Are Cell Viruses A Real Threat Now?

Celpha writes "According to security firm F-Secure, a Trojan virus (Cardtrap.A) attacks Symbian mobile phone operating systems, attempting to infect users' PCs if they insert the phone's memory card into their computers. From the article: 'We expect to see more of this on the mobile front,' an F-Secure chief research officer said. Trend Micro issued a media alert stating it is a 'fully functioning' mobile threat. However, Antivirus firm Sophos slams the claim of this first example of a serious mobile malware threat as just plain bonkers."

Comments

Heh

[Walkiry]

'We expect to see more of this on the mobile front,'

I bet you do, as you are probably already hard at work to make it happen.

Cell Phones

[certel]

Everyone knew this was coming. Anything that has any type of software code will eventually be exploited or tried to be exploited at some point.

Re:Cell Phones

[kihjin]

Netcraft hasn't confirmed it yet, so it can't be true.

Sorry.

Re:Cell Phones

[certel]

I never said that it was or wasn't true. I just said that it should be expected that at some point a cell phone would be exploited.

Re:Cell Phones

[kihjin]

Bah, it was a joke.

You better believe it's a threat.

[TripMaster Monkey]

TrendMicro claims that the Symbos_Cardtrp.A trojan is a "fully functioning threat", while Sophos dissmisses the entire thing as "bonkers". I'm thinking that the truth is rather in the middle.

The Symbos_Cardtrp.A trojan is one of the first clumsy attempts at this sort of thing, but we all know that the malware only gets more sophisticated and polished over time. People certainly should be alarmed about the appearance of this trojan...not because it itself is all that threatening, but because it clearly demonstrates the potential for mischief.

As Raimund Genes, president of the firm's European Operations, said: "This attack is really a proof of concept and may be an indication of a new type of blended threat to come." You can bet that as cellphones become more sophisicated and more interconnected to our computers, malware authors are going to turn this into a genuine threat.

In short, while it's rather sensationalistic to tout this as a "fully functioning threat", claiming that there is nothingto worry about disingenuous in the extreme. Sophos' claim that paying attenton to this threat distracts sysadmins from the "real threat" of attacks on Windows desktops is pure sheepdip. Imagine if we dismissed out of hand the new threat of infection via USB thumbdrives, because we were all too busy paying attention to the "real threat" of infection over the network?

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

You can bet that as cellphones become more sophisicated and more interconnected to our computers, malware authors are going to turn this into a genuine threat.

An objective observer (which the various anti-virus people probably aren't) might ask why a mobile phone needs to become "more sophisticated" in the first place. My phone was a freebie about four years ago when I signed up, and still has way more features than I ever want or need.

Give me a good phone book feature, voice, text messaging and some sort of answerphone if I can't take a call. I don't need it to be a low quality digital camera, hard-to-use PDA, sub-standard web browser, trivial calculator, poor-capacity MP3 player, pathetically quiet alarm clock, and all the other junk. Nor do I need it to run some super-complicated operating system that's ripe for attacking.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[black mariah]

My phone was a freebie about four years ago when I signed up, and still has way more features than I ever want or need.

I highlighted the key words there for you. You may not use those features, but someone does, and probably on a very regular basis.

I don't need it to be a low quality digital camera, hard-to-use PDA, sub-standard web browser, trivial calculator, poor-capacity MP3 player, pathetically quiet alarm clock, and all the other junk. Nor do I need it to run some super-complicated operating system that's ripe for attacking.

So you'd rather carry around a camera, a PDA, a calculator, an MP3 player, an alarm clock, and all the other junk instead of having it all in one convenient package? I hope you have a lot of pockets...

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[JFitzsimmons]

Belive it or not, that's exactly what I do. While I do have several pockets, I rarely use them because I have a backpack.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Alistar]

Yea, thats your opinion. I have a Treo and I use the various advanced functions of it everyday, well except the camera, stupid vga camera. The address book, alarms, contacts, mobile e-mail, fairly advanced graphing and calculatory functions, a multitude of clock and timer functions, memos, encrypted memos, having important data with me on the go, editing and reviewing documents, etc. Ill admit, I don't use the camera or music playing capabilities of it, but everything else allows me to stay ahead of problems in my business.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Thorwak]

So basically you won't be running Linux on it anytime soon?

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

You may not use those features, but someone does, and probably on a very regular basis.

I very much doubt most people would miss them if they weren't there. In my whole life, surrounded by people with mobile phones, I have met one person who I've ever seen use his WAP browser. I have seen a calculator used on a mobile phone twice, and both times I'd worked out the correct answer in my head faster. You get the idea.

I think all this stuff is a triumph of marketing over necessity. How many people would really miss any of these features if they weren't there?

So you'd rather carry around a camera, a PDA, a calculator, an MP3 player, an alarm clock, and all the other junk instead of having it all in one convenient package? I hope you have a lot of pockets...

The two aren't equivalent. There's a huge difference between having a real PDA and some token naff organiser thing on a mobile phone. A real MP3 player would have far more capacity than the recently announced phones. A real calculator or computer system can blow away anything integrated into any phone I've ever seen. A real digital camera can produce vastly higher resolution images than any phone.

Even ignoring that, how often do people really need to take all of these things everywhere they go anyway? I don't see the convenience, nor even the novelty value, and apparently neither does pretty much everyone I know or walk past in the street.

Of course, time will tell which of us is right. I'll bet you a drink that when large parts of mobile phone networks start dying because all the 3G/4G devices running $MOBILE_OS got infected with a virus within minutes, people find giving up all the naff extras a small price to pay for being able to make a call when they need to.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

OK. I'm sure there must be someone somwhere who really does find more than one or two of the gizmos useful, and perhaps you're him. Fair enough.

Even so, I can't help noticing that your top-of-the-line phone is currently listed at around the $400 mark, give or take whatever special offer is running this week. If you'd only spent $50 on the phone, I wonder how much real computing hardware you could have bought, if you have a genuine use for the organiser and mathematical functions, and how much better at everything you describe it would be.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[Tim Browse]

I very much doubt most people would miss them if they weren't there. In my whole life, surrounded by people with mobile phones, I have met one person who I've ever seen use his WAP browser. I have seen a calculator used on a mobile phone twice, and both times I'd worked out the correct answer in my head faster. You get the idea.

As regards the other features mentioned, it might be just me, but I think I've seen more than one instance of someone using their camera phone.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[mlush]

Give me a good phone book feature, voice, text messaging and some sort of answerphone if I can't take a call. I don't need it to be a low quality digital camera, hard-to-use PDA, sub-standard web browser, trivial calculator, poor-capacity MP3 player, pathetically quiet alarm clock, and all the other junk. Nor do I need it to run some super-complicated operating system that's ripe for attacking.

"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone"
- Bjarne Stronstrup

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[black mariah]

I love how there are so many total fucking Luddites on a supposed tech forum.

How many people would really miss any of these features if they weren't there?

How many people would REALLY miss their cell phone at all? If you get into such stupid questions as "Who NEEDS that?" the answer is always "Well, nobody really NEEDS it... it's just nice to have if you have a use for it."

There's a huge difference between having a real PDA and some token naff organiser thing on a mobile phone. A real MP3 player would have far more capacity than the recently announced phones. A real calculator or computer system can blow away anything integrated into any phone I've ever seen. A real digital camera can produce vastly higher resolution images than any phone.

So fucking what if you can store 12,000 songs on your new whiz-bang MP3 player? Even at home I'm rarely listening to more than 20-30 songs in rotation so having enough room for that many songs on a phone is a nice feature. Okay, a real calculator can beat up a phone calculator... so what? Who uses a calculator so often that they carry one in their pocket every day? But how many that almost never use one will be glad there's one on their phone that one time they need it? Why are you worried about the resolution of a camera phone anyway? The point isn't super shiny photo-quality images the point is to send something immediately.

For every argument you make against including something on a phone, I can make ten why it SHOULD be on there.

Even ignoring that, how often do people really need to take all of these things everywhere they go anyway? I don't see the convenience, nor even the novelty value, and apparently neither does pretty much everyone I know or walk past in the street.

The question isn't "how often do people need to take these things with them?", it's "how often do you need these things and not have them?"

I'll bet you a drink that when large parts of mobile phone networks start dying because all the 3G/4G devices running $MOBILE_OS got infected with a virus within minutes, people find giving up all the naff extras a small price to pay for being able to make a call when they need to.

Line up the Red Bull, 'cause I'll be thirsty. Cameras, text messaging, PDA functionality, MP3 players... they make too much sense and are too useful to give up.

Like I said before, YOU might not find these things useful, but SOMEONE does.

If one in a hundred people find a use for something, that's 3.5 million people that use it in this country alone. That's a LOT of potential users for something that is trivial to implement and will only bother people that are large enough asshats to complain about something that has no impact on their life whatsoever.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[vertinox]

I don't need it to be a low quality digital camera, hard-to-use PDA, sub-standard web browser, trivial calculator, poor-capacity MP3 player, pathetically quiet alarm clock, and all the other junk.

I need the digital camera, browser, calculator, and alarm clock (but like you said a bit louder). Having a camera on you at all times may actually come in handy during a car wreck or something that needs to have a picture taken at that moment like a crime in progress... Well, if you live in a place like Phildadelphia (Baltimore, NYC, or Detroit) you sort of think of those things.

I often find myself at resturants arguing with people over tip and having the cell phone fixes that and I often fine myself sleeping in places where there isn't an alarm clock and so my cell phone is the next best thing.

Can't tell you how many times I needed to use the web browser instant messaging feature... It is more of a lifestyle thing than anything else.

I'm not going to carry around a bulky laptop, pda, or (even though really tempting) a Sidekick everywhere with me.

Regardless of if you need them or not, plenty of others do... If I was purchasing a cell phone and I came across one that didn't have those things I would shy away for the more feature laden but same priced cell phone.

Re:You better believe it's a threat.

[illium]

go to China. every single person has at least one cell phone, sometimes two or three. most of them constantly use the entire functionality of those phones. america is a little behind the game on cell phones. we still mostly use them for audio (talking, voice mail). no need to restate, as the other posters have clearly said that wether you want it or not lots of people do, and it exists, and it's only going to get more complicated, as is the nature of things, so there is no purpose in discussing any other possible situation, other than what is really happening. _illium

Cell Viruses are the most common!

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the computer term virus CAME from Cell Viruses. Now we are using Cell Virus to talk about cell PHONE viruses?

yeah, my Motorola phone caught a cold, and it passed it along to my PC.

Re:Cell Viruses are the most common!

[hugesmile]

I wonder if it's possible to write a Mono Virus in Mono, that Mono Tribe Members can get, by speaking on their single channel cell phone in the Mono language.

...sounded funnier in my head.

Just Windows.

[kihjin]

If you are going to quote some one, quote them completely.

From TFA(emphasis mine):
"We expect to see more of this on the mobile front," Hypponen said. "We may begin to see Windows viruses spreading to PDAs that are synched up to computers, or go from PCs to mobile phones with the memory card."

Re:Just Windows.

[Sockatume]

It's a trivial point, really. There's nothing to stop viruses for other operating systems working this way.

Re:Just Windows.

[$RANDOMLUSER]

What "viruses for other operating systems"?

Re:Just Windows.

[Sockatume]

They exist, although there are few of them. I certainly had a few on my Amiga back in the day. My points are that: 1) The statement's inclusion would imply that only Windows systems are theoretically vulnerable to this sort of threat, which is untrue. 2) Its true meaning, which is at best implicit, is that the only noticable development of these viruses will be on Windows systems. This is painfully obvious anyway (as there are so few viruses in general for other systems). Ergo, it's a trivial point.

Cell phone viruses??? I'm immune!

[Anonymous Coward]

Since my phone is so old!

Still works fine though. My cell phone company (Telus, a canadian CDMA company) calls me occasionally to try and sell me a new phone. I keep saying the same thing, "I'd love to buy a new phone. Do you have any phones with infrared?"

The sales rep says, "No."

I say, "Why not? All your competitors sell phones with infrared."

The sales rep says, "I don't know. We have phones with bluetooth though."

I say, "Well, I have a laptop with infrared, and a PDA with infrared, and as soon as Telus sells a phone with infrared, I'll buy it."

The sales rep hangs up.

The only reason I stick with Telus is that I want to keep my number. I can't wait for number portability to begin in Canada...

Re:Cell phone viruses??? I'm immune!

[tcatt]

Telus (as in Telecommunications US || Tell us how much we owe you now) is not a Canadian company. BC Tel, AGT, and Sasktel were Canadian companies. Offtopic I know but I've always been disappointed in my western canadian provinces for selling out our telecoms to american interests.

Re:Cell phone viruses??? I'm immune!

[Anonymous Coward]

Telus is not a Canadian company.

How do you define Canadian? Their primary operations are in Canada, and like all big Canadian telecoms, there are government ownership restrictions on the sector.

Focus you energy.

[OctoberSky]

I am calling on all hackers and script kiddies to stop writing malicious code for cell phones and start writing codes that allow me to get a connection (place a call) without my carrier knowing.

$39.99+ is far too much to pay per month. I want free calling. And I am not talking about cloning, I am talking about getting on Verizons antenna and placing calls from my phone without them seeing it, or seeing who owns the phone.

Re:Focus you energy.

[mysqlrocks]

I use Verizon as well. I don't think the price is unreasonable. However, I do think the customer service is horrible. The sad thing is that Verizon probably has the best customer service of the cell phone companies (at least here in the US). When I moved and wanted to change my cell phone number and plan I had to wait over an hour at the local Verizon store for someone to help me. Could anybody write a virus that causes so called "customer service" representatives to actually provide customer service? That would be more useful.

Re:Focus you energy.

[Reality Master 201]

If you had any idea how half assed the goings on at VZW were, behind the scenes, you'd be wondering how it is they actually manage to charge you for the service you get. Having witnessed some of it through a previous job, I was stunned. Of course, they're still better than T-Mobile. With them, it's a miracle your device works at all.

Re:Focus you energy.

[OctoberSky]

I don't actually use Verizon, in fact I don't have a cell phone, haven't in over 6 months. Its quite nice not being found by my friends who just want to talk because... A. Thier bored B. They can make a call I just said Verizon because they are so well known. When I do get another phone, which is quite soon, I will be getting Nextel because they have the best signal where I go (work, house, hunting). Thats all that really matters to me now.

Re:Focus you energy.

[Anonymous Coward]

I just said Verizon because they are so well known.

That's funny, because it's pretty much impossible to get executable code onto ~90% of Verizon's phones without it going through a costly approval process. And then you have to buy it specifically for each phone, since it's cryptographically signed both ways. They're not like most other providers where you can download Java apps from wherever you want (or don't want).

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[Daniel_Staal]

Does anyone come here for serious discussion anymore?

You're assuming anyone ever did.

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[welshwaterloo]

Does anyone come here for serious discussion anymore?

No, I came here for a good argument..

Simplicity is the key to beating this easily...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just buy a damn PHONE. You know. Those things that used to just go ring-ring, and you pick it up and talk on it and maybe keep an address book on? I still use a Motorola V60 flip phone. No windows/PalmOS/WinOS/WinCE/PocketPC/2003 crap to worry about. Ring tones? No thanks. I'm not 13 anymore, trying to make some sort of 17-second "statement" to the crowd around my ringing phone. Sometimes simplicity is the key. K.I.S.S. metheodology is still around for a reason.

Re:Simplicity is the key to beating this easily...

[Pichu0102]

Yes, but another thing is to just use an old type cell phone.
I mean, what's the point of having a color cellphone anyways? And with web capabilities?
Web browsers on phones were just asking for trouble. And the worst part is no one can make an antivirus for phones, so if your phone gets infected, your provider will probably charge you an arm, a leg, and your first born to repair it instead of trying to fix the holes in the first place.

Re:Simplicity is the key to beating this easily...

[Anonymous Coward]

My ringtone is an old telephone ringer... (Bringggggggg Bringgggggggggggg) kinda hard to get much simpler than that.

Re:Simplicity is the key to beating this easily...

[ErikZ]

(blink)

I use ring tones so I know it's my phone that's ringing.

We used to have it where almost everyone had the same ring tone. It sucked. Pay attention.

Got paid to develop Trojans

[Anonymous Coward]

I got paid by a major company in the mobile field to develop Trojan horses for Java, Symbian, PalmOS and Windows Smartphone.

The goal was not to release "in the wild" but to showcase the need for funding for mobile phone security.

Nevertheless, pretty much nothing has been done even though modern smartphone OSes are incredibly close to allowing excellent OS security (MMU enables kernel / user separation).

It's pretty easy to do fancy stuff once you get in the mindset of an attacker. Like waking up the phone at midnight to place calls to a premium number. One doesn't even need to stack-smash to have fun (that is harder on ARM platforms bc you have to develop your own shellcode anyway).

The problem is especially important for wireless operators because people pay with their mobile phone. While that is the basis of revenue, it also enables major fraud (very much akin to what the "dialer kits" do to modem owners by silently ringing 900 numbers).

Examples:

  * There's a WAP (wireless browsing) service where you can download ringtones for $2. What if a program on your phone starts downloading those silently?

  * In some countries SMS are charged with a premium. What if a program are sending premium SMS without your knowing?

Of course it's also important for users ("what if a Trojan posts my phone book to some website", "what if a Trojan gets my location from the network and gives it to my wife". It's also important for security that the phone not be transformed into a jammer by changes in the radio firmware / software, but that's harder to do.

Hopefully the players involved will wake up before we find a nasty one in the wild.

Re:Got paid to develop Trojans

[tkinnun0]

I got paid by a major company in the mobile field to develop Trojan horses for Java, Symbian, PalmOS and Windows Smartphone.

Wow, I'm really interested in your results. What in your opinion are the relative strengths and weaknesses of those platforms? I've heard Java touted as being head and shoulders above the rest in security, but is it really so?

Re:Got paid to develop Trojans

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to discuss some of your findings, if that's ok with you. Specifically what you _could_ do on the various platforms without the user actively having to install/ok/verify the actions taken by your programs. My questions would be white-hat.

You can reach me at: celltrojans at troed dot se

Still just a trojan...

[MosesJones]

It irritates me when trojans are lumped with the virus crowd. This requires a user to ACCEPT and INSTALL the application before it becomes an issue, it is useless without that user interaction.

Re:Still just a trojan...

[FirienFirien]

However, the average phone user is not so virus savvy as the average computer user. To wit, a semi-quoted example from an article from earlier - may have been slashdot, probably wired magazine or similar though.

User gets notification on phone. Accept or reject? Reject.
User gets notification on phone again. Accept or reject? Reject.
Repeat line above a few times. A virus doesn't care about the user rejecting it, and will keep trying to give it. User (hooray for the general public, sigh) eventually presses accept. Granted, this doesn't happen every time... but I bet you know a fair number of people who would, even out of curiosity.

And there's your issue. If this thing keeps popping up on someone's phone - especially if they're trying to do something else, like dial a number - there's a good chance that they'll get irritated enough before moving out of range.

Re:Still just a trojan...

[Anonymous Coward]

A trojan doesnt require a user to accept it.
A trojan is something that gives someone access to the computer.
It doesnt have to be accepted and run by the user.
Thats how most SKIDDIES get trojans on peoples computers(normaly unsuspecting friends).
Alot of trojans are planted on systems after a hacker has got his foot in the door.

Re:Still just a trojan...

[Anonymous Coward]

The average phone user doesn't own a $400 Symbian based phone.

Re:Still just a trojan...

[Anonymous Coward]

This requires a user to ACCEPT and INSTALL the application

Not as hard as you think, anymore.

Just yesterday I saw for the first time a cell-phone virus trying to get to my own oldish Nokia-7650. I was messing a little with the phone and I saw a "Nokia-6600 wants to connect to you through bluetooth. Accept? Yes/No" kind of a message. I decided to play along and pressed "Yes". In like a half-minute my messages' in-box beeped with a new message arrived from bluetooth, containing ngab0ustp.sis, the Symbian installer format file. Playing along (it's an old phone, and I just look for an excuse to replace it with a new one, so I didn't mind the possible infection; or I can always restore from the phone's ROM) I clicked on open the message, to see what's in. It errorred with being unable to install that particular file as a result. Obviously the versions are not compatible.

Yes, you still do have to accept a bluetooth connection, but you don't have to do any special things to INSTALL it. A generic Joe User will just try to open a received "message" (how many of Symbian-powered cell-phone users know what ".sis" file is; or how many of them even know that their phones run Symbian?), and it will try to install automatically on being open.

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[Anonymous Coward]

...says the guy with the high 700k UID?

Get with the times, Grampa!

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

Yes, you are a Luddite, we know. Some of us actually like to have a phone with all the bells and whistles because it saves hauling around a dozen other devices like an mp3 player, a camera and pda. Need internet? I'll whip out my phone and can connect to any Wifi, UMTS or GPRS network. I even use Skype to save on long distance calls.

But I suppose you drive around a horse and carriage too...

Re:Get with the times, Grampa!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I am not a Luddite. As an audiophile, I don't appreciate the pseudo-sound that is usually generated from phone-quality MP3 "players". I have my iPod and a decent set of cans for that, which also has about 10x the battery life of my phone. Secondly, NO ONE has yet to make a statement by providing Internet to a hand-held device. I don't care who you are. I'll whip out my 12" laptop if I want Internet, which is usually in my car with me at all times anyway, connecting via EVDO or wifi 24/7. Skype is on the laptop too, if I need it. Don't make me sit here and believe you surf AND enjoy it from your all-in-wonder device with it's 2" screen. Cell cameras are overrated. For the first 30 years of my life, I didn't need the capability to take a picture every 47 seconds of my life, and neither did you. The quality sucks too. Get over it. Something embarrassing about YOU is just going to end up getting hacked off your phone and posted on the 'Net anyway. It's bound to happen. So, when is the gamble worth it when your all-in-wonder device gets a virus and locks up solid? You now have NO phone, NO Internet, NO camera, and NO tunes. Maybe you should search Google for a few words of advice from the all-your-eggs-in-one-basket division...

Re:Get with the times, Grampa!

[glesga_kiss]

As an audiophile...snip...I have my iPod a

That took me a good minute to stop laughing there. You don't buy a portable player for quality. The sound in my mobile phone is as good as your iPod. In fact, as mine can play way more formats, I'd bet at least one of them was superiour to the iPod suppporting ones.

Re:Get with the times, Grampa!

[Anonymous Coward]

I never said it was my permanent setup. It's simply my choice for a mobile setup. Combined with a decent headroom amp, or my Sennheiser amp, and it will do while travelling.

You buy a portable MP3 player for portability. I chose the iPod for SOME quality features. Format is pointless, as I rip my own music, and everything can be converted in one way or another to a compatible format.

You do not (or at least should not) buy a cell phone for playing music. I'm wondering how many times you've wanted to make a call, only to find your portable "ton-o-formats" MP3 player has a dead battery? Then again, I believe that was my point of my original post...

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[Anonymous Coward]

Now you're just contradicting me.

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Sorry, this is abuse.

Cell "phones"

[BarkLouder]

Oh, cell "phones" . . . . . whew!

Cell viruses?

[ftoomch]

I've always been threatened by cell viruses, in fact I have a bad cold at the moment.

Surely it's cellphone viruses the article refers to guys.

Cell Phone Viruses would pose no threat if....

[Khyber]

Cell companies would make cell phones that didn't rely upon such an exploitable OS.

Granted Symbian is nice, looks pretty, but everyone I know with a cell phone running Symbian also complains that the phone is so slow to respond.

All the old Nokia phones were extremely fast, responsive (no 3-4 second lag waiting to go back a screen just to look at one freaking phone number) and best of all, didn't require such an exploitable OS because at the time, it was all hardware logic-control.

I don't know what the OS is on my Kyocera Phantom phone, but even it's slow to respond to keystrokes, and it doesn't have all those little capabilities that most phones nowdays have.

Simply put, as long as phone companies use software instead of hardware to control a phone, there will always be a threat of software infection.

Just an opinion...

Re:Cell Phone Viruses would pose no threat if....

[Lehk228]

when i replaced my dying nokia 5185 i spent quite a bit of time looking for a phone without all the extra crap on it. the nokia 1100 is good if you can use GSM phones. inexpensive at $70 unsubsidized and it uses the old 4 key nokia interface (up, down, action, cancel)

Ah, the V60

[jfengel]

I loved my V60c, and when the screen went I couldn't find anything to replace it that didn't come with a million other features sucking up battery life. So I ditched it, glad to be rid of its stupid break-off antenna (I replaced it nearly a dozen times in its two-year life span).

But when the new phone had to go in for repairs, I briefly re-activated the V60. That was a pleasure.

Dirty telephone

[Aerion]

What? Phone viruses?

Damn, we shouldn't have sent all those telephone cleaners off in the B ark!

Don't blame the user, they are human.

[BillGodfrey]

(Full article at http://billpg.me.uk/2005/09/barbarians-at-mobile-p hone.html )

Selected extract...

A good model to follow could be something similar to Flash files. Commonly seen used in animations, a program inside a flash file can do a lot. Here's a jigsaw puzzle. Here's a simple arcade game. Here's a collaborative document editing system.

Flash implements a full program language, but the program's wings are clipped. Unlike regular executables, a flash program can't interfere with other programs and it can't mess with files it doesn't own. Add a way allowing programs to interact with other components (including the file system) with a strict and manageable protocol, and there's no big need for any program to run unrestricted. (Except the operating system and the occasional device driver, that is.)

asdf

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure Slashdotters won't care unless it's an open-source phone.

News topic should have included "phone"

[Anonymous Coward]

For a moment I thought the PlayStation 3 was going to be the world's first console to contract a virus...

Re:I'll give it 3 comments

[m50d]

I was reading and posting for years before I got an account, not that it matters.

No Interface

[Gates82]

I'm glad my cell phone only interfaces with the cell tower, a power adapter and me. I hate new cell phones, I just want to orally communicate, nothing else. That is what my laptop is for.

--
So who is hotter? Ali or Ali's sister?

blatant karma whoring, don't mod me up

[poot_rootbeer]

we all know that the malware only gets more sophisticated and polished over time.

Proof of this can easily be obtained by comparing Windows 3.0 to Windows XP.

Mod parent down

[Anonymous Coward]

Conspiracy Theory Troll!

Well grampaw...

[HermanAB]

the trouble is that cell phones use digital signal processing to do their thing. They contain enormously powerful processors to encode and decode voice and even some radio functions are now done directly in firmware. Therefore, the user functions are really just a trivial add-on to the phone.

The days of a carbon microphone and battery at the end of a long wire are long gone...

Why more sophisticated??

[Khyber]

An objective observer (which the various anti-virus people probably aren't) might ask why a mobile phone needs to become "more sophisticated" in the first place.

Simple, it's called advertising and "Look here at what our phones can do!" type of bragging rights.



Or, as one of my other friends put it to me a long time ago, it's "creating a false market for other services." I mean, come-on. "Let's boost our economy by making our hardware run off of software so it can be infected and boost other markets which in turn, we may possibly get kickbacks for doing so?"