Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Motorola Confirms That It Will Not Commit To Monthly Security Patches (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the security-woes dept.

If you are planning to purchase the Moto Z or a Moto G4 smartphone, be prepared to not see security updates rolling out to your phone every month -- and in a timely fashion. After Ars Technica called out Motorola's security policy as "unacceptable" and "insecure," in a recent review, the company tried to handle the PR disaster, but later folded. In a statement to the publication, the company said: Motorola understands that keeping phones up to date with Android security patches is important to our customers. We strive to push security patches as quickly as possible. However, because of the amount of testing and approvals that are necessary to deploy them, it's difficult to do this on a monthly basis for all our devices. It is often most efficient for us to bundle security updates in a scheduled Maintenance Release (MR) or OS upgrade. As we previously stated, Moto Z Droid Edition will receive Android Security Bulletins. Moto G4 will also receive them.Monthy security updates -- or the lack thereof -- remains one of the concerning issues that plagues the vast majority of Android devices. Unless it's a high-end smartphone, it is often rare to see the smartphone OEM keep the device's software updated for more than a year. Even with a flagship phone, the software update -- and corresponding security patches -- are typically guaranteed for only 18 to 24 months. Reports suggest that Google has been taking this issue seriously, and at some point, it was considering publicly shaming its partners that didn't roll out security updates to their respective devices fast enough.

6 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's actually pretty easy to roll out regular patches, especially considering the upstream testing... ... unless you're adding a ton of vendor/carrier crapware. Testing and maintaining *that* might be an issue.

    Yet Motorola's solution is (apparently) not "DONT FUCKING DO THAT" but instead "don't bother with patching". Yay. Go team dumbass.

  2. Fuck you Motorola/Lenovo by LichtSpektren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You specifically advertised the 2015 Moto E with the following line: "And while other smartphones in this category don't always support upgrades, we won't forget about you, and we'll make sure your Moto E stays up to date after you buy it."

    Then you stopped providing updates for it (of ANY kind) after 219 days.

    Fuck you, fuck you so hard. I've made it very clear to everybody I know that they should never, under any circumstances, buy any Motorola or Lenovo products.

  3. Then UNLOCK OUR BOOTLOADERS! by emil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No exceptions. A phone is a critical communications device, and if the OEM won't supply critical upgrades, then they must allow others to do so.

    DMCA exceptions should be established, and vendors should not be allowed to sell phones within the U.S. without providing all required unlock keys into an escrow. Upon 6 months of patch inactivity, the keys go public.

    1. Re:Then UNLOCK OUR BOOTLOADERS! by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if we had ralph nader types working for us, it would be a law that any series of skipped or delayed security patches (some threshold in a row) would mandate that you unlock bootloaders and let people do the patching themselves.

      man, I wish we had people working FOR THE PEOPLE as our government. the fact that they sold all of us out and stopped caring, that's going to be part of our total demise as a nation. not the main part, but a huge part.

      there were short periods in time (sorry to say, usually under D control) where our congress and senate worked to make things better for regular people. I can't remember the last time this happened, though.

      too bad our lawmakers have no balls to stand up to the power of money and bribes and 'election campain money'.

      we surely deserve better than this.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  4. The iPhone 3 still gets support? by emil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    According to wikipedia, Apple took this phone out behind the woodshed in 2012.

    Any phone vendor who cuts support for a model should be REQUIRED to open the platform for 3rd-party maintenance. A phone is not a general purpose computer, and there should be special rules for it.

  5. Re:Sad but unavoidable by macs4all · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not Google's choice. Vendors want the ability to make customizations to the OS, to "add value".

    Wrong! It IS Google's choice.

    I'm sure that "Vendors" wanted the ability to make "Customizations" to the iPhone, too. It's just that Google COULDN'T CARE LESS about anything other than Datamining. Every Android install is nothing more to them than more Click-bait, more Datamining, more Privacy incursions.

    Google could end this RIGHT NOW. But they won't.

    Ever ask yourself why?