Blackberry More Secure Than Android
- It's not me being spammed. I set up filters to block their emails. It's their god-damn emails, and not everyone on my contacts list knows how to block emails... or texts for that matter. I sure hope they start spamming Apple, since I had Apple's email address in xD02-27-11 08:47 AMLike 0
- I hadn't really got much in the way of emails off them myself, but I did it anyway just to be safe when I read they were Spam City. I fear it is my friends who are falling prey...02-27-11 09:30 AMLike 0
- This seems like another forum post for trolling purposes to justify the owning of a blackberry vs any of the other great platforms out there.
i7 did you actually read this article, or just figured posting it to stir the hornets nest up?
To sum it up... "User installs malicious app with knowledge and machine is now infected." This could happen to anyone regardless of platform. I'd really like to hear your answer when Blackberry starts running Android apps... will that still make them "more secure" then?02-27-11 09:58 AMLike 0 - This seems like another forum post for trolling purposes to justify the owning of a blackberry vs any of the other great platforms out there.
i7 did you actually read this article, or just figured posting it to stir the hornets nest up?
To sum it up... "User installs malicious app with knowledge and machine is now infected." This could happen to anyone regardless of platform. I'd really like to hear your answer when Blackberry starts running Android apps... will that still make them "more secure" then?02-27-11 10:04 AMLike 0 - The point is RIM can allow the user to either leave their phone unsecured to secure it to the nth degree. It's pretty much immune from casual drive-bys when the phone is set up properly. The doesn't make the platform unsecure, it makes it as secure as the user wants. You are debating that a device is unsecure because the manufacturer allows that option. The question really is when the device is secured properly how unsecure is it?
Having the Administrator account in [some versions of] Windows XP not have a password by default opened up every users to attack, and Microsoft ha to change it in Vista. On servers sometimes the default installation activates superfluous services which can have vulnurabilities, and servers have been hacked because of it. It's why decent UNIX and BSD OSes like FreeBSD and Solaris disable everything but required (to run the computer) services by default.
With smartphones being so widely used these days, you have to look at it in a similar way because they have the capability to hold as much IMPOTANT information as a computer - more in some cases. They are also much easier to steal, and since the defaults on pretty much every smartphone OS are so insecure (and consumers are pretty much lazy in general), this leads to problems.
Giving a consumer the option is like giving them a Norton AntiVirus CD to install, but having the installation program turn off the AV program and give them to option to turn it on later. All smartphones (don't care which platform, it's a general line of thinking) should ship with secure defaults or have a non-exitable Setup application that prompts them to setup the phone in a secure fashion and doesn't allow early Exiting of said Setup application.
Blackberries don't attempt to persuade the user to set up their device securely.
Android does not.
Windows Mobile doesn't.
Windows Phone 7 doesn't.
They all fail in that regard. At least attempting to have secure defaults matters more than any article that only a small fraction of the user base will see. People who use all smartphone platforms should be asking for that: secure defaults, or a setup app that tries to persuade the user to set up their phone to be at least moderately secure: i.e. Encrypted Storage/SD Card, at least a 4 letter passcode with no repeated numbers, and a screen lockout <= 3 minutes.02-28-11 01:21 AMLike 0 - The poster you responded to has a point, though. There are lots of computers and servers that got hacked due to default settings. Consumers are lazy. It's the way things are.
Having the Administrator account in [some versions of] Windows XP not have a password by default opened up every users to attack, and Microsoft ha to change it in Vista. On servers sometimes the default installation activates superfluous services which can have vulnurabilities, and servers have been hacked because of it. It's why decent UNIX and BSD OSes like FreeBSD and Solaris disable everything but required (to run the computer) services by default.
With smartphones being so widely used these days, you have to look at it in a similar way because they have the capability to hold as much IMPOTANT information as a computer - more in some cases. They are also much easier to steal, and since the defaults on pretty much every smartphone OS are so insecure (and consumers are pretty much lazy in general), this leads to problems.
Giving a consumer the option is like giving them a Norton AntiVirus CD to install, but having the installation program turn off the AV program and give them to option to turn it on later. All smartphones (don't care which platform, it's a general line of thinking) should ship with secure defaults or have a non-exitable Setup application that prompts them to setup the phone in a secure fashion and doesn't allow early Exiting of said Setup application.
Blackberries don't attempt to persuade the user to set up their device securely.
Android does not.
Windows Mobile doesn't.
Windows Phone 7 doesn't.
They all fail in that regard. At least attempting to have secure defaults matters more than any article that only a small fraction of the user base will see. People who use all smartphone platforms should be asking for that: secure defaults, or a setup app that tries to persuade the user to set up their phone to be at least moderately secure: i.e. Encrypted Storage/SD Card, at least a 4 letter passcode with no repeated numbers, and a screen lockout <= 3 minutes.
There are people who don't need government level encryption on their smartphones and shouldn't be required to have it. It's an individual choice.
If you leave you car door unlocked, even in a supposed safe neighboorhood...02-28-11 03:23 PMLike 0 - This seems like another forum post for trolling purposes to justify the owning of a blackberry vs any of the other great platforms out there.
i7 did you actually read this article, or just figured posting it to stir the hornets nest up?
To sum it up... "User installs malicious app with knowledge and machine is now infected." This could happen to anyone regardless of platform. I'd really like to hear your answer when Blackberry starts running Android apps... will that still make them "more secure" then?
It appears to me the article is saying Android users are loosey goosey with the apps more so than Blackberry users and the popularity of apps will make it more easier for app writers to hide their malicous content.
To say all phones are subject to viruses and malware is a truism but it doesn't reflect the fact RIM has stayed under the radar for whatever reason.
When that changes, I'll come back and debate this again.02-28-11 03:29 PMLike 0 - While I am security conscious you can't force a user to lock their car doors, or secure their phone.
There are people who don't need government level encryption on their smartphones and shouldn't be required to have it. It's an individual choice.
If you leave you car door unlocked, even in a supposed safe neighboorhood...
I'm through with you.03-01-11 02:06 AMLike 0 - BrantaRetired Network ModI believe the problem is that Jared Co applications steal the phone's contact database, and then spam the user's contacts. The spam is not confined to the unfortunate user who installs a Jared Co trojan.Daniel Ratcliffe likes this.03-01-11 07:37 AMLike 1
- No..i think it has more to do with having a pointless conversation with someone (i.e. you) who just keeps re-itterating the same off topic nonsense. It's like trying to have a conversation with Rain Man when Judge Whopner is on..03-01-11 08:08 AMLike 0
-
My other comments are relevant to the thread title and linked article.
I agree with your comment, but I really wonder who is Rain Main and who is Judge Whopner...03-01-11 08:21 AMLike 0 - You just keep spouting the same stuff..."If you leave the vehicle unlocked and the keys in it", "It's not the device, it's the user" blah blah..
As i've said before WE ALL KNOW THIS. Someone makes a point and you just keep spouting the same ****e..move along already.
"Definately gotta watch Judge Whopner..definately definately"03-01-11 08:26 AMLike 0 - You just keep spouting the same stuff..."If you leave the vehicle unlocked and the keys in it", "It's not the device, it's the user" blah blah..
As i've said before WE ALL KNOW THIS. Someone makes a point and you just keep spouting the same ****e..move along already.
"Definately gotta watch Judge Whopner..definately definately"
WE ALL KNOW EVERYTHING. The same stuff keeps getting rehashed. In thousands of posts, nothing unique has really been said.03-01-11 08:35 AMLike 0 -
- With all the contacts and prestige that CB higher ups have with RIM, why aren't they doing their part to make RIM aware of the issue. I don't understand why they still haven't pulled those apps with more then 6 months worth of issues and complaints.03-01-11 09:48 AMLike 0
-
I could see a big company saying "Okay, we know what's going on. But if we really start getting an overwhelming number of complaints about you guys, then that'll be our cue to do something."03-01-11 12:26 PMLike 0 - No. You just can't read. You're trolling hard, but I feel the need to set you straight.
From my post.
Giving a consumer the option is like giving them a Norton AntiVirus CD to install, but having the installation program turn off the AV program and give them to option to turn it on later. All smartphones (don't care which platform, it's a general line of thinking) should ship with secure defaults or have a non-exitable Setup application that prompts them to setup the phone in a secure fashion and doesn't allow early Exiting of said Setup application.
If you do not have your AV/FW application active on your computer, Windows pops up and says "Your Computer isn't secure" (basically) and there's a quick option to turn that stuff back on. Smartphones don't offer that, and the options systems on most smartphone OSes (blackberry, Symbian, Windows Mobile especially) aren't worth most people's time to navigate and find it.
Also, the Setup applications really don't help the user set up everything on the phone... Just the basics, and those Setup programs can be exited the minute the phone is turned on, making them largely useless.
So... In the future, READ the post you're replying to before you leak your postal diarrhea on the forum.
Also, I'd like to remind you that much of the security of Blackberries are tied to BES, which means without a BES account you really only have access to about 10% of the whole of RIM's security features on the phone... They should build Policy Support into Desktop Manager and allow consumers to enable them on their phone if they don't have a BES account, IMO.
Ciao!Last edited by N8ter; 03-01-11 at 11:30 PM.
03-01-11 11:28 PMLike 0 - If you actually read the article you might have noticed it did say the words "top target". That's what makes it newsworthy.
It appears to me the article is saying Android users are loosey goosey with the apps more so than Blackberry users and the popularity of apps will make it more easier for app writers to hide their malicous content.
To say all phones are subject to viruses and malware is a truism but it doesn't reflect the fact RIM has stayed under the radar for whatever reason.
When that changes, I'll come back and debate this again.
To me it seems like you need to justify another reason to owning your inferior blackberry with minimal app support. Yeah it's hard not to be less secure when you don't have a choice of over 100,000 apps to install.03-02-11 01:32 AMLike 0 -
From my post.
This means that anyone with an insecure phone... It's their fault. At the moment, it's not chiefly their fault, because many of those options are hidden in an already rather mundane tree of options that lots of people simply don't see them.
If you do not have your AV/FW application active on your computer, Windows pops up and says "Your Computer isn't secure" (basically) and there's a quick option to turn that stuff back on. Smartphones don't offer that, and the options systems on most smartphone OSes (blackberry, Symbian, Windows Mobile especially) aren't worth most people's time to navigate and find it.
Also, the Setup applications really don't help the user set up everything on the phone... Just the basics, and those Setup programs can be exited the minute the phone is turned on, making them largely useless.
So... In the future, READ the post you're replying to before you leak your postal diarrhea on the forum.
Also, I'd like to remind you that much of the security of Blackberries are tied to BES, which means without a BES account you really only have access to about 10% of the whole of RIM's security features on the phone... They should build Policy Support into Desktop Manager and allow consumers to enable them on their phone if they don't have a BES account, IMO.
Ciao!
On Blackberries there is a trade off between security and battery-life. I don't know if other platforms give those options or if it's a one size fits all. But I like having options.
You're somewhat wrong about BES. With a BIS account you can turn on the strongest level of security and encrypt your media card. As far as the communication stream between phone and server I don't know and I don't care.
As far as leaking "postal diarrhea" you've done a very good job, you get an A+.03-02-11 06:48 AMLike 0 - The reason it's a top target is because it's a popular platform and their are 4x the number of actual apps people use. It's no different then Windows having more viruses than Macs.
To me it seems like you need to justify another reason to owning your inferior blackberry with minimal app support. Yeah it's hard not to be less secure when you don't have a choice of over 100,000 apps to install.
It seems to me Android is going to become irrelevant with the news of a Blackberry virtual machine to run Android apps. Since for you it appears to be quantity and not quality I can see you back on Blackberry once this happens.03-02-11 06:54 AMLike 0 - Check this out....
Google ousts 21 malicious applications from Android Market, user handsets | BGR
Pretty disturbing03-02-11 08:54 AMLike 0 - It's also a top target due to a bunch of vulnerabilities. A poster recently posted an article from engadget on a reported stack overflow hack for IOS. It's one thing to have an app misuse my information after I've given consent, it's a whole different level to do a drive by stack overflow or take advantage of a critical vulnerability in the O/S to get root access.
It seems to me Android is going to become irrelevant with the news of a Blackberry virtual machine to run Android apps. Since for you it appears to be quantity and not quality I can see you back on Blackberry once this happens.
Check this out....
Google ousts 21 malicious applications from Android Market, user handsets | BGR
Pretty disturbing03-02-11 10:19 AMLike 0
- Forum
- Popular at CrackBerry
- General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
Blackberry More Secure Than Android
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD