SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
ZDNet have put out a story claiming that, although Apple's walled-garden approach is not popular with everybody, it does appear to have prevented almost all malware from becoming prevalent on iOS. From the article:
Everyone knows there's no iOS malware, right? Strictly speaking, there is. As a practical matter, there isn't. At least if you stick with the official Apple store, you are more likely to win Powerball than to be hit by iOS malware.
But to make that "strictly speaking" point, FortiGuard Labs's Axelle Apvrille ("the Crypto Girl") felt it necessary to list all the iOS malware on record all 11 instances, eight of which work only on jailbroken phones.
[....]
It's not like iOS isn't an inviting target. There are zillions of devices out there and iOS customers have shown that they are willing to spend money on apps. And there absolutely are ways that iPhones can be attacked, although more likely through vulnerabilities, especially in Safari, than through malicious apps.
In fact, Apple's rules for what it will allow in its App Store are so strict that they effectively ban security software. It's a good thing there is next to no malware, because what you would need to do to block it on your phone is not permitted. Android, on the other hand, has a burgeoning market for security software and no shortage of malware.
Do you agree with this assessment?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by stormwyrm on Saturday June 14 2014, @10:21AM
But I'll add that malware is a side effect of having a fully open system where you, the user, are empowered to do interesting things. No freedom without responsibility. It's the difference between living in a functioning democracy and a totalitarian nanny state.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by quadrox on Saturday June 14 2014, @10:31AM
Most insightful comment every. Too bad I have no mod points!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @10:55AM
I live in a democracy, hooray!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Horse With Stripes on Saturday June 14 2014, @12:04PM
The iPhone users still have the choice to be iPhone users so there is still plenty of freedom involved.
(Score: -1) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @12:13PM
Just like you can choose to move to North Korea. But don't be surprised if your freedom disappears after making that choice, just like with Apple. And we can debate whether these people really made an educated choice, obviously not...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Horse With Stripes on Saturday June 14 2014, @12:29PM
Wow. Comparing choosing a phone to moving to North Korea? That's quite a bit of hyperbole (and Apple hate).
In case you didn't know, you can always change phone vendors, models or even carriers. It's not a permanently implanted device that commits your life to some all-controlling oppressive entity. I understand your desire to have the freedom to choose anything you like, as do I. But let's not lose perspective. It's just a phone, and can be swapped, replaced or even put in a drawer if desired. Try some real life oppression some day and you'll beg for the "North Korean State of Apple".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @03:09PM
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @04:44PM
North Korea is not an analogy for Apple. Someone has 'overreaction' and 'hyperbole' turned up to 11.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by HiThere on Saturday June 14 2014, @06:45PM
Sorry, but it is *an* analogy to Apple. I.e., there is at least one way in which they are analogous. Singapore would have been an analogy with a closer fit along multiple axis, but wouldn't have had the emotional impact. Even then it's (currently) overstating the case.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by khchung on Sunday June 15 2014, @06:00AM
Singapore would have been an analogy with a closer fit along multiple axis, but wouldn't have had the emotional impact.
It HAS the emotional impact, just not the one desired by Apple-haters.
If an Android user who has been to Singapore read about this analogy, they might actually decide to switch to iPhone, and we can't have that.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Saturday June 14 2014, @07:20PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 3, Interesting) by BasilBrush on Saturday June 14 2014, @06:25PM
There are plenty of interesting things to be done on iOS. Here and on Slashdot, we have an unusual niche of hobbyist geeks that want to do things with gadgets that most people don't. And many are prepared to accept the security downgrade that comes with it. For most phone users that's a security cost with no benefit, as thy don't want to do those things.
The only popular thing the freedoms (and security cost) you are talking about enables is piracy.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @06:49PM
> The only popular thing the freedoms (and security cost) you are talking about enables is piracy.
Don't confuse your ignorance of what other people want for what is really unwanted.
For example, XPrivacy [wired.com] on Android is revolutionary but the user-interface is not anywhere near close to mainstream quality levels. That's irrelevant for iOS though, because there are no circumstances whatsoever in which Apple will allow an app with that kind of functionality because it interferes with apple-approved "malware" the kind that sells you out to 'legitimate' companies instead of outright criminals.
But there are much simpler things that Apple won't let you do with an iphone that regular people want to do. For example, you can't record from the camera or the microphone with the screen off -- apple forbids apps that do that. Another thing you can't do is log what happens in imessage to email - you can do it one message at a time, and you can try to extract it from a device backup, but if you just want a set-it-and-forget it automated external log of the text messages you receive you can't do it.
