[pantlesspenguin]

You're right, I think there might've been an even earlier limited android on orange network in uk. But NFC on blackBerry has never poised a problem, on Android there have been several.

Several? What else besides a vulnerability that was discovered by a professional who's JOB is to pinpoint such issues in all operating systems?

And thank you for admitting I was right about something. That's a nice change .

[Rickroller]

S beam is pretty crap. Can't work with non Samsung phones.

You do realize that S-Beam is a Samsung technology, right..so of course it won't work with non Samsung phones. That'd be like complaining HTC Sense features won't work on Samsung or Motorola products..

[anon62607]

Call me old-fashioned but rather than go through all that I would just send an email. Isn't it added through the "share" function under menu?

Sure but the OP topic was that Samsung is misrepresenting the usability, and someone commented that the devices had to be paired before it would work. My comment goes to that, they don't need to be paired and the way it functions is pretty much exactly how it is shown in the commercial, aside from not being as fast.

I agree that it's not really something most people would use compared to email, I'd never tried it until reading this thread. It was kind of cool though.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[belfastdispatcher]

Several? What else besides a vulnerability that was discovered by a professional who's JOB is to pinpoint such issues in all operating systems?

And thank you for admitting I was right about something. That's a nice change .

How about this one?

http://www.pcworld.com/article/249599/google_wallet_security_concerns_raised.html


"As for the security issue, it turns out that Google Wallet PIN information is stored on the phone itself, rather than on the NFC chip, and is therefore not terribly secure.

"Knowing that the PIN can only be a 4-digit numeric value, it dawned on us that a brute-force attack would only require calculating, at most, 10,000 SHA256 hashes," Zvelo Senior Engineer Joshua Rubin wrote in a blog post. SHA refers to Secure Hash Algorithm, which is one of a number of cryptographic hash functions. "This is trivial even on a platform as limited as a smartphone."

[howarmat]

Why are we talking about security of S Beam instead of the commericial which is what this thread is about? PK already warned once and yet you wont drop it. This is the last warning.

[aniym]

You do realize that S-Beam is a Samsung technology, right..so of course it won't work with non Samsung phones. That'd be like complaining HTC Sense features won't work on Samsung or Motorola products..

You can still use Android Beam to send NFC data across two NFC phones running Android 4.0 or higher.

[Rickroller]

You can still use Android Beam to send NFC data across two NFC phones running Android 4.0 or higher.

Yes, but S-Beam is Samsung specific

[pantlesspenguin]

How about this one?

UPDATE: Google Wallet Security Concerns Raised | PCWorld


"As for the security issue, it turns out that Google Wallet PIN information is stored on the phone itself, rather than on the NFC chip, and is therefore not terribly secure.

"Knowing that the PIN can only be a 4-digit numeric value, it dawned on us that a brute-force attack would only require calculating, at most, 10,000 SHA256 hashes," Zvelo Senior Engineer Joshua Rubin wrote in a blog post. SHA refers to Secure Hash Algorithm, which is one of a number of cryptographic hash functions. "This is trivial even on a platform as limited as a smartphone."

And from that same link:

"Now for the good news: you don't need to worry about this unless you rooted your phone. If you did root your phone, you should be okay if you take some extra security steps -- set your phone's lock screen, and don't lose your phone."

That was also nearly a year ago and I'm sure more security precautions have been put into place since then. Also, one opinion is that it could strike other mobile wallets as well:

Google Wallet s Security Issues Could Strike Other Mobile Wallets - American Banker Article

[Rickroller]

How about this one?

UPDATE: Google Wallet Security Concerns Raised | PCWorld


"As for the security issue, it turns out that Google Wallet PIN information is stored on the phone itself, rather than on the NFC chip, and is therefore not terribly secure.

"Knowing that the PIN can only be a 4-digit numeric value, it dawned on us that a brute-force attack would only require calculating, at most, 10,000 SHA256 hashes," Zvelo Senior Engineer Joshua Rubin wrote in a blog post. SHA refers to Secure Hash Algorithm, which is one of a number of cryptographic hash functions. "This is trivial even on a platform as limited as a smartphone."

Thanks, again, for a year old article BD. Did you read the update?

UPDATE: Google has issued a statement about the security of Google Wallet:


The Zvelo study was conducted on their own phone on which they disabled the security mechanisms that protect Google Wallet by rooting the device. To date, there is no known vulnerability that enables someone to take a consumer phone and gain root access while preserving any Wallet information such as the PIN."

[belfastdispatcher]

Thanks, again, for a year old article BD. Did you read the update?

Yes, we were talking about past NFC vulnerabilities regarding Android, where BB had none.

[pantlesspenguin]

Why are we talking about security of S Beam instead of the commericial which is what this thread is about? PK already warned once and yet you wont drop it. This is the last warning.

Sorry boss.

