Phil Schiller Tweets Link to Another Security Report Criticizing Android

[BaldiMac]

thank you for mentioning this. i feel that quite a number of posters here are under the impression that the moment you start using ANdroid, some magical malware attacks your device. this is far from truth.

- the user has to take certain steps to allow installations from unofficial sources
THEN
- the user has to install pirated/hacked apk files on their device.

Well, that's not true either. There have been plenty of examples of malware downloaded from Google Play.

in addition, users can see what permission each app needs. i'm not sure if it's possible on ios. and those with root-ed android phone, can use firewall and block internet access.

iOS asks you for permission to access certain features such as photos, contacts, location services, etc. And it allows you to prevent access to individual features even if an app requests it.

(And anything that requires root access is not a feature in my opinion. You might as well be comparing Android to a jailbroken iOS device.)

----------

Hey thanks for the tip Phil! I was going to buy an iPhone but I saw on that report that Windows Phones are way more secure.

Where did yo see this report? Because the report in the OP doesn't say that at all.

 

[F apple FE]

Where did yo see this report? Because the report in the OP doesn't say that at all.

The very small snippets of that report quoted also do not say that iOS is more secure than Android but that's what most folks here and elsewhere are ASSuming.

So, based on these very same ASSumptions, Windows Phone is way more secure than iOS...

 

[LagunaSol]

Neither of us know one person with an android device that has had any encounter with malware.

* that they are aware of.

 

[numlock]

I'm not sure you understand how marketing works...

its probably at the same level as your reading and understanding

if you cant read and follow the conversation then maybe you should just jot down in textedit

 

[BaldiMac]

The very small snippets of that report quoted also do not say that iOS is more secure than Android but that's what most folks here and elsewhere are Assuming.

I have no idea what that has to do with your previous statement that I responded to, but the report very explicitly states that "99 percent of all mobile malware targeted Android devices."

So, based on these very same Assumptions, Windows Phone is way more secure than iOS...

Not in any way.

 

[Greg.]

Schiller getting desperate.

 

[BaldiMac]

Schiller getting desperate.

Or... he's proud that the decisions that Apple has made in mobile have avoided the malware problems of the PC market.

 

[titanz91]

Why?

Because Android is more 'open'. Open, in that, users have far more freedom (without the need to 'jailbreak') and that it supports more formats (video, audio files, flash), the ability to, out of the box, side load applications and that you aren't limited to just the Google Play Store for apps. I still prefer Android. to me, it's worth the risk. Besides, you can get anti-virus. Apple's software and hardware isn't horrible by any means, but I highly value customization and openness (without having to go through tons of loops and tweaks). But hey, that's just me.

 

[techwhiz]

Well, that's not true either. There have been plenty of examples of malware downloaded from Google Play.



iOS asks you for permission to access certain features such as photos, contacts, location services, etc. And it allows you to prevent access to individual features even if an app requests it.

(And anything that requires root access is not a feature in my opinion. You might as well be comparing Android to a jailbroken iOS device.)

----------



Where did yo see this report? Because the report in the OP doesn't say that at all.

When an app on Android it tells you what services it will access.
You are informed. There have been errant apps on the PLaystore and when detected they get pulled.

There is nothing that requires your to "root" and Android device and yes, it's the same as a jailbroken iOS device.

Any application you allow to access storage, contacts, etc. has the potential to be "malware". There have been no cases of developers using your information in a way you people didn't think about on the iTunes store? Get back to me on that one. The difference between malware and okay software is not that they access any different data. The difference is that malware takes the information and sends it somewhere you don't want it to go.

 

[tymaster50]

Play to your strengths.

i thought apple evolved past the "this is why we're better than you, because we're apple" thing that plagued their war with microsoft during the 00's. And even samsung during the '10's.

 

[slffl]

Since when did reporting facts become 'criticizing'? You know that "Reality has a well-known liberal bias" too right?

EDIT: why do I come here again? SOOO MANY anti-Apple zealots. I really wonder why you people come to a mac site.

 

[LukasValine]

Thank you MacRumors.

 

[phillipduran]

I think if Phil made the list a bit shorter it would help drive home the point he is making.

 

[BaldiMac]

When an app on Android it tells you what services it will access.
You are informed. There have been errant apps on the PLaystore and when detected they get pulled.

There is nothing that requires your to "root" and Android device and yes, it's the same as a jailbroken iOS device.

Yep. Did you think that disagrees with anything I said?

 

[F apple FE]

I have no idea what that has to do with your previous statement that I responded to, but the report very explicitly states that "99 percent of all mobile malware targeted Android devices."

[...]

Not in any way.

It's simple, really.

All that report says is that most of the mobile malware TARGETS Android or, in other words, the authors chose Android to write their malware for (and most probably for the very same reason Windows is the preferred target among desktop operating systems: because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world).

It does NOT say if or how much they were successful.

Then, the table reproduced in the article says that 74% of Android devices have "encountered" web malware, it does NOT say if or how much that malware was successful. That tablet also shows that 14% of iOS devices have "encountered" web malware and that around 2-3% of Windows Phone devices have "encountered" web malware.

