype and fear-mongering when it comes to mobile security and precious little hard data.
The result? Apple banned his account and tried to quietly sweep it under the carpet, just like every other bit of controversy that rears its head at Cupertino.
Wake up, people.
Yes, please wake up and stop posting worthless lies.
Why would the mac have fewer problems compared to an Android machine? The android security model is quite similar to that of OS X. Both systems let you install applications from anywhere you want, both use unix-style process isolation, and in fact Android sandboxes applications more extensively.
Lol you really have no clue what your talking about .
Lol you really have no clue what your talking about .
Care to enlighten me with some details? I was referring the security measures built into the OS's themselves, not the policies governing the various app stores.
I actually had more problems with my iPhone than android. Maybe I'm lucky.
You've had more security problems with your iPhone, than you've had with your Android phone? Is that what you're saying? Or are you changing the argument away from security to general problems, of which you've suppled no supporting facts for your statement, once you've realized you were defeated? Please respond with facts. Thank you.
You. By claiming Apple “swept it under the carpet”. If you had proof of that, as well as your assertion that “every controversy” is treated the same, you would have posted it. You did not. You obviously have no proof. Stop posting lies.
I hear that eating crow is better if you warm it up. You might want to try that.
I guess you normally eat your crow raw at room temperature. That's a year old article and did you READ the article? Oh, BTW, Charlie Miller prefers to use Apple products, in case you didn't know Charlie's history.
Would you bring up something more recent? That article is dated Nov. 2011. What year is it? 2013. Is it possible for you to show us something more recent? I can show you to F-secure's Q1 2013 Mobile Threat report if you like that's more recent and FYI, the number of types of threats on Android is growing at a fast rate. Did you notice how many threats have been seen in iOS? Or Windows phones, or other mobile device OS's? Symbian seems to have a problem as well, but not many people use it, so you can't use that market share BS excuse either.
You. By claiming Apple “swept it under the carpet”. If you had proof of that, as well as your assertion that “every controversy” is treated the same, you would have posted it. You did not. You obviously have no proof. Stop posting lies.
Maestro doesn't read anything current. SInce he's probably using an older version of Android, he's kind of stuck in 2 year old mentality, hence the stupid article he listed, but obviously he can't show a single security report by any of the security research companies that proves his point.
I think it's hilarious that EVERY security research company is slamming Android platform to the ground as they are seeing more threats increasing like a log scale, when just about every one else has pretty much on threats to talk about, and Eric Schmidt can basically say that Android is more secure when there is not one single shred of evidence from ANY of the security research companies that he can use to back his statement up. If I was Apple, I would gather all of the market research information on security threats and stack in on a BIG HUGE SLANDER AND DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER lawsuit against Eric Schmidt/Google to shut them up FOREVER.
Comments
You don't think Apple is 100% successful at detecting everything either do you? None are failsafe and it appears Google may have solved the bulk of their potential malware problem over the past several months.
FWIW there's apparently claims from Homeland Security that Windows phone is more secure than either iOS or Android.
http://www.windowsphonedaily.com/2013/08/windows-phone-has-less-risk-of-malware.html
I never stated Apple was 100% successful. Nice try. However I will state that Apple's methods of checking Apps are superior to Google's even if Apple isn't 100% perfect either.
And again, this is just checking of Apps. We haven't even gotten to the architectural differences between Android and iOS.
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?
I'm not sure those are relevant to Google's numbers. Yes, it would be good if bugs in the OS could be fixed faster, but given the way vendors customize the OS and the certification processes that carriers insist on, I don't think that'll happen (Nexus/GE and CM devices aside). But if Google's security scanner blocks a malicious app from being installed in the first place, it doesn't matter as much, does it?
That's what we see with the master key bug. There are a great many devices out there with vulnerable ZipFile implementations, but Google can detect apps that try to exploit this and remove them from the Play Store or block them from third-party installs (at least on devices with Google Play Services installed). No, that's not 100% perfect (nothing is), but it's vastly better than the mainstream tech press (and many AI commenters) would have you believe.
Since you're stating Apple's method for checking apps is superior how does Apple check apps before they're approved? F-Secure (yes THAT F-Secure) says "Apple’s App Store is a monopoly. And that makes it more secure – not because of technology – but because of economics". In other words no one is going to waste a lot of time building a malicious iOS app they aren't going to make much money from, the possible exception being some political motivation rather than monetary. Should we believe F-Secure's comments on security?
Some of the same exact sources that AI has used to question Android security from a malware perspective also claim Apple's iOS has many more security holes than Google's Android. Is that referring to the architectural differences you mention and should we believe Symantec's comments on security?
http://www.symantec.com/security_response/publications/threatreport.jsp
While iOS is almost certainly "more secure" than Android in most areas, Android is also not as malware infested and insecure as the antivirus companies like F-Secure and Symantec are trying to convince us to believe, and us includes AI readers.
Some of the same exact sources that AI has used to question Android security from a malware perspective also claim Apple's iOS has many more security holes than Google's Android. Is that referring to the architectural differences you mention?
http://www.symantec.com/security_response/publications/threatreport.jsp
While iOS is almost certainly "more secure" than Android in most areas, Android is also not as malware infested and insecure as the antivirus companies would like users (and AI readers) to believe.
Here is a salient quote from that symantec report (http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/other_resources/b-istr_main_report_v18_2012_21291018.en-us.pdf):
Quote:
[...]
