[raino]

And they would know

Millions of Android users vulnerable to security threats, say feds | ZDNet

79 percent of malware threats affect Android, with 19 percent targeting Symbian. Windows Mobile, BlackBerry, iOS, and others all peg in at less than 1 percent each. (The source of the figures is not known.)

[Kris Simundson]

dude come on, your a experienced user, you should know better

[spotmark]

Wow! Another one of these threads. Take a number.

[pkcable]

It appears to be a new article so we'll let it stay. However it's a very old issue.

[Acidwire]

�According to the roll call release �*marked as unclassified but "for official use only," and designed for police, fire, emergency medical services (EMS) and security personnel*�*upwards of 44 percent of Android users worldwide are still using Android versions 2.3.3 to 2.3.7, which still contain security vulnerabilities fixed in later versions.�

Come on this is obviously a bait article because its quietly mentioning its talking about old android OS's not current ones whilst blowing the article up yo make it look like its a problem with 4.0 and up. 30% of users have 2.3 to 2.3.7 and 63% have 4.0 and up as of august 1st [the majority of those being on jelly bean].

Android isn't as secure as other platforms its obvious but for being open source they are doing well to make it more so with each new version. Its just as tired a subject as bb10s app subject tbh

[raino]

44% is quite a large number, so the question needs to be asked why these people are still on Gingerbread. I think the article goes on to answer:

staying ahead of the Android security curve requires actively ditching existing handsets and buying a new device, particularly in a bring-your-own-device world where this falls down to the responsibility of the user. Many manufacturers and carriers do not issue the latest Android versions for older devices.

So it's in the best interest of multiple parties (OEMs, carriers, more?) to drive new handset sales over securing those with older handsets.

[Acidwire]

44% is quite a large number, so the question needs to be asked why these people are still on Gingerbread.

44% is wrong by the way, 30% of users worldwise use gingerbread 2.3.3-2.3.7 http://developer.android.com/about/d...rds/index.html

not up to me to decide who buys a phone with an old operating system, for all we know those could be people in 2-3 year contracts who dont know how or dont really want to mess about upgrading their old phones operating system (4.0+ can be ported to almost every popular android phone running gingerbread if it doesnt have an official version already - see galaxy s2). they might also have it as a cheapo throwaway back up/gaming/app only phone instead of wasting money on something high end

So it's in the best interest of multiple parties (OEMs, carriers, more?) to drive new handset sales over securing those with older handsets.

with the cheap $200-$300 jelly bean phones with decent specs you can buy today you shouldnt really need to be purchasing a 3/4 year old phone, yeah it should be a priority to secure the old OS's but from may to August alone the 4.0 + percentage has risen from just over 50% to 63%, why bother when most people will be upgrading soon and when youve already had 13% upgrade in the past few months. for all we know those years old os versions cannot support the new fixes and tweaks without running badly, years old hardware specs aswell as years old software.

now im in no way saying they should be using androids for these government tasks or whatever the article was talking about im just saying that article is cherry picking from the report and blowing it up to make it sound like every android is infected with a supervirus

[Troy Tiscareno]

The truth is that those old phones are so far behind the curve in hardware (processor power, RAM, and especially storage) that even bargain-priced modern phones are far better. Those users need to upgrade, and in fact, THEY ARE, in huge numbers.

Even Microsoft is stopping support for their most popular product ever, Win XP, because its time has come and (long) gone. Sure, people who continue to use it will "be vulnerable to security threats". But oh well, that's not Microsoft's fault or problem. Should GM have to retrofit disc brakes, 3-point seatbelts, and airbags into any existing GM car on the road, just because modern cars offer those safety features? Or does the buyer have to take responsibility for buying a car that is decades out of date and accept the risks? This is no different.

Android 4 was a HUGE upgrade from 2.x, and frankly the previous generations of hardware just aren't up to the task. At some point, they needed to be left behind, and they have been, just like Apple has done TWICE with their MacOS (you think OS9 is "vulnerable to security threats"? I'd bet it is!), and just like BB has effectively done several times as well. Folks will solve these problems for themselves, and few manufacturers are putting these old OS versions on devices anymore, at least, not in first-world countries. The ones that are still for sale are mostly designs from a year ago that are on pre-paid carriers, and even those are nearly phased out.