Now, you either get all of this correctly and logically and deduce ONLY that Android is targeted the most because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world and it "encounters" web malware the most simply because, again, it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world OR you choose to baselessly ASSume that "encounters" = succesful infections and in that case Windows Phones at 2-3% are WAY more secure than iOS devices at 14%... Your pick.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[dagger01]

Which coincidentally is very close to the worldwide market share of each OS.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4415258/apple-announces-600-million-ios-devices-sold

No it's not. It's more like 60/40 to Android. I hate this quarterly shipment data being used as overall market share. The total units sold of each over their total existence equals overall market share for all devices running each OS. 900 million Android to 600 million iOS since 2007 as of May/June 2013. I will look for newer data, but I don't think the percentages have changed significantly that 60/40 wouldn't be close enough. It's not 71/14, that's for damn sure, nor is it 80/20. Tablets alone are way skewed toward the iPad, but phones are skewed toward Android. Why their numbers are so good. Cheap Android phones. But let's keep this all lumped together when talking operating systems not devices. 60/40

 

[malexandria]

Shut up and give us a New iPhone Design!

I hate corporate sniping. all I know is the next iPhone 6 better have a new design or at least a screen and camera comparable to current Android Phones or I'm jumping to the Galaxy S V in May when my contract is up. Tired of the 4/4s.

 

[VulchR]

@PhilSchiller: "I just ate a donut"

Article: Phil Schiller teases the iDonut

Bluetooth4 device that shows you pictures of your insides, measures heart rate, kcal intake, glucose levels etc.

 

[BaldiMac]

It's simple, really.

All that report says is that most of the mobile malware TARGETS Android or, in other words, the authors chose Android to write their malware for (and most probably for the very same reason Windows is the preferred target among desktop operating systems: because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world).

It does NOT say if or how much they were successful.

You are talking about unrelated statistics out of context.

Then, the table reproduced in the article says that 74% of Android devices have "encountered" web malware, it does NOT say if or how much that malware was successful. That tablet also shows that 14% of iOS devices have "encountered" web malware and that around 2-3% of Windows Phone devices have "encountered" web malware.

No, the table does not say that at all. The table says that around 70% of web malware was encountered by a device with an Android user agent. And around 25% of web malware was enountered by a device with an iOS user agent. And around 3% of web malware was enountered by Windows Phone.

When you compare that to the mobile OS web usage share, you get the conclusion that you are more likely to encounter web malware on an Android or Windows Phone device than an iOS device.

http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8&qpcustomd=1

Now, you either get all of this correctly and logically and deduce ONLY that Android is targeted the most because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world and it "encounters" web malware the most simply because, again, it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world OR you choose to baselessly ASSume that "encounters" = succesful infections and in that case Windows Phones at 2-3% are WAY more secure than iOS devices at 14%... Your pick.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Nope. Your conclusion is simply false based on this data. iOS users surf the web MORE and encounter LESS web malware than Android users.

 

[oliversl]

I saw what you did there:
if Android is like Windows in marketshare, then Android is as insecure as Windows. He has a point.

 

[dagger01]

It's simple, really.

All that report says is that most of the mobile malware TARGETS Android or, in other words, the authors chose Android to write their malware for (and most probably for the very same reason Windows is the preferred target among desktop operating systems: because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world).

It does NOT say if or how much they were successful.

Then, the table reproduced in the article says that 74% of Android devices have "encountered" web malware, it does NOT say if or how much that malware was successful. That tablet also shows that 14% of iOS devices have "encountered" web malware and that around 2-3% of Windows Phone devices have "encountered" web malware.

Now, you either get all of this correctly and logically and deduce ONLY that Android is targeted the most because it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world and it "encounters" web malware the most simply because, again, it is the most widespread mobile operating system in the world OR you choose to baselessly ASSume that "encounters" = succesful infections and in that case Windows Phones at 2-3% are WAY more secure than iOS devices at 14%... Your pick.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Ok, using installed base numbers ( http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4415258/apple-announces-600-million-ios-devices-sold )and extrapolating from the Cisco data percentages, one can logically assume that 635 million Android users and about 84 million iOS users have encountered malware. That's about as good as you're going to get as far as accuracy based on the data we have available. Still makes Android a lot scarier no matter how you want to split the hairs.

I would not call Windows phone way more secure. If you've tried to get to the web via Windows phone you'd know why the numbers are so low. Nobody wants to surf on a Windows phone to begin with! Most of the internet use comes from the MS walled garden apps so they've been hardened after being on iOS and Android for longer anyway. And again, there's so few of them they benefit from low market share numbers. Same reason the Mac OS wasn't way more secure due to its market share. It was just less targeted because of it. Simple numbers to be exploited and availability of opportunities.

 

[jonAppleSeed]

I saw what you did there:
if Android is like Windows in marketshare, then Android is as insecure as Windows. He has a point.

reductio ad absurdum

 

[BaldiMac]

Ok, using installed base numbers ( http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4415258/apple-announces-600-million-ios-devices-sold )and extrapolating from the Cisco data percentages, one can logically assume that 635 million Android users and about 84 million iOS users have encountered malware.

Nope. The percentages in the table are percentages of all web malware encounters. Not percentages of users of each mobile OS.

 

[erangaj]

How about Android vs (iPhone+iPad+iPod) chart

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Remember the good old days when Apple didn't need to knock the competition?

Not really...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUtqNJebrTM