Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Throws Microsoft Under Bus, Then Won't Patch Android Flaw

Posted by timothy on from the well-that's-one-way-to-view-it dept.

An anonymous reader writes Last month, Google took the bold steps to release the details of a security vulnerability ahead of Microsoft. Microsoft responded and said that there was a patch in works which was set to be released two days after Google went live with the details. Microsoft accuses Google for refusing to wait an extra 48 hours so that the patch would have been released along with the details of the exploit. Now, let's see what is happening on the Google side of software development. Recently, an exploit has been uncovered in the WebView component of Android 4.3 — estimated to cover roughly 60% of Android install base — and Google is saying that they will not patch the flaw. Google's only reasoning seems to be that they are not fixing vulnerabilities in 4.3 (introduced in June 2012) anymore, as they have moved focus to newer releases. It would appear that over 930 million Android phones in use are out of official Google security patch support.

19 of 629 comments (clear)

  1. Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if they patched it for 4.3, there is approximately zero chance that it would be pushed out as an update by anyone.

    1. Re:Makes sense. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And somehow this is an acceptable situation?

      "Too fucking bad buy a new phone" is not a proper response for a gaping security flaw. I hold Google accountable, as well as the handset manufacturers.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:Makes sense. by Rich0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've been wondering when people would start to take notice of this problem with Android. There is no general policy of security backports on it at all. Phones can have security vulnerabilities like anything else - it is just a matter of time before we start seeing exploits.

      They're doing a better job with ChromeOS, with a 5 year support pledge. Ironically that still isn't as good as Windows (10yrs from obsolescence vs 5yrs from introduction). If you want to see big companies taking linux seriously vendors need to start matching Windows support timelines. People like to joke about XP, but it was supported just a year ago and what was the latest version of your favorite Linux distro when XP first came out? Being secure without having to do major updates is a big selling point.

    3. Re:Makes sense. by ichthus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I totally agree. Google could patch it, but it would then be up to the various manufacturers to push it out (Samsung, et al.) But, despite this, Google should still patch it, for PR's sake.

      --
      sig: sauer
    4. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You forgot the carriers.

      They're probably the worst offenders of all, as holding back an update means they can use "comes with the latest OS!!" as a selling point on their merchandise.

    5. Re:Makes sense. by sshir · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, you simply didn't get the point. Google can't push the patch to those devices (unless they are from Nexus line). Samsung, LG, etc. must do the pushing. But they wont.

    6. Re:Makes sense. by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not being able to patch an older system that could be patched, that makes sense to you?

      I'll never understand the logic of Android fanboys. At this point I'll pick iOS and Windows over Android any time.

      I'm sorry, but what?

      I bought my first gen iPad within a month of launch. In less than 2.5 years it was unsupported on the latest version of iOS.

      When I updated my latest gen iPod touch to iOS 8.x, I ran into problems, had a few apps stop working, and generally found myself underwhelmed.

      Apple does the exact same shit, and don't pretend they don't.

      Basically manufacturers expect us to pay for a new device every year or two, and then quickly decree them to be off support.

      So WTF should we pay full price for something they're going to abandon in a relatively short period of time for?

      Sorry, but no. If you want to charge me $700 for a device, I expect you to support it longer than two years. Otherwise, I'm not buying your shit any more, because you somehow think of me as a revolving cash supply.

      In this regards, I think both Android and iOS are sorely lacking.

      So, screw the lot of them. Want these devices to be disposable? Sell them to us at discounted prices instead of your inflated prices. Or if you're going to charge us that much money, support it MUCH longer.

      Two years support for a brand new device? Hell no.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:Makes sense. by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Would it be nice if Google could *FORCE* companies like AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint to upgrade the OS on the devices they sold? Hell yes, but that's not going to happen because then these big asshole companies wouldn't sell as much product if people got the latest features on aging handsets and tablets.

      Works for iOS. Carriers cannot prevent the upgrade of devices that can be upgraded.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    8. Re:Makes sense. by Wycliffe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've been wondering when people would start to take notice of this problem with Android.

      930 million phones might be enough. Now we just need someone to write a worm that uses this to get noticed by taking
      down the cellular network for a few days and then maybe someone will get smart enough to require phone manufacturers
      to push updates for a reasonable amount of time (say 5 years after they stop selling the phone).
      I've seen phones stop receiving updates before their 2 year contract is even up. This should be breach of contract.

    9. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MS supported bug fixes for XP for TWELVE years. Google has barely supported 18 months. There is absolutely no comparison. Use you're head and stop blindly worshiping Google and hating MS. I know it's hard to not be a complete idiot, but give it your best,.

    10. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This sudden attempt by Google supporters to shift the responsibility is the lamest fucking excuse I've ever seen. Microsoft has supported XP FAR longer than Google has supported... well, anything. I also especially like how suddenly it's not Google's fault for NOT thinking ahead and making it possible to deploy security updates to their OS like certain other phone vendors did BEFORE Google made their competing OS.

      Seriously, for all the bluster here that "it's not Google's fault!" this is 100% Google's fault. It's their security vulnerability, their inability to update many of the devices easily, and their desire to stop supporting something less than 3 years after it was made, despite it still being fully-functional. Since when has the geek crowd become so pathetic that we've bought into the planned obsolesce phase whole-heartedly, and started making excuses for the biggest tech firms on Earth?

  2. Don't be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or if you do, divert attention by saying Microsoft did it first

  3. Google's official support policy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1- You can go buy a new Android phone; or
    2- You can go fuck yourself.

  4. They gave MS 90 days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't believe for a moment that MS were working flat-out on the patch for 90 days - it's more likely that they left it until the last minute, and then assumed that Google would make a special exception for them.

    Sorry Microsoft, the deadline is the same for everyone.

  5. Android is not Chrome. by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First, I consider myself a fan of the Googlesphere. I love Android, love Chrome, love GMail, enjoy the availability of their online Apps, and so on. (Hate hate hate Google+, though).

    And saying that - Google needs to come to terms with the fact that they can't get away with the same bullshit update cycle for an OS installed on physical hardware, as they do with Chrome. For a desktop browser, weekly updates with support ending more-or-less after a year counts as an annoyance, but not a deal-killer. For an OS, just "no". My last phone lasted a decade - Support your devices (at least for critical vulnerability patches) for at least that long, or GTFO of the playground.

  6. The truth of the matter by JonathanP.Bennett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The original article doesn't give any details as to what this "exploit" is in android. Even if it is a real exploit, no new phones will be made with Android 4.3, and at this point, no manufacturer would push an update to an old device even if Google did fix it. As to Google throwing Microsoft under the bus, that is utter crap. Google privately disclosed a vulnerability to MS, and *TOLD THEM* they had 90 days. After 90 days, Google publicly released the vulnerability. This is standard stuff. Giving a deadline is the only way to keep vulnerabilities out of the NSA toolkit and force MS to actually fix it.

    1. Re:The truth of the matter by Angua · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Google made the 90 day deadline up, sure. But they are enforcing it, which I think is pretty cool. MS wanted them to wait two days. TWO DAYS. Which says to me they were testing the waters. No way those two days were actually crucial for MS. If you can finish the job in 92 days, you can finish it in 90 days (especially when you have the resources MS has). They were simply finding out if Google would bend their 90 day rule. Next time, it would be a week. The time after, it would be a month. Until they could and would just ignore it. Since Google stuck to their guns, MS has to resort to the tactic of making Google out to be the bad guy. Which, to be fair, they kind of are. MS doesn't like to be bossed around any more than anyone else. But to me, this is the type of pressure which is on the whole beneficial to the users in the long run.

      --
      I am not a vegetarian werewolf.
  7. Re:Microsoft over Google any day. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Microsoft learned to placate government officials by donating to them. They sought power so they could gin up memes like "anti-competitive behavior" and sic true believers AKA their meme enforcement cogs, until the politicians git paid to get back out of the way.

    Now, having placated the US federal government, most state governments, and most individual EU countries, they must now focus on placating the EU parliament AKA European Federal Government, whose politicians now are wondering why they, too, can't get a piece of the pie.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  8. Re:Doesn't really matter if they do patch it by tobiasly · · Score: 5, Informative

    Furthermore we are up to version 5 of android and there is still no way to push security updates? That's a pretty serious fail IMO. Google might want to rethink that strategy before it seriously burns them in the long run.

    They have rethought that strategy, and the solution is Google Play Services. All of the critical functionality has been moved there, which they can update via the Google Play store. Most of the individual apps have moved to independently-updatable Google Play apps as well. The WebKit based library discussed here has been replaced by a Chrome-based version, which also receives regular updates.

    And yes, all devices Gingerbread (2.3) and above get these updates. The problem is that the WebView is one of the remaining pieces that was still tied directly to the OS in those earlier versions, so it can't be updated directly.

    I'm not excusing Google for not fixing it here, but saying that version 5 still has no way to push security updates directly is incorrect.