Cell Phone Virus Threat Overblown

An anonymous reader writes "Symantec has come under fire for claiming that 73 percent of smart phone users are aware of viruses and attacks aimed at their handsets. Wireless company WDSGlobal described this as a scaremongering tactic, with its spokesman saying: 'If you look at the viruses out there, currently there are about 14 core viruses, the majority of which are fairly benign. They are mostly developed as "proof of concept" to warn manufacturers of handsets and operating systems or the antivirus industry about potential vulnerabilities.' But Bruce Schneier, chief technology officer at Counterpane Internet Security, believes mobile viruses and attacks shouldn't be discounted altogether, though he believes they aren't currently registering on any significant scale."

Comments

SMS Spam is worse

[esconsult1]

While virii can be a little bit of a problem, I've never got any.

What I have gotten regularly though is spam text messages. On a HTML enabled phone (Treo), the messages are sophisticated enough so that you can click through on a URL to bring up your tiny browser.

Re:SMS Spam is worse

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI, the plural of virus is viruses.

Re:SMS Spam is worse

[Anonymous Coward]

it's worse than that, of course. "virii" is nothing more than a possible plural for the nonexistent word "virius"

Re:SMS Spam is worse

[biglig2]

I fear that it is too late to burn virii as the abomination it is. The thing with language is that it is defined not in books but by what people say.

Re:SMS Spam is worse

[Macka]

FYI it's not a big deal

It may not be for you, as you obviously don't care about language. But for others it is. And someone has to speak out about correct spelling and use of diction in this forum every now and then. Personally I welcome it.

Who are you to tell him his view isn't important? At least he had something intelligent to say.

too many phones to write portable viruses?

[Anonymous Coward]

So many different phones. It's too hard to write anything that will run on them all. Even with write once run everywhere technology ;)

http://www.madecollective.com/

Re:too many phones to write portable viruses?

[3vi1]

Don't worry, after Microsoft uses it's marketing muscle to position itself as the premier OS provider for mobile phones, there will be a base set of API's hackers can write for / exploit.

No, the threat is not overblown.

[Sheetrock]

Unlike with most computer virii, there is an incentive to profit with cell virii.

I'm sure there are people already working out how to get these programmable phones to call those phone numbers in certain countries that charge you an outrageous amount per minute. The wireless companies need to take this seriously.

OK, let's sum it up...

[mangu]

Should we or shouldn't we be afraid of cellphone viruses? This is about the most confusing slashdot story I have seen in the last two hours...

Well of course -

[thewldisntenuff]

There's a large virus risk! Especially when you've got anti-virus software to sell.....

-thewldisntenuff

No way

[Mooga]

"73 percent of smart phone users are aware of viruses and attacks aimed at their handsets."

This is bull. If you stoped 1,000 people on the streat and asked them if cell phone viruses exist, 998 will laugh at you, 1 will say yes, and 1 will bable off in 1337 speak. While people has been able to make cell viruses, they aren't out there yet. Atleast not to my knowlage...

Re:No way

[patio11]

"Smart cell phone" is an industry term of art for the newer phones-cum-PDAs which can, for example, execute non-factory-installed programs and download content off the Internet. Smart cell phone users are people who use smart cell phones (i.e. the ones with current top-line phones, or about 3.7% of the total installed base, at least in the American context), who are, as you might imagine, easily identifiable to survey. Distinguishing a smart phone from a regular phone is no more difficult than distinguishing a PDA from a calculator (the TI-92 is a calculator despite having text capabilities, the PalmPilot is a PDA despite having a built-in calculator, and if your phone is running, say, Symbian and has a stylus its "smart").

Why your comment got modded as Insightful rather than Funny is beyond me.

Awwww...

[mangus_angus]

I bought Cellphone AND Mac Anti-virus as a special bundle pack! Well at least I didn't waste my money on the mac protection, I mean Symantec told me I needed it...and they wouldn't lie.....right?

Symantec's Desperate

[PocketPick]

Symantec is already under pressure from it's stock holders to diversify itself and expand upon the security market. They've taken in anti-spam and anti-spyware companies to beef up the privacy/security buisness, but with good, free competition thier unlikely to get where they would like to be. Buisness is good now, but no doubt the company is concerned about the future, with greater awarness of security from all ends.

I wonder if Symantec's recent statements are an act of true concern, or just an attempt to bolster sales in the exploding hand-held & mobile market?

Mobile phone viruses are the new hotness.

[Nijika]

This is where things are going, I wouldn't discount them for a second. While not as 'practical' or extendable as PC virii or worms, they have the potential to be a much bigger nuisance than either.

This is a big red warning flag if anything. Overblow it if only to vastly improve mobile device wireless security, which at the moment is somewhere between not present and just asking for it.

And luckily, my phone is too crap to be compramised, woohoo!

Too Bad

[brogdon]

"Cell Phone Virus Threat Overblown"

It's too bad this isn't fark.com so someone could have stuck an [obvious] tag in front of that headline...

Only the Paranoid Survive: Listen to Bruce

[postbigbang]

Ten years ago, viruses on PCs were uncommon. Now it's all we can do to keep a machine from being rooted in minutes. While the infrastructure of mobile companies is well NAT'd, the possibilities of people inadvertently getting snarfed is really high. There are five OS makers out there for mobiles, none of which do anything at all to warn users about possible hijacks, phishing schemes (how about emulating that Coke machine that someone wants to buy from?), viruses, and/or data theft (Hi Paris!) and other threats.

Where Symantec is invested in making us paranoid, why not act now, rather than patch phones until we're blue in the face, like we do with PCs? I really disliked Symantec's other seemingly bogus announcements about threats where they don't exist, but with mobile use approaching a billion users, it's just bound to happen and with widespread panic.

Imagine not wanting to use your mobile because you're worried about what might happen. Imagine getting popups, or very unexpected use from a hijack. Or having your authentication swiped then charged up the yang in the next few minutes. Sound like fun? It will happen. Or: just ignore it. It'll go away. Those bad people won't hurt you on your mobile.

F-Secure

[TuomasK]

F-Secure tells, that you need to answer YES four time before you get infected. From F-secure's page: "So how come anybody ever gets infected by it if you have to click "Yes" so many times? Well, we've spoken to many people who've actually been infected, and they typically explain it like this: They got this weird message on the phone, requesting a "Yes" or "No" answer. So they clicked "No". But the message popped up immediatly again. And they clicked "No" - only to see the message pop up again. And since "No" didn't seem to be working, they clicked "Yes"... The message would have disappeared if they would have walked away from the area where they were (to get out of the range of the infected phone), but there's no way for an end user to know that." http://www.f-secure.fi/weblog/