[Xterra2]

The OP is completely WRONG

I use my friend's S3 and to use the S beam you have to switch on NFC on both the devices and then switch on S Beam under the NFC toggle, That is, just touch the two phones together and the content you want to send would move forward then tap it and that's all, you can now detach the phones and it would send using WIFI Direct which is faster and requires no pairing unlike RIM's Blackberry Tag
I onced S Beam-ed a movie 750mb and it took less than 4 minutes

[belfastdispatcher]

And from that same link:

"Now for the good news: you don't need to worry about this unless you rooted your phone. If you did root your phone, you should be okay if you take some extra security steps -- set your phone's lock screen, and don't lose your phone."

That was also nearly a year ago and I'm sure more security precautions have been put into place since then. Also, one opinion is that it could strike other mobile wallets as well:

Google Wallet s Security Issues Could Strike Other Mobile Wallets - American Banker Article

I'm aware it was a year ago, you did ask what other nfc related vulnerabilities Android had, you said it was only one. Can you find any for BB?

[Rickroller]

Yes, we were talking about past NFC vulnerabilities regarding Android, where BB had none.

But, as the update stated, the "vulnerability was user induced", which as we know, is applicable to all platforms, even BB.

[pantlesspenguin]

I'm aware it was a year ago, you did ask what other nfc related vulnerabilities Android had, you said it was only one. Can you find any for BB?

Nope, but I never claimed that BB had vulnerabilities. I *know* it's more secure than Android. I was expecting some current, ongoing threats. Google Wallet had been pulled for quite awhile a year ago getting its security tightened.

[anon62607]

Agreed. I tried to send a 10MB email from my work PC yesterday and it nearly shut this place down.

Give me all of the options and I will decide what works for me. I look forward to an NFC enabled device or two.

Getting back to the OP. Yes it was "misleading". An earlier poster mentioned a 2MB picture taking about about 15 seconds. I find that too long and hope that there is a magnet in there because I refuse to carry around a pocket full of rubber bands. However, misleading and carefully stated sales points are the norm nowadays. As sad as it is to say it, this just doesn't bother me anymore.

I should clarify that I was sending a file between a Samsung and a non Samsung device and when doing that, android beam negotiates the bluetooth connection via NFC and transmits the file via bluetooth. If they were both Samsung devices I believe that the connection that is negotiated is wifi direct and is much faster. Unfortunately I only have the one Samsung device so I can't verify it.

To the security point, I think the subtle message in Samsung's commercial is that your wife can send you those sorts of videos without that video being transmitted and stored in a place where bored system administrators can find it (and this has happened even at google - in that system administrators have been caught looking through other people's email for personal reasons http://m.gawker.com/5637234/ ) which would be the case for email. This is not a bad thing for a commercial to point out, but they can't spell it out in that much detail.



Sent from my Droid DNA

[PatrickMJS]

The OP is completely WRONG

I use my friend's S3 and to use the S beam you have to switch on NFC on both the devices and then switch on S Beam under the NFC toggle, That is, just touch the two phones together and the content you want to send would move forward then tap it and that's all, you can now detach the phones and it would send using WIFI Direct which is faster and requires no pairing unlike RIM's Blackberry Tag
I onced S Beam-ed a movie 750mb and it took less than 4 minutes

I find it comical that you say I was "completely wrong"... then you proceed to make my very point. My point was that the commercial shows the 2 users merely tapping their phones together, making it seem to the average tv watcher that's all you need to do and the file transfer is done.

As you pointed out, both users must go into their NFC settings and activate it cuz it is off by default. Then they have to separately activate S Beam. Only after that will tapping commence the file transfer. And then, for a relatively small movie file of 750 MB it took 4 minutes, far from the instant transfer implied by the way the commercial displayed it.

I get that other commercials including some BB stuff in the past has relegated details to the fine print but this one from Samsung seems to me to be pushing that to an extreme, especially given the qualification statements are so tiny and faint, barely legible. I figure lots of folks will be confused it doesn't quite work as advertised. Kinda like Siri. But oh well.

[Bold_until_Hybrid_Comes]

I find it comical that you say I was "completely wrong"... then you proceed to make my very point. My point was that the commercial shows the 2 users merely tapping their phones together, making it seem to the average tv watcher that's all you need to do and the file transfer is done.

As you pointed out, both users must go into their NFC settings and activate it cuz it is off by default. Then they have to separately activate S Beam. Only after that will tapping commence the file transfer. And then, for a relatively small movie file of 750 MB it took 4 minutes, far from the instant transfer implied by the way the commercial displayed it.

I get that other commercials including some BB stuff in the past has relegated details to the fine print but this one from Samsung seems to me to be pushing that to an extreme, especially given the qualification statements are so tiny and faint, barely legible. I figure lots of folks will be confused it doesn't quite work as advertised. Kinda like Siri. But oh well.

Patrick I still agree 100%

[Rickroller]

I find it comical that you say I was "completely wrong"... then you proceed to make my very point. My point was that the commercial shows the 2 users merely tapping their phones together, making it seem to the average tv watcher that's all you need to do and the file transfer is done.

But that is all they need to do, once those features are enabled. You are merely implying from the commercial that those 2 people haven't already done that, when in fact, the commercial is perhaps implying they have. Either way, welcome to advertising.

[howarmat]

and nobody listens anymore...