MacDailyNews Take: See how Spence did that? He first made Google’s Android look like an equal of Apple’s when, in fact, 210,161 of those “more than 250,000 applications” he cites happen to reside in Apple’s App Store. Then he makes it seem as if malware as big a concern for Apple’s iPhone as for Google’s Android when nothing could be further from the truth. We fixed the Journal’s headline, too. Ours conveys the real story much more clearly.
Ante continues, burying the lede several paragraphs into his piece, “Unlike Apple or BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Google doesn’t have employees dedicated to vetting applications submitted to its Android store. Google said it removes apps that violate its policies, but largely relies on users to alert it to bad software. ‘We check reactively,’ said a Google spokesman.”
MacDailyNews Take: Ante then reports that the FBI and U.S. Air Force have barred employees from downloading apps, but specifically mentions RIM BlackBerry in conjunction with the Air Force, not iPhone, while failing to explain what type of phone the FBI uses (must be classified). Even if the FBU uses iPhones, barring employees from downloading apps doesn’t necessarily mean that malware is a concern; perhaps they simply don’t want them whiling away the day with Super Monkey Ball. Again, the most important thing in his report is something Spencer seems to want to obfuscate. We won’t oblige and therefore repeat Ante’s words, “Unlike Apple or BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Google doesn’t have employees dedicated to vetting applications submitted to its Android store. Google said it removes apps that violate its policies, but largely relies on users to alert it to bad software. ‘We check reactively,’ said a Google spokesman.”
Ante continues, “‘We all see this tipping point coming,’ said Peter Tippett, who oversees an investigative-response team that studies computer crime at Verizon Business, a unit of Verizon Communications Inc. that serves corporations. ‘There is a lot of activity to figure out how to make it less likely that a financial transaction would be exploited’ on a mobile phone, he said.”
MacDailyNews Take: So, Tippett sees a tipping point. Cute onomatopoeia aside, Verizon offers BlackBerry and Android devices, not Apple’s iPhone.
Ante continues, “Some security experts believe Google’s Android Market is more vulnerable than other app stores since Google doesn’t examine all apps before they are available for users to download.”
MacDailyNews Take: Kudos to Spence for throwing that line in; however, when you read his whole piece, the general takeaway is that it’s an attempt to tar all smartphones with the same brush. We encourage you to read his full article and see if you agree.
Ante continues, “A Google spokesman said the company has put in place security measures, such as remotely disabling apps found to be malicious and requiring developers to register with its Checkout payment service, and argued there’s no evidence for claims that its store poses a greater risk than others.”
MacDailyNews Take: Oh, really? Malware designed to steal bank information pops up in Google’s Android app store, January 11, 2010. A bit of research from Spence would have been welcome in that spot, don’t you think?
Ante continues, “Apple vets applications before they appear in its App Store, but risks still exist. In July 2008, Apple pulled a popular game called Aurora Feint from its store after it was discovered to be uploading users’ contact lists to the game maker’s servers. More recently, it yanked hundreds of apps it said violated its policies, some out of security concerns.”
MacDailyNews Take: July 2008. And it wasn’t stealing bank information, either. The hundreds of apps Apple removed recently were due to objectionable content (nudity, etc.) not “security concerns.” Plese see: Apple removes porn and sex apps from iTunes App Store, February 19, 2010.
Ante continues, “‘Consumers should be aware that iPhone security is far from perfect and that a piece of software downloaded from the App Store may still be harmful,’ wrote software engineer Nicolas Seriot in a research paper detailing iPhone security holes that he presented at a computer security conference in February.”
MacDailyNews Take: That’s fine and dandy, but why does he limit it to iPhone? It’s curious. Again, this “report” seems to try really, really hard to equate all smartphones’ security concerns, when they most certainly are not equal. As Spence himself reported earlier, “Unlike Apple or BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Google doesn’t have employees dedicated to vetting applications submitted to its Android store. Google said it removes apps that violate its policies, but largely relies on users to alert it to bad software. ‘We check reactively,’ said a Google spokesman.”
Ante continues, “Apple’s iPhone itself isn’t immune to mobile threats, either. Since 2008, security experts have identified at least 36 security holes in the phone’s software, according to a review of the National Vulnerability Database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security. One, identified in September 2009, could have allowed hackers to learn someone’s username and password from messages sent to servers when browsing the Web.”
MacDailyNews Take: That’s okay, Spence, we’ll finish your report for you: That September 2009 issue has since been corrected and unlike most Google Android users, Apple iPhone users can update their devices quickly and easily to the latest OS with the latest security fixes. Please see: Android users unlikely (and often unable) to upgrade their operating systems, May 03, 2010. You’re welcome, Spence.
Ante continues, “Some victims are now more cautious. Sara Dellabella, a car saleswoman in Cuba City, Wisc., said she doesn’t download as many apps on her Motorola Inc. Droid phone, which uses Google’s Android software, after a malicious game her son downloaded from the Android Market wiped out all of her text messages and personal notes. ‘It just rips your heart out,’ she said. ‘I am being more vigilant now.'”
MacDailyNews Take: You’d better be more vigilant, Sara. After all, “Unlike Apple or BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd., Google doesn’t have employees dedicated to vetting applications submitted to its Android store. Google said it removes apps that violate its policies, but largely relies on users to alert it to bad software. ‘We check reactively,’ said a Google spokesman.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Yellow journalism, just amateurish reporting, and/or something else? Please read the full article and let us know what you think. Also, while you’re at it, let The Wall Street Journal know, too:
Some people just can’t handle the truth.
Despite attempts like this, and similar attempts on the Mac/PC front, the truth will win out in the end.
The only thing missing is accountability for reporters who deliberately bend the truth to sell the story they want to tell.
MDN: Yellow journalism, just amateurish reporting, and/or something else?
The ‘Careless Caveat’ applies: Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere incompetence.
Hm:
Applicable widely these days
(And I ‘carelessly’ hit <enter> instead of <return> for a new line.)
And the WSJ is filled with incompetence now that Rupert runs the show.
Breaking News: ” In a recent study, researchers have found that the WSJ has no editorial staff”. Researcher jax44 says “Well, I suppose I am correct, besides the Times pays me”.
@ Hm…,
Anyone can be
incompetent.
After reading the article, I now know Apple’s approach to the app store is definitely right. Soon Google will have to adapt a similar approach.
I imbeded keystroke logger in Droid app. No one complained.
I cancelled my WSJ subscription a while back after growing tired of badly biased articles.
And under its current owner the WSJ is not worth the paper it’s printed on any more.
And their web offerings are priced to make it a no brainer to pass up on the idea of paying them for an online subscription.
Wow, this site has turned on Fox News, same Newscorp now. The guy is full BS, did his Droid screw up and now he hates all smart phones.
The point of the article is that there can be malware on any app you download to any smartphone. This includes iPhone, and examples are cited. The fact that iPhone and Blacberry apps are less likely to have malware is not the main point of the article but even so, it is mentioned. The take-away message is be careful about downloading apps, no matter what phone you have. That message has merit.
I don’t know what else you want them to say. The iPhone is mentioned because it’s what many people think of when they think of a smartphone, and because malware problems do and have existed on the iPhone, it’s perfectly acceptable to talk about it. Not once does it say or even imply that security on the iPhone is worse than Google (in fact, it explicitly says otherwise) so I don’t see what your problem is.
Learn to be objective and read the article for what it is. Hint – it’s not a hit piece on Apple.
Android users want a choice of malware. That’s part of their freedoms.
I’ll stick with my “walled garden”.
“requiring developers to register with its Checkout payment service” – that isn’t something all the google fans mention much when talking about apple’s ‘lock-in’.
Ummmm, no.
This guy works for verizon and this is a hit piece. They are in a bad spot with these mal-phones, and no iPhone on the horizon.
Personally, I think AAPL and AT will will withold the iPhone goodness until VZW is on the ropes, unable to fully recover – blood sport.
Typoes all ovur the plaice…
I still don’t like the idea that I need Apple’s permission to run an app on my device. I don’t like their policies — there’s nothing wrong with porn or political speech if people want it, and I certainly wouldn’t spend months developing an application only to have Apple decide not to approve it. I don’t and won’t have an iPhone unless that policy changes.
@Hm…
A new razor for Occam.
Oh Joe, you’re so smart, and brave, and clear headed. You’ve really made me see the light.
Let’s get married.
You’d have to ask your mother first?
What a rebel.
Oh ya, one word: Safari
Just recently Facebook, the 800-pound social networking gorilla, got a lot of flak for opening up its walled-garden policy of privacy by the very same tech elite who love to criticized Apple for its closed platform. The reason why Facebook decides to do so is because of Twitter envy. Twitter is open and everyone knows that their information is not private and that Twitter can use their information for any purpose. Facebook has grown its membership to half a billion and it wants to leverage its predominance to also sell information to the highest bidder.
It is ironic to notice that people like Leo Laport, Jeff Jarvis and many others who wanted people to believe that they are the champions of “open” platform are now cynically decrying the “open” policy of Facebook and insisting that Facebook should restore its walled-garden policy.
Oh what hyprocrites! This proves that the walled-garden model protects freedom and privacy from pirates such as Google and Microsoft.
“hyprocrites”
I’m sure that was a typo but I think you’re on to something.
It’s a combo of retro, backwards thinking and hypocrisy.
To silverhawk:
The Franciscan friars must have pelted William with self referential contradictions on the first appearance of a five o’clock shadow.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate!
René Descartes is sitting in a bar, having a drink. The bartender asks him if he would like another. “I think not,” he says and vanishes in a puff of logic.
Jean-Paul Sartre is sitting at a French cafe, revising his draft of ‘Being and Nothingness’.
He says to the waitress, “I’d like a cup of coffee, please, with no cream.”
The waitress replies, “I’m sorry, monsieur, but we’re out of cream. How about with no milk?”
WSJ has always been anti-Apple.
Ampar,