The suggestion that al-Qaeda might be running an Android smartphone botnet was not only a conjecture but a ridiculous one.
If you are citing this independent paragraph: "Google has left open plenty of vectors for malware attacks seeking to spy on users or take control of their devices to form botnets," it did not specifically state that Al Qaeda might be running a botnet, only that Google has such a vulnerability that anyone with evil intent could so exploit. He is not making that up. You may not believe that Jihadists are or could do this, but that's no less conjecture than you accuse DED of.
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
I liked the part where you thought that anyone would take this article seriously.
I'll get right on trying to prove that Al-Qaeda isn't making an Android botnet to DDOS [insert target here]. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
If you are citing this independent paragraph: "Google has left open plenty of vectors for malware attacks seeking to spy on users or take control of their devices to form botnets," it did not specifically state that Al Qaeda might be running a botnet, only that Google has such a vulnerability that anyone with evil intent could so exploit. He is not making that up. You may not believe that Jihadists are or could do this, but that's no less conjecture than you accuse DED of.
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
Because it's an idiotic article. Substitute anything for __________ prefers Android over Apple's iOS. It's asinine, because the entire premise of the article is to drive the narrative that terrorists prefer Android- and if you don't agree that that's an asininie, idiotic, and ridiculous narrative than I don't know what to say. The story is at the level of tabloid sludge, if that.
I'm not going to bother to search back through all of my prior posts, but I'm almost certain that I have mentioned something similar to this topic a long time ago, at least once, if not more.
Going back many years ago, when they were hunting down terrorist scum in crappy places like Afghanistan and Pakistan, when the terrorists were captured, they almost always had ugly and bulky PC laptops!
I'm not saying that it is inconceivable or impossible, but I've never heard of any Islamic terrorists who were caught with Macs. And believe me, this subject is right up my alley, so I know what I'm talking about. When they shot dead the disgusting Bin Laden, do you think that he had a Macbook Air in his compound? Hell no.
It also makes perfect sense that Al-Qaeda terrorists prefer Android!
Apple is for creative people, and terrorists are not exactly the creative type. And no, figuring out new ways of killing people or blowing yourself up does not qualify as being creative.
Android is obviously for really poor people and now it's also apparently for Al-Qaeda terrorists too!
I didn't think that my opinion of Android users could possibly sink any lower than it currently is, but amazingly, I detest Android users even more than before now.
I'm actually taking a flight tomorrow to Vegas. I assume that I will mostly only see iOS devices being used on my flight, but I will certainly be keeping an eye out for anybody who is using Android on the plane, as they are far more likely to be a terrorist.
"Android is obviously for really poor people"???? What are you smoking?? I have a lot of friends and know a lot of people who bought iPhones but switched to android because of the restrictions. Let me add that they are not too tech savvy, so they don't know about jailbreak and stuff. They went back to android because they can't interact "normally" with other devices. (Bluetooth transfer, drag and drop on a pc, syncing music etc..) Understandable, I have never used an android phone, I used blackberry's but when I switched to the iPhone 3G a couple of years ago, I really had to adept and get used to it. Never ever switched to another platform though. Also I know a lot of people who are just waiting for a bigger screen sized iPhone and simply chose for android because of the screen size. So don't you ever say that "obviously" android is for really poor people again.
Daniel has never had much credibility. This article once again more than proves that. Terrible article by a terrible writer.
16 posts in 8 years. What's kept you coming back and not commenting? As far as your statement, I think the exact opposite. Daniel is one of the few writers who actually researches the topics he writes.
I think this is interesting research and does speak to the fact that Android is not very secure and allows apps to be side loaded quite easily. The open nature and hackability makes it very attractive to terrorists groups competing with forces like the US military. I wouldn't be surprised if we would start finding Android devices strapped to IED and missiles for GPS navigation and communications. It's a pretty scary prospect that rogue militants (whether Al-Qaeda or just plain crazy domestic terrorists), could be using cheap and open hardware to wage whatever war they want to.
How does Google handle things like export restrictions of encryption technology to Cuba, North Korea, etc? Open is open and any one with access to the source can share it. Again, that's not good news people, regardless of your affinity with Android. I would think that soon, some national interest folks may be knocking on Google and Apple's door wondering how they are going to handle this.
1. Android IS malware, it's primary design is a data-harvesting trojan, a botnet which feeds Google's core business of web advertising. Saying Google has malware is like saying a mushroom's caught a cold.
2. Android devotees are jihadists. They are Neo-esque anti-heroes, white-hat terrorists who fight the oppression of not-having-choices-I'm-not-qualified-to-make. Of course, true to character, they're just part of the plan, behaving as expected and feeding back vital information as to why the 'anomaly' they represent occurs in the first place and how it can be better contained.
No, wait a minute. Now I am always reading that Android users are susceptible to all sorts of spying by Google. Why can't the CIA find all these terrorists if they are so easily tracked by their phone? Something is wrong here. Are you saying Google refuses to reveal to the CIA which terrorists are out there? No, probably not? So what is wrong with this picture.
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
The facts in this piece are:
Two wings of Al-Qaeda have written encryption apps for Android
The rest of the article is conjecture, especially the claim that Android provides some kind of doomsday botnet to terrorists. Why the hell would anyone run a botnet off devices with limited connectivity when Windows XP is still so prevalent?
b) You act like other stories made up by analysts are researched. Um... no.
c) Because, click bait.
That being said, I think it's something that governments should look into (or do we not trust them either now?). Are we putting technology into the hands of enemies of the state because of an unfettered believe in "open and cheap"? Should we allow commercial entities (Apple, Google, Microsoft) to permit technology like encryption into the hands of those set on destruction? Is there something more that could be done to allow this technology to be used for good and not evil?
These are timeless questions which are newsworthy in my opinion. That's not an attack on Android per se, but it is something to look into from a sociological standpoint. Is all that was mentioned in this article a good idea in the long run?
That being said, many sound like they've had their feathers ruffled and panties twisted by this article. I think it's legitimate critique that should be considered instead of dismissed outright.
This article veers from preference to just idiocy. I expect this stuff on Fox News with redneck right-wing morons who believe Obama is a Muslim operative and Busy/Cheney were right to do what they did because wait for it...Al-Qaeda.
Bahahahah I love liberals. Their ability to make up the biggest crap and blame fox news is hilarious. Let me know what next you can think up after watching MSNBC and The Daily Show. I love your rants:)
Comments
If you are citing this independent paragraph: "Google has left open plenty of vectors for malware attacks seeking to spy on users or take control of their devices to form botnets," it did not specifically state that Al Qaeda might be running a botnet, only that Google has such a vulnerability that anyone with evil intent could so exploit. He is not making that up. You may not believe that Jihadists are or could do this, but that's no less conjecture than you accuse DED of.
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
I liked the part where you thought that anyone would take this article seriously.
I'll get right on trying to prove that Al-Qaeda isn't making an Android botnet to DDOS [insert target here].
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
If you are citing this independent paragraph: "Google has left open plenty of vectors for malware attacks seeking to spy on users or take control of their devices to form botnets," it did not specifically state that Al Qaeda might be running a botnet, only that Google has such a vulnerability that anyone with evil intent could so exploit. He is not making that up. You may not believe that Jihadists are or could do this, but that's no less conjecture than you accuse DED of.
The problem i that the full claim is false
Android = Terrorists
APPLE = MERICA! F*** YEAH!!
Lol
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
Because it's an idiotic article. Substitute anything for __________ prefers Android over Apple's iOS. It's asinine, because the entire premise of the article is to drive the narrative that terrorists prefer Android- and if you don't agree that that's an asininie, idiotic, and ridiculous narrative than I don't know what to say. The story is at the level of tabloid sludge, if that.
Can't wait to see how wall street and the Giggle girls spin this!
Straight out of Steve's playbook%u2026..love it!
"Android is obviously for really poor people"???? What are you smoking?? I have a lot of friends and know a lot of people who bought iPhones but switched to android because of the restrictions. Let me add that they are not too tech savvy, so they don't know about jailbreak and stuff. They went back to android because they can't interact "normally" with other devices. (Bluetooth transfer, drag and drop on a pc, syncing music etc..) Understandable, I have never used an android phone, I used blackberry's but when I switched to the iPhone 3G a couple of years ago, I really had to adept and get used to it. Never ever switched to another platform though. Also I know a lot of people who are just waiting for a bigger screen sized iPhone and simply chose for android because of the screen size. So don't you ever say that "obviously" android is for really poor people again.
Daniel has never had much credibility. This article once again more than proves that. Terrible article by a terrible writer.
16 posts in 8 years. What's kept you coming back and not commenting? As far as your statement, I think the exact opposite. Daniel is one of the few writers who actually researches the topics he writes.
C'mon you guys! Only 4 pages of comments for this story?? Get the lead out! Put your backs into it!!
I think this is interesting research and does speak to the fact that Android is not very secure and allows apps to be side loaded quite easily. The open nature and hackability makes it very attractive to terrorists groups competing with forces like the US military. I wouldn't be surprised if we would start finding Android devices strapped to IED and missiles for GPS navigation and communications. It's a pretty scary prospect that rogue militants (whether Al-Qaeda or just plain crazy domestic terrorists), could be using cheap and open hardware to wage whatever war they want to.
How does Google handle things like export restrictions of encryption technology to Cuba, North Korea, etc? Open is open and any one with access to the source can share it. Again, that's not good news people, regardless of your affinity with Android. I would think that soon, some national interest folks may be knocking on Google and Apple's door wondering how they are going to handle this.
Two things Daniel missed;
1. Android IS malware, it's primary design is a data-harvesting trojan, a botnet which feeds Google's core business of web advertising. Saying Google has malware is like saying a mushroom's caught a cold.
2. Android devotees are jihadists. They are Neo-esque anti-heroes, white-hat terrorists who fight the oppression of not-having-choices-I'm-not-qualified-to-make. Of course, true to character, they're just part of the plan, behaving as expected and feeding back vital information as to why the 'anomaly' they represent occurs in the first place and how it can be better contained.
But it did make me smile!
McD
sorts of spying by Google. Why can't the CIA find all these terrorists if they are
so easily tracked by their phone? Something is wrong here. Are you saying Google refuses
to reveal to the CIA which terrorists are out there? No, probably not? So what is wrong
with this picture.
You know, for all the haters calling this article "asinine" and/or dismissing DED as a writer, no one has attacked the source or facts presented in the article as inaccurate, slanted, or fiction. Not even even the smokescreen of FUD, which is frequently used to dilute anything they don't want to believe to be true. Wow. DED's got 'em right where he wants: cornered and writhing.
The facts in this piece are:
The rest of the article is conjecture, especially the claim that Android provides some kind of doomsday botnet to terrorists. Why the hell would anyone run a botnet off devices with limited connectivity when Windows XP is still so prevalent?
It's Ann Coulter-level scaremongering.
a) This is a RUMOR site. Expect this.
b) You act like other stories made up by analysts are researched. Um... no.
c) Because, click bait.
That being said, I think it's something that governments should look into (or do we not trust them either now?). Are we putting technology into the hands of enemies of the state because of an unfettered believe in "open and cheap"? Should we allow commercial entities (Apple, Google, Microsoft) to permit technology like encryption into the hands of those set on destruction? Is there something more that could be done to allow this technology to be used for good and not evil?
These are timeless questions which are newsworthy in my opinion. That's not an attack on Android per se, but it is something to look into from a sociological standpoint. Is all that was mentioned in this article a good idea in the long run?
That being said, many sound like they've had their feathers ruffled and panties twisted by this article. I think it's legitimate critique that should be considered instead of dismissed outright.
Your hate has made you strong. Your anger gives you focus.
Actually it gives Google a counter advertising slogan to Apple's new-found Enterprise success...
"Android, now deployed in 95% of the Jihad 400...."
This article veers from preference to just idiocy. I expect this stuff on Fox News with redneck right-wing morons who believe Obama is a Muslim operative and Busy/Cheney were right to do what they did because wait for it...Al-Qaeda.
Bahahahah I love liberals. Their ability to make up the biggest crap and blame fox news is hilarious. Let me know what next you can think up after watching MSNBC and The Daily Show. I love your rants:)