I was under the impression that most Android malware was of the trojan variety. It doesn't exploit any vulnerabilities in Android, it exploits the users' stupidity. Things you download from the market list the permissions. If a wallpaper app wants access to your accounts, SMS, contacts, phone ID, etc., you install it at your peril.
I'm sure there are other vulnerabilities. But as far as I'm aware they are in the minority. Could be wrong.
I'm guessing ARM sees it as the assimilation of the mobile realm into the traditional "personal computing" market. In that case, ARM has a near monopoly in devices that I wouldn't be shocked far out-volume the traditional desktops and laptops. ARM won't be touching what has traditionally been Intel's market, but it may be influencing it by making it smaller, as people substitute into ARM powered tablets and that kind of thing. ARM really only stands to lose share in what has been it's traditional market (but still may increase its volume as that market is growing rapidly).
It's not that VirtualBox requires hardware support. I use it for other things. It's that Windows 8 in VirtualBox requires hardware support. First time I've encountered this.
I'm running Linux on my laptop now, so I don't know how trivial getting VMware or others up and running. Maybe I'll look into it, but I guess I'm wondering if it's somehow related to Win8 and not the host software.
But don't take MY word for it, download the free Win 8 consumer preview yourself. Just fire up a VM and give it a spin if you don't have a spare machine to try it on
I don't have a spare machine to try it on, so I did try to test it in a VM. Turns out, it requires hardware virtualization features which I don't have in my Core Duo laptop, which has otherwise been adequate for my needs for the past several years. Which pretty much negates any chance of me buying Windows 8 for the computer I've been planning, because I can't give it a thorough test run.
Anyone know why the CP requires hardware virtualization, or is it just a quirk of VirtualBox?
I have never seen any such button or setting anywhere in the browser or browser menus for any of my HTC devices, including now (I just looked). I also looked for such an option in the stock browser on the Xoom (ICS) and can't find anything like it there, either. Although that does have an "incognito" mode, and that mode's description says nothing about being signed out of Google's account.
Because like any other browser on any other platform, being logged in is not a browser setting, but a webpage setting. I wouldn't look to sign out of my Amazon account in my Firefox preferences because I'm on my phone and not a desktop. Simply go to google.com, if it says you're signed in, then hit sign out.
Incognito mode should also work, as it shouldn't start with any history or browser data at all.
As for Chrome running on an Android device, I think it would be surprising if it didn't automatically pick up the current identity automatically and behind the scenes.
It does requests Accounts permissions, but this is unsurprising - Chrome has sync and Chrome to Mobile built in, and to use them, it needs to access your account. But this is an option in the settings, and in Chrome, automatically signing in to Google services is also an option.
Err... On the stock browser, I just hit the "Sign Out" button. According the google.com, I'm not signed in. Is there some reason to believe that secretly I'm still signed in? On the Chrome browser, I was never signed in to begin with.
Well... I try to keep fairly abreast of such things, and have seen nothing about it, save for some initial concerns about Chrome on the desktop. Google pretty quickly addressed those.
I've seen nothing suspicious show up in my Privoxy logs (when on my WiFi, my phone proxies through my main rig - Privoxy in the market isn't very robust yet). I've run an occasional packet sniffer to find ad hosts for hosts-based blocking on my phone and have seen nothing suspicious.
Google analytics is baked into SO many websites, and Google has the majority of searches, and if you're using an Android you probably have Google mail anyway. What does Google gain by baking it into the browser as well? Is that marginal benefit greater than the marginal cost?
Some websites almost require flash support. Big, popular sites? No, but ones I may be interested in nonetheless. Actually, some small businesses that outsourced their website design may be the worst offenders, but I'm still interested in the business. It's also useful for some things like college hockey scores - I like college hockey, and until recently, many live stats pages did not have a non-flash counterpart.
In essence: the need for flash is diminishing but not yet gone. I'm happy to be able to use it in this period of transition.
It's only trivial to root if the manufacturer makes it easy to unlock or an exploit is found.
Fortunately, the winds are swaying towards manufacturer support. HTC makes it easy now. I think most Samsung devices are fairly straightforward. Last I saw, Motorola made it a PITA (should change once Google takes over). Even still, it takes more work for these devices. HTC for example, you need to make an account on their developer page, get some info off of your device and submit it, get a key from them, take the appropriate steps to unlock, then start rooting.
The Nexus devices it is as easy as you say, however.
(well, that, and no Google-overlord spying as with the stock and Chrome Android browsers)
Out of curiosity, has anyone seen any evidence to back this up, or is it just speculation?
Not saying I don't understand the cause for concern, but, given the number of people suspicious of anything Google, you'd think someone would have some evidence were it a problem.
I seem to remember that not all features are being backported, e.g., the ICS version of the browser contains updates and upgrades that older releases will not get.
But the stock browser is only part of the story (not that I've ever had any real trouble with it), the goalposts moved significantly with Chrome for Android, and others like Dolphin are very good too.
For the most part, I agree with you. Paying a low up-front cost but a little more in the end is a good option, and not just for low income folks. (Emphasis on option.) There's a opportunity cost related to whether or not you tie up that extra ~$200 in the console now, or keep it on hand for other uses for the time being. Just because you can afford to pay cash outright for a car, for example, does not mean that it makes sense to do so.
However, when you say Thus one has to buy a separate console for each gamer in the family... No, no one doesn't.
My first suspicion would be that the filesystem is messed up, not the actual files. Unless s/he had a lot of pending writes to all of these files, there is no reason that something should have actually overwritten or garbled them when the power shut down. Much more likely was an impending or in-progress write to the filesystem's tables, which has affected where it thinks all the files' pieces are stored. And if that is the case, date modified and size may be irrelevant because those are going to be reported by the filesystem.
Aside from trying to read back sector-by-sector data and assembling them, however, I don't know that there's a remedy.
So, wait - you're complaining that the GP was wrongly down-modded due to "groupthink;" geekoid and myself opine that it's not necessarily bad to punish factually incorrect posts for being factually incorrect; and your response is that moderation should not be peer review either, and that because the system is not perfect, no one should try?
You don't want posts modded by merit or basis in reality, and you don't want posts modded by popular perception. What do you want? No moderation at all? A new moderation for "+1 Precious Special Snowflake?"
I didn't say mod it troll, either. Though it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between someone who is adequately (mis|dis)-informed and someone who is feigning it. Mod it Overrated straight to -1 for all I care. + gives bullshit too much credibility.
Yep, totally not his/her fault for spreading lies and not bothering to read the several articles linked to the previous/. story or the commentary attached to the/. article. S/he deserves being modded up, plus some bonus karma for being such a victim, and not having lies modded down so that they stop sustaining themselves is a necessary sacrifice. The fact that s/he is posting as AC and will not suffer/benefit beyond that one post notwithstanding.
Slashdot Mirror
And which vulnerabilities are those?
I was under the impression that most Android malware was of the trojan variety. It doesn't exploit any vulnerabilities in Android, it exploits the users' stupidity. Things you download from the market list the permissions. If a wallpaper app wants access to your accounts, SMS, contacts, phone ID, etc., you install it at your peril.
I'm sure there are other vulnerabilities. But as far as I'm aware they are in the minority. Could be wrong.
Huh? Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say.
I downloaded the 32-bit version of the CP.
Nope, just verified that what I downloaded the 32-bit version.
I'm guessing ARM sees it as the assimilation of the mobile realm into the traditional "personal computing" market. In that case, ARM has a near monopoly in devices that I wouldn't be shocked far out-volume the traditional desktops and laptops. ARM won't be touching what has traditionally been Intel's market, but it may be influencing it by making it smaller, as people substitute into ARM powered tablets and that kind of thing. ARM really only stands to lose share in what has been it's traditional market (but still may increase its volume as that market is growing rapidly).
This and this make it sound like hardware support is necessary regardless of the virtualization software.
Found nothing conclusive, though.
It's not that VirtualBox requires hardware support. I use it for other things. It's that Windows 8 in VirtualBox requires hardware support. First time I've encountered this.
I'm running Linux on my laptop now, so I don't know how trivial getting VMware or others up and running. Maybe I'll look into it, but I guess I'm wondering if it's somehow related to Win8 and not the host software.
But don't take MY word for it, download the free Win 8 consumer preview yourself. Just fire up a VM and give it a spin if you don't have a spare machine to try it on
I don't have a spare machine to try it on, so I did try to test it in a VM. Turns out, it requires hardware virtualization features which I don't have in my Core Duo laptop, which has otherwise been adequate for my needs for the past several years. Which pretty much negates any chance of me buying Windows 8 for the computer I've been planning, because I can't give it a thorough test run.
Anyone know why the CP requires hardware virtualization, or is it just a quirk of VirtualBox?
I have never seen any such button or setting anywhere in the browser or browser menus for any of my HTC devices, including now (I just looked). I also looked for such an option in the stock browser on the Xoom (ICS) and can't find anything like it there, either. Although that does have an "incognito" mode, and that mode's description says nothing about being signed out of Google's account.
Because like any other browser on any other platform, being logged in is not a browser setting, but a webpage setting. I wouldn't look to sign out of my Amazon account in my Firefox preferences because I'm on my phone and not a desktop. Simply go to google.com, if it says you're signed in, then hit sign out.
Incognito mode should also work, as it shouldn't start with any history or browser data at all.
As for Chrome running on an Android device, I think it would be surprising if it didn't automatically pick up the current identity automatically and behind the scenes.
It does requests Accounts permissions, but this is unsurprising - Chrome has sync and Chrome to Mobile built in, and to use them, it needs to access your account. But this is an option in the settings, and in Chrome, automatically signing in to Google services is also an option.
Err... On the stock browser, I just hit the "Sign Out" button. According the google.com, I'm not signed in. Is there some reason to believe that secretly I'm still signed in? On the Chrome browser, I was never signed in to begin with.
To the rest of it - you're digressing.
Well... I try to keep fairly abreast of such things, and have seen nothing about it, save for some initial concerns about Chrome on the desktop. Google pretty quickly addressed those.
I've seen nothing suspicious show up in my Privoxy logs (when on my WiFi, my phone proxies through my main rig - Privoxy in the market isn't very robust yet). I've run an occasional packet sniffer to find ad hosts for hosts-based blocking on my phone and have seen nothing suspicious.
Google analytics is baked into SO many websites, and Google has the majority of searches, and if you're using an Android you probably have Google mail anyway. What does Google gain by baking it into the browser as well? Is that marginal benefit greater than the marginal cost?
I think the answer s "no."
Same with other browsers, e.g. Chrome. Not sure about the stock browser.
Some websites almost require flash support. Big, popular sites? No, but ones I may be interested in nonetheless. Actually, some small businesses that outsourced their website design may be the worst offenders, but I'm still interested in the business. It's also useful for some things like college hockey scores - I like college hockey, and until recently, many live stats pages did not have a non-flash counterpart.
In essence: the need for flash is diminishing but not yet gone. I'm happy to be able to use it in this period of transition.
It's only trivial to root if the manufacturer makes it easy to unlock or an exploit is found.
Fortunately, the winds are swaying towards manufacturer support. HTC makes it easy now. I think most Samsung devices are fairly straightforward. Last I saw, Motorola made it a PITA (should change once Google takes over). Even still, it takes more work for these devices. HTC for example, you need to make an account on their developer page, get some info off of your device and submit it, get a key from them, take the appropriate steps to unlock, then start rooting.
The Nexus devices it is as easy as you say, however.
Up to the carrier. Some disable or hide the feature.
(well, that, and no Google-overlord spying as with the stock and Chrome Android browsers)
Out of curiosity, has anyone seen any evidence to back this up, or is it just speculation?
Not saying I don't understand the cause for concern, but, given the number of people suspicious of anything Google, you'd think someone would have some evidence were it a problem.
I seem to remember that not all features are being backported, e.g., the ICS version of the browser contains updates and upgrades that older releases will not get.
But the stock browser is only part of the story (not that I've ever had any real trouble with it), the goalposts moved significantly with Chrome for Android, and others like Dolphin are very good too.
Better yet, some work is going on for an Android port of Privoxy. Much better control and more robust than IP-based blocking.
(answer left as an exercise to the reader)
I don't understand, am I supposed to do jumping jacks or something to unlock the answer? Is it like an achievement?
Maybe you're just speaking a different language.
The use is technically correct, if obscure.
For the most part, I agree with you. Paying a low up-front cost but a little more in the end is a good option, and not just for low income folks. (Emphasis on option.) There's a opportunity cost related to whether or not you tie up that extra ~$200 in the console now, or keep it on hand for other uses for the time being. Just because you can afford to pay cash outright for a car, for example, does not mean that it makes sense to do so.
However, when you say Thus one has to buy a separate console for each gamer in the family... No, no one doesn't.
Well...
My first suspicion would be that the filesystem is messed up, not the actual files. Unless s/he had a lot of pending writes to all of these files, there is no reason that something should have actually overwritten or garbled them when the power shut down. Much more likely was an impending or in-progress write to the filesystem's tables, which has affected where it thinks all the files' pieces are stored. And if that is the case, date modified and size may be irrelevant because those are going to be reported by the filesystem.
Aside from trying to read back sector-by-sector data and assembling them, however, I don't know that there's a remedy.
Sigh, /. ate part of my comment as html markup.
That was supposed to read +{integer} {adjective != "funny"} gives bullshit too much credibility.
Mea culpa.
So, wait - you're complaining that the GP was wrongly down-modded due to "groupthink;" geekoid and myself opine that it's not necessarily bad to punish factually incorrect posts for being factually incorrect; and your response is that moderation should not be peer review either, and that because the system is not perfect, no one should try?
You don't want posts modded by merit or basis in reality, and you don't want posts modded by popular perception. What do you want? No moderation at all? A new moderation for "+1 Precious Special Snowflake?"
I didn't say mod it troll, either. Though it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between someone who is adequately (mis|dis)-informed and someone who is feigning it. Mod it Overrated straight to -1 for all I care. + gives bullshit too much credibility.
Yep, totally not his/her fault for spreading lies and not bothering to read the several articles linked to the previous /. story or the commentary attached to the /. article. S/he deserves being modded up, plus some bonus karma for being such a victim, and not having lies modded down so that they stop sustaining themselves is a necessary sacrifice. The fact that s/he is posting as AC and will not suffer/benefit beyond that one post notwithstanding.
Sorry. I think I need more coffee.