Named CommWarrior.a, the new virus attacks smartphones running the Symbian OS based Series 60 platform, replicating over both MMS and Bluetooth.
First Symbian OS virus to replicate over MMS appears
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
and well supported on many devices, but the fact that it’s closed-source and has viruses makes me kind of afraid of it.
On any OS you should be able to turn off all services (like MMS or Bluetooth in this case), so that viruses can’t get in. Most BSDs and the Mac ship in such configurations.
one thing really wonders me why people keep bluetooth on when they don’t have any of its application (like headset)? Its really simple go to bluetooth menu & select BLUETOOTH OFF! Nokia smartphones have option regarding Bluetooth visibility just turn it off. (Not sure about SE phones but they might also have such option)
All Sony Ericsson phones with Bluetooth (Classic and UIQ) have the ability to turn broadcast/visibility off.
all these symbian viruses require the user to explicitly install them.
Yeah, whatever if it was MS Windows you would be
bashing it, so it is something else it is ok
to get a virus.
Makes sense, take up for anything else.
well until it can spread with out user intervention phone viruses aren’t going to be a problem, they have to perswade the user to install, via bluetooth most hopefully are going to just bin it, though might catch a few out via text.
roger
Well in windows I would bash it because I can catch a virus with anything that is Pre-SP2 just for being online.
With these virii at least I would need to do something to get it.
personally I dont know why you would have your BT on all the time.
Read this story <a href=http://www.scmagazine.com/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=newsDetails&new…
The major worry is people will fall for this!!!
I don’t know, the fact that people have to agree to install it doesn’t make me feel good.
This is new stuff, additionally the file/request to install will most likely appear to be coming from a friend.
I think this combination will mean many people will install this not knowing any better. It could be worse of course, lets hope we never see anything that doesn’t require user intervention.
Assuming that happens, an interesting question is whether or not consumers should be obligated to pay for charges incurred by a virus (that doesn’t require user intervention to get infected).
As a consumer obviously the answer is no! But will the service providers be sympathetic? Can they afford not to be?
-mike.