A year from now, this number will be under 10%, and many of those devices will be non-phones (Android has been put into a bunch of stuff besides phones, often with a very limited feature-set). It's not nearly the problem that people make it out to be.

[FFR]

44% is wrong by the way, 30% of users worldwise use gingerbread 2.3.3-2.3.7 http://developer.android.com/about/d...rds/index.html

not up to me to decide who buys a phone with an old operating system, for all we know those could be people in 2-3 year contracts who dont know how or dont really want to mess about upgrading their old phones operating system (4.0+ can be ported to almost every popular android phone running gingerbread if it doesnt have an official version already - see galaxy s2). they might also have it as a cheapo throwaway back up/gaming/app only phone instead of wasting money on something high end


with the cheap $200-$300 jelly bean phones with decent specs you can buy today you shouldnt really need to be purchasing a 3/4 year old phone, yeah it should be a priority to secure the old OS's but from may to August alone the 4.0 + percentage has risen from just over 50% to 63%, why bother when most people will be upgrading soon and when youve already had 13% upgrade in the past few months. for all we know those years old os versions cannot support the new fixes and tweaks without running badly, years old hardware specs aswell as years old software.

now im in no way saying they should be using androids for these government tasks or whatever the article was talking about im just saying that article is cherry picking from the report and blowing it up to make it sound like every android is infected with a supervirus

The gingerbread figure is actually larger.
Google no longer recognizes any devices that does not visit the google play store in their breakdown stats.

Alienating all the android users who use their devices solely as a dumb phone feature phone.

"Android Jelly Bean on the rise, thanks to Google's new math"
http://m.cnet.com/news/android-jelly...-math/57577674

[Acidwire]

The gingerbread figure is actually larger.
Google no longer recognizes any devices that does not visit the google play store in their breakdown stats.

Alienating all the android users who use their devices solely as a dumb phone feature phone.

"Android Jelly Bean on the rise, thanks to Google's new math"
Android Jelly Bean on the rise, thanks to Google's new math - CNET Mobile

read the website i posted, its 30% as of August 1st 2013. that website you posted is 3rd party and dated April 2013

what google now does is take information about phone os version and model when it visits the google play store so that it has a more accurate reading of how many has what operating system (it used this data before anyway purely to optimise app compatibility for the phone model), with its old method they had no way of knowing if someone used a custom upgraded rom or upgraded their os officially as they only went on what os the phone was first checked into google servers.

edit: its 33% but we can all agree its not 44% lol

[FFR]

read the website i posted, its 30% as of August 1st 2013. that website you posted is 3rd party and dated April 2013lol

Easy there Sherlock.
The point of my link was to ILLUSTRATE googles change in the way they report fragmentation within the ecosystem.

what google now does is take information about phone os version and model when it visits the google play store

Rather than devices that have CHECKED-IN to Google servers.
LOL.

so that it has a more accurate reading of how many has what operating system

Your incorrect it is less accurate because it ONLY counts the phones using google play store.
Again if your phone has checked in to googles server, IT WILL NOT be counted until it has accessed the google play store.

This is done to MINIMIZE the perception of fragmentation in the android ecosystem
and artificially INCREASE jellybean adoption rate.

with its old method they had no way of knowing if someone used a custom upgraded rom or upgraded their os officially.

Jellybean usage jumped by approximately 10% when they changed their accounting practices.

Google did so to try and highlight the devices that access the google play stores ,over the VAST MAJORITY of android users, who buy CHEAP gingerbread phones and do NOT use google play.

with its old method they had no way of knowing if someone used a custom upgraded rom or upgraded their os officially as they only went on what os the phone was first checked into google servers.

Hahahaha your confusing activation numbers with android distribution numbers.

You have to love rabid fanboys, a lot of bark very little comprehension.

[Hilman76]

Their new method does not have anything to do with fragmentation and everything to do with aiding app developers. The new method illustrates which phones/OS version is accessing the Google Play store in order to download apps. If older phones are not accessing the Play store, the developers do not need to worry about that OS when making their apps. From a developers point of view, why worry about older phones that aren't downloading apps?

Furthermore, if everyone is just buying cheap GB devices and not downloading apps, why does the Play store have more downloads than the Apple App Store (over 50 billion)? Why are the Play store developer revenues starting to equalize with Apples app store?

[Acidwire]

Easy there Sherlock.
The point of my link was to ILLUSTRATE googles change in the way they report fragmentation within the ecosystem.



Rather than devices that have CHECKED-IN to Google servers.
LOL.



Your incorrect it is less accurate because it ONLY counts the phones using google play store.
Again if your phone has checked in to googles server, IT WILL NOT be counted until it has accessed the google play store.

This is done to MINIMIZE the perception of fragmentation in the android ecosystem
and artificially INCREASE jellybean adoption rate.




Jellybean usage jumped by approximately 10% when they changed their accounting practices.

Google did so to try and highlight the devices that access the google play stores ,over the VAST MAJORITY of android users, who buy CHEAP gingerbread phones and do NOT use google play.



Hahahaha your confusing activation numbers with android distribution numbers.

You have to love rabid fanboys, a lot of bark very little comprehension.

ok rude unnecessary digs aside what you did was post some incorrect website and claimed it was accurate over googles own statistics, im not a rabid fan boy im female and i like all platforms i just speak up more about android because i own a tablet and i know what im talking about and i know when people are just posting fud, i wouldnt talk ios or windows phone in these types of bashing threads because i could be completely wrong.

do you honestly think there are millions of people who use android devices as dumb phones and never check into the google playstore? why would they when they could buy a dumb phone or a blackberry for just calls and texting? you have no proof theres a significant number of people doing this at all youre just making a guess because you dont like the percentage change.

where is this VAST MAJORITY of gingerbread users (aka 11%)? have the numbers dropped significantly in these reports? no have the 11% in numbers mingled into the ics and jellybean numbers? yes

if google was faking its android os percentages for months someone would have pointed it out by now

[FFR]

You seem to have comprehension issues.

what you did was post some incorrect website and claimed it was accurate over googles own statistics

So google did not change how the report active users. Oh wait the did and you seem to be glossing over intentional or otherwise.

im not a rabid fan boy im female and i like all platforms i just speak up more about android because i own a tablet and i know what im talking about and i know when people are just posting fud, i wouldnt talk ios or windows phone in these types of bashing threads because i could be completely wrong.

LOL, you know what your talking about because you own an android tablet.
Ok then.

do you honestly think there are millions of people who use android devices as dumb phones and never check into the google playstore? why would they when they could buy a dumb phone or a blackberry for just calls and texting? you have no proof theres a significant number of people doing this at all youre just making a guess because you dont like the percentage change.

I honestly can't stop laughing now.
Thank you.

where is this VAST MAJORITY of gingerbread users (aka 11%)? have the numbers dropped significantly in these reports? no have the 11% in numbers mingled into the ics and jellybean numbers? yes

Brava, Brava.

if google was faking its android os percentages for months someone would have pointed it out by now

Your right no one has pointed it out not even in the article I posted, no one has talked about google CHANGING (not faking, different words/meanings and all) their accounting practices regarding active android devices.

Do not click that link.
It might confuse you, fud and all.
Enjoy your snfroid tablet.

[FFR]

Why are the Play store developer revenues starting to equalize with Apples app store?

How are they equalizing?

Android iOS marketshare split is 80/20
Yet iOS app revenue is still greater then android.
I'm not going to ask you why?
I already know the answer.
But feel free to speculate.

Did you know that google makes more out of iOS then android. Do you know how much more?
I do.
4 times as much.
Again feel free to speculate why.

Cheers

[raino]

44% is wrong by the way, 30% of users worldwise use gingerbread 2.3.3-2.3.7 Dashboards | Android Developers

Thank you for posting this link. I don't think it's quite saying what you are saying, in terms of fragmentation percentages. When I read it, I saw exactly what Hilman76 saw: it's a breakdown of OSes provided to devs, and not meant to address the fragmentation debate. Now if Google has used these numbers to address the fragmentation debate, then yes, you would have a point. But I don't think they have, so it's an incorrect interpretation on your part. If you have any other sources where Google is claiming ICS on 63% of devices, please post.

The original Kindle Fire, which as of May 2013 is the second best selling tablet with at most 7 million sales, still runs 2.3, and since it comes with no access to GP, it should not be counted in GP stats. You have to also keep in mind that GP is probably not available in all countries/other Android builds, so they would not be represented in the numbers you have linked to above.

[Hilman76]

How are they equalizing?

Android iOS marketshare split is 80/20
Yet iOS app revenue is still greater then android.
I'm not going to ask you why?
I already know the answer.
But feel free to speculate.

Did you know that google makes more out of iOS then android. Do you know how much more?
I do.
4 times as much.
Again feel free to speculate why.

Cheers

The Apple App store made 4 times more revenue in the fourth quarter of 2012 compared to Google Play. 2013Q1 had that down to 2.6x and last quarter it was 2.3x. Notice a pattern???? Time to face the facts that Android has passed iOS in almost every metric that Apple use to gloat about in the past, with 1.5 million+ devices being activated a day, its just a matter of time until it makes more money in its app store.

Any guesses how this graph will look in a few quarters??


iOS vs. Android: Gaming App Revenue by Region | Tech-Thoughts by Sameer Singh

[FFR]

The Apple App store made 4 times more revenue in the fourth quarter of 2012 compared to Google Play. 2013Q1 had that down to 2.6x and last quarter it was 2.3x. Notice a pattern????

Yes the decline is slowing down.
Let's see if the cheap iPhone will have any affect Or do you think all variables will remain constant?

Time to face the facts that Android has passed iOS in almost every metric that Apple use to gloat about in the past, with 1.5 million+ devices being activated a day, its just a matter of time until it makes more money in its app store.

Wow 1.5 million + android activations per day and apple still makes 2.3x more revenue in the App Store.

Any guesses how this graph will look in a few quarters??

I do, and it might surprise.

[codehut]

A very link-bait article with little content. In almost every single Android malware story, there always seems to be one of two elements present. To be vulnerable:

(1) The user has to be running some old version of Android
(2) The user has to actively override settings which restrict the installation of apps from third-party sources, and intentionally install a malicious app.

In many ways it's not all that different from Windows (which I'm sure most of you use without all the "OMG malware" drama). Running an old version of Windows and not installing updates? Installing stupid random things downloaded from the web and emails? You're gonna be at risk too.

The rest of the article is usually blah blah blah open source (which has zero correlation with security), blah blah more "threats" (of course there are more threats - it's the most popular smartphone OS!).

Rubbish. Absolute rubbish.

[raino]

(1) The user has to be running some old version of Android.

And some users might be in this position because there is no update available due to the OEMs', carriers' and Google's lack of interest. Can't quite fault them unless there are updates they are ignoring, or unless the one finding fault is willing to pay for their upgrade.

[codehut]

And some users might be in this position because there is no update available due to the OEMs', carriers' and Google's lack of interest. Can't quite fault them unless there are updates they are ignoring, or unless the one finding fault is willing to pay for their upgrade.

While true, I think you'll find if you set up a Venn diagram and in one circle put "People at risk from malware due to outdated OS" and "People who cannot upgrade their OS due to lack of availability of update" you'll find there will be almost zero overlap.

[raino]

While true, I think you'll find if you set up a Venn diagram and in one circle put "People at risk from malware due to outdated OS" and "People who cannot upgrade their OS due to lack of availability of update" you'll find there will be almost zero overlap.

So you're saying those 44% running Gingerbread are willfully choosing to keep themselves at risk? That they're ignoring OS updates their carriers and/or device manufacturers are providing to them? How else are they at risk, then?

[Troy Tiscareno]

So you're saying those 44% running Gingerbread are willfully choosing to keep themselves at risk? That they're ignoring OS updates their carriers and/or device manufacturers are providing to them? How else are they at risk, then?

First, it's 33% as of the most recent data, and second, yes, in a world where you can buy a low-end Samsung Galaxy with Android 4.x for $79, those folks who stay on old Gingerbread devices are choosing to be at risk, just like the 30% of PC users who are still using WinXP are. And, again, this problem is solving itself, as more and more customers ARE ditching those old Gingerbread phones in favor of modern ones.

For the most part, the people who are "at risk" are those who are installing apps from somewhere other than the Google Play Store, and in order to do that, you have to specifically enable that ability (it's turned off by default), and when you do that, you get a big pop-up warning that you are putting yourself at risk. Folks who stick to the Play Store, which is most of them, really don't have too much to worry about.

[raino]

So it goes back to what the article says: if you want updates, pay to upgrade.

[Houshinto]

And they would know

Millions of Android users vulnerable to security threats, say feds | ZDNet

And yet people do not care. Cognitive dissonance, on this issue, has already run it's course. Something else is needed if you want to shake the average persons perception.