Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Apr 2013 12:25 UTC
Apple "Last Friday, The Verge revealed the existence of a dead-simple URL-based hack that allowed anyone to reset your Apple ID password with just your email address and date of birth. Apple quickly shut down the site and closed the security hole before bringing it back online. The conventional wisdom is that this was a run-of-the-mill software security issue. [...] It isn't. It's a troubling symptom that suggests Apple's self-admittedly bumpy transition from a maker of beautiful devices to a fully-fledged cloud services provider still isn't going smoothly. Meanwhile, your Apple ID password has come a long way from the short string of characters you tap to update apps on your iPhone. It now offers access to Apple's entire ecosystem of devices, stores, software, and services."
Thread beginning with comment 557319
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: it happens to everyone
by Tony Swash on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 13:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: it happens to everyone"
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

If, after all these years, someone still present numbers from antivirus peddlers as-is, you know said someone is either stupid, or has an agenda.


Sounds a bit complacent to me. I wonder what your position would have been if it was reported that 79% of malware was found on iOS? Less complacent I suspect.

A report from www.mobilesandbox.org, a site that collects information about malware on Android found that out of the 300,000 new Android apps on Android stores in 2012 it found 43,000 malicious apps in 115 different malware families. Most of the fake apps were downloaded from Russian and Asian third-party app stores, but 13 malware families were also found on the official Google Play Store. It's possible to assume that very few people are downloading those apps and hence that the actual rate of malware infections is very low, but I would like to understand the reasons for assuming such a thing and the evidential basis supporting such reasoning.

According to a recent report from the security firm Kaspersky, 99 percent of all new malware attacked the Android platform last year. That was a continuation of the trend from 2011, which registered an explosive growth in Android malware.

During 2011, an average of 800 new types of malicious programs were discovered every month, and this figure rose in 2012 to a whopping 6,300 programs.

"Android is the world's most widely used smartphone operating system, so it is not surprising that it is also the hacker's favorite goal. But it has probably surprised many people, including myself, that it's as much as 99 percent", security expert Kevin Freij from MYMobileSecurity said.

Again one could assume that all those malware programs on Android are failing to actually infect any end user, even though the writers of Android malware seem to be increasing their efforts hence the explosive growth, but again I would like to understand the reasons for assuming such a thing and the evidential basis supporting such reasoning.

It's perfectly fine to argue that it is better for various reasons if one does not lock the door to ones house but it is mendacious to suggest that leaving ones door unlocked is as secure as locking it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Antivirus companies have a product to sell. So, they make it appear as if Android - the most popular mobile platform by a huge and wide margin - is insecure. A few years ago, they tried the same tactic for iOS, and failed, Interestingly enough, Apple fanatics - rightfully so - attacked antivirus companies because of that. Now, you don't. Curious.

I have another explanation for there being more different variants of malware for Android: there are more versions and variants of Android, so malware needs to be adapted to each. End result: more malware families.

Until we actually see numbers about how many Android devices are infected, from an independent source, i'm not going to believe antivirus companies, who have a long history of lies, deceit, and other forms of despicable scummy behaviour.

Sounds a bit complacent to me. I wonder what your position would have been if it was reported that 79% of malware was found on iOS? Less complacent I suspect.


Your selective perception to solve your cognitive dissonance at work again, I see! Predictable.

Consider, for instance, my reporting on the Flashback trojan:

http://www.osnews.com/story/25776/Reports_Flashback_trojan_has_infe...

Just a single antivirus company making such claims is not something that piques my interest. Antivirus companies tend to be pretty sleazy, and they like nothing more than making a threat look bigger than it really is because, hey, what do you know, their antivirus product stops this particular super-dangerous cat-killing virustrojanmalwarething.

[...]

Now, we're looking at data from security firms, so I'm still a little bit sceptical. However, I'm risking the "You're anti-Apple!!1!!!"-crap because it's looking more and more like this is an actual serious issue. Do with it as you please.


Huh. It would appear you blocked this one out to solve your state of cognitive dissonance. I've got another one for you:

http://www.osnews.com/story/24475/Supposed_Mac_OS_X_Trojan_Another_...

Headline: "Supposed Mac OS X Trojan Another Piece of Linkbait"

All in all, these stories are linkbait - plain and simple. Security companies are a lot like politicians - they spread fear (terrorism, computer viruses) because they've got something to sell (laws that further impede your rights so they can maintain their own power, security software). Like politicians, security companies are not tobe trusted, and are probably the worst scum in the software industry.


So, there you have it. The quoted claim from you is a lie. Will you apologise for spreading said lies? I highly doubt it.

Edited 2013-04-02 13:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

So, there you have it. The quoted claim from you is a lie. Will you apologise for spreading said lies? I highly doubt it.


What quoted claim??

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: it happens to everyone
by Alfman on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 16:16 in reply to "RE[6]: it happens to everyone"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Tony Swash,

Just a small personal request, but can you please cite the links to the sources of information when you are posting stats? It helps others take a quick look without having to dig up what you're talking about, thanks.

Reply Parent Score: 2