The anti-exploit mitigations in android are no weaker than those of iOS. In fact, one could argue that they are somewhat stronger, since you get to see exactly what privileges a program wants before you even install it. However, if you choose to install apps from shady sources and turn off Google Play's verification tool, you are going to get burned. These are the users that malware writers prey on, particularly in other countries where people make extensive use of software sources in addition to, and possibly instead of, Google Play.
You never stated that Apple was 100% secure, but neither did derekmorr state that any virus scanner was 100% reliable. Your straw man begot the second straw man.
That aside, the 0.001% success rate of malware installation on Android is only one part of the security landscape. This tells you that Google's Play Services scanner is doing a decent job blocking malicious apps. And Play Services are independent of Android version, so it protects even the sad folks stuck on Gingerbread.
You're right though that there are differences in security between Android versions and that someone on Gingerbread is more vulnerable than someone on Jelly Bean.
Based on that we can make some guesses about who is getting infected by malware: mostly Gingerbread users (now 28.5% of active users) who choose to ignore the warnings from Play Services. Jelly Bean users (now 48.6% of active users) are inherently less vulnerable but may still choose to ignore the warnings and install a malicious app.
If you have a Nexus device running 4.3x you can already control and fine-tune some of the permissions for specific apps even after they're installed. I've been doing so on a Nexus7. It's also likely to be an official and more easily accessed Android feature for everyone with the next Android version.
Similarly, the PERSPECTIVE is that the iPhone is more secure because Apple controls the App Store, yet...Charlie Miller warned Apple several times about malware-infected apps on the App Store, and Apple ignored him. He finally wrote and successfully uploaded proof-of-concept malware to the App Store just to prove a point. The result? Apple banned his account and tried to quietly sweep it under the carpet, just like every other bit of controversy that rears its head at Cupertino.
Wake up, people.
I don't know if you can go that far with the data that we have. I'd love to see good, reliable data about which versions have what infections, etc. I'd also love to see how OEMs and carriers compare for patch responsiveness. There's far, far too much hype and fear-mongering when it comes to mobile security and precious little hard data.
Wake up, people.
Yes, please wake up and stop posting worthless lies.
Whew! Continuity of entertainment has been guaranteed.
This poor guy (shmidt) he needs to get back on his meds, the dementia is kicking in.
Why would the mac have fewer problems compared to an Android machine? The android security model is quite similar to that of OS X. Both systems let you install applications from anywhere you want, both use unix-style process isolation, and in fact Android sandboxes applications more extensively.
Lol you really have no clue what your talking about .
Lol you really have no clue what your talking about .
Care to enlighten me with some details? I was referring the security measures built into the OS's themselves, not the policies governing the various app stores.
I actually had more problems with my iPhone than android. Maybe I'm lucky.
You've had more security problems with your iPhone, than you've had with your Android phone? Is that what you're saying? Or are you changing the argument away from security to general problems, of which you've suppled no supporting facts for your statement, once you've realized you were defeated? Please respond with facts. Thank you.
Who's posting lies???
http://blogs.cio.com/iphone/16612/iphone-dev-sneaks-malware-apple-app-store-feels-swift-wrath-cupertino
I hear that eating crow is better if you warm it up. You might want to try that.
Yes, please wake up and stop posting worthless lies.
Who's posting lies???
http://blogs.cio.com/iphone/16612/iphone-dev-sneaks-malware-apple-app-store-feels-swift-wrath-cupertino
I hear that eating crow is better if you warm it up. You might want to try that.
Who's posting lies???
You. By claiming Apple “swept it under the carpet”. If you had proof of that, as well as your assertion that “every controversy” is treated the same, you would have posted it. You did not. You obviously have no proof. Stop posting lies.
Who's posting lies???
http://blogs.cio.com/iphone/16612/iphone-dev-sneaks-malware-apple-app-store-feels-swift-wrath-cupertino
I hear that eating crow is better if you warm it up. You might want to try that.
I guess you normally eat your crow raw at room temperature. That's a year old article and did you READ the article? Oh, BTW, Charlie Miller prefers to use Apple products, in case you didn't know Charlie's history.
Would you bring up something more recent? That article is dated Nov. 2011. What year is it? 2013. Is it possible for you to show us something more recent? I can show you to F-secure's Q1 2013 Mobile Threat report if you like that's more recent and FYI, the number of types of threats on Android is growing at a fast rate. Did you notice how many threats have been seen in iOS? Or Windows phones, or other mobile device OS's? Symbian seems to have a problem as well, but not many people use it, so you can't use that market share BS excuse either.
Here's the link. http://www.f-secure.com/static/doc/labs_global/Research/Mobile_Threat_Report_Q1_2013.pdf
In order to remove parasites, you might want to set your crow to 350 F or do you like it raw to induce more parasites in your system?
You. By claiming Apple “swept it under the carpet”. If you had proof of that, as well as your assertion that “every controversy” is treated the same, you would have posted it. You did not. You obviously have no proof. Stop posting lies.
Maestro doesn't read anything current. SInce he's probably using an older version of Android, he's kind of stuck in 2 year old mentality, hence the stupid article he listed, but obviously he can't show a single security report by any of the security research companies that proves his point.
I think it's hilarious that EVERY security research company is slamming Android platform to the ground as they are seeing more threats increasing like a log scale, when just about every one else has pretty much on threats to talk about, and Eric Schmidt can basically say that Android is more secure when there is not one single shred of evidence from ANY of the security research companies that he can use to back his statement up. If I was Apple, I would gather all of the market research information on security threats and stack in on a BIG HUGE SLANDER AND DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER lawsuit against Eric Schmidt/Google to shut them up FOREVER.