I know about those two cases because my friend's daughter has an abusive husband and she needed to do those things in order to get irrefutable proof of his abuse (death threats, etc) because he's smart enough not to leave bruises. Apple wouldn't let her.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Monday June 16 2014, @07:19PM
There's nothing quite so ignorant as an AC.
XPrivacy is an app that only exists to counter the security weaknesses of Android. It's not needed on iOS because users can already selectively deny apps access to user data.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 15 2014, @01:17AM
The real question is whether the device you bought really belongs to you, or do you still want Apple to continue to dictate what you can and can't do with the gadget you paid them several hundred dollars for? That expensive gadget is your device only insofar as Apple's goals and yours coincide. If they ever clash, you always lose. It's a secure (as in trusted computing secure) computer, but it's secure as far as Apple is concerned, not you. Bruce Schneier wrote this [schneier.com] about the first mainstream attempts at making such "trusted computing" a reality (Microsoft's Palladium/NGSCB):
Arguably many modern-day mobile devices (both iOS and Android) have become exactly what Schneier described in that article from 2002: "owned by a variety of factions and companies all looking for a piece of our wallet." Further extrapolating beyond that into a world where the type of attitude that the iDevices foster becomes still more ubiquitous looks a lot like this famous dystopia [gnu.org].
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Tork on Saturday June 14 2014, @07:04PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 14 2014, @08:19PM
Windows[...]more fully open
That's how I've always seen it--in the sense of open *wounds*. [google.com]
A big problem with that ecosystem has always been that its users see the band-aids pasted all over its open wounds as armor.
I really liked the name they gave to that release of Ubuntu which translated as armor-plated bug eater. [blogspot.com]
That seemed especially apt for folks migrating from Redmond's stuff.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 15 2014, @12:49AM
Yes, Windows is perhaps so open that its brains fall out. If we go by analogies with countries, perhaps Windows would be like Somalia (absolute anarchy leading to chaos), GNU/Linux like perhaps one of the Scandinavian countries (perhaps Finland where it was born, reasonable levels of control), Android/Linux perhaps like the United States (Google, like the NSA, is always watching you), and iOS like maybe Singapore (nanny state with a lot of irritating arbitrary rules). I don't know what an OS with policies analogous to China, the old Soviet Union, or North Korea would be like. Perhaps one of those absolute lock-down systems that supposedly exist to process highly classified data.
(Score: 2) by bugamn on Sunday June 15 2014, @01:58AM
But you can install malware on Linux, just like on Windows. It just isn't a bigger target as it isn't as widely used.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 15 2014, @02:41AM
Nonsense. What blackhat wouldn't want a botnet of ten thousand powerful Linux servers which sit in professional data centres and have big fat dedicated links connected to them? Each one of those is probably worth at least ten Windows PCs sitting in someone's living room with pathetic DSL connections in a DDoS attack. The difference is for the most part these Linux servers are run by competent admins who know and care about what they are doing, and are supported by an OS that helps rather than hinders them in their attempts to secure their systems. These people understand that they aren't supposed to run any binary sent to them by some joker on the Internet, and in case they don't, the OS does nothing to help them in their stupidity, as Windows seems ever apt to do.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday June 15 2014, @03:52AM
I don't know if you realize how profound this statement is, but not in the way you intended it. Having the tools available is no good if the person at the keyboard isn't interested in using it. The device is in the hands of millions. You've just illustrated the value the "Walled Garden", that everybody likes to bitch about, is bringing to the security part of the equation. Your smart phone is one of the most personal things you could have in your possession. It has the photos you've taken, the contacts of your associations, a direct link into your communications services/social networking, and it has the ability to easily run up bills on your account. Do you want to be vigilant to keep it 'secure', or do you want it to be as dumb-proof as possible?
That's not a question intended to only receive one answer. There are very good reasons you could answer either way, I'm not judging you for choosing either. Me personally? I've chosen the pretend-I'm-dumb path. My phone is an iPhone, it's value is that it is as appliance-like as possible. I cannot install MAME on it, but at the same time I'm not too worried about getting malware from the App Store. I have an Android tablet I use for the tinkering stuff I like to do. If I render it unusable or it goes rogue on me, no biggie. I just don't want to combine tinkering with sensitive-to-my-personal life.
Thank you for bringing up exactly the reason the Walled Garden has value.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