That is not what SMobile put in their report...it says that 20% of all the apps in the Android Market potentially expose private data. Some really need the access, which deflates that 20% quite a bit...the rest are questionable with requiring access to data/features of the phone when said access does not change the behavior of the app being installed.
Again.. Read the Article... and all of the subsequent articles linked.
And STOP changing the name of the article to a completely misleading description.
Maybe you should read the article. They didn't just go removing any app they wanted. The app they removed was clearly added to the market with no working feature other than to request permission for access to some potentially private data in the installer's phone. The developer was doing a PoC to show that there are a number of Android phone owners that just blindly install anything without reading the required warning.
The developer did not put anything malicious in the code other than an installed counter. But very well could have just made the app send all the allowed data back to him...but he didn't. And Google only exercised the remote removal of the remaining installations of this app.
You need to just chill with the outrage...
Seriously...Google does not just remotely remove apps. It is in the Terms of Use stating that they reserve the right to remotely uninstall a malicious app from phones in an effort to thwart something malicious from propagating further.
The title the OP submitted clearly states that Google just does this...period.
What was that you were saying about Android momentum?
And let's not even try bringing Nokia into this battlefield...since they are still pushing Symbian(^3) which just shows they don't have the innovation mojo to even compete anymore.
I've been looking for me for a year...and there I was right in plain view.
*shakes fist*
darn you Parents for creating a son, a son without it. if you have to ask what it is, you don't have it either.
gVibe
I'm going with the monumentally stupid. Considering the military has known about this for several weeks, and prior to the breaking of the story, DoD contractors were tasked with finding a secure high-powered transmitter for video/audio feeds to be installed on the unmanned drones.
The timing of all this might be indication of what's to come next from the insurgency.
Lets use simple math...the App Store has been open for how long? the Android App Store?
Ok then...STFU until the Android App store has had time to mature.
Have you bothered to read any of the other comments besides mine? Its clear that Ceznic partnered with Microsoft before publishing this study. Yes every study is biased and slanted, most likely because of payment. So I do not trust nor believe studies that immediately claim things like IE being more secure than FF. Technical common sense comes from years of Internet use and before that ARPANET. Did you work on the original ARPANET?
I really do think that nickname you use is a misnomer trying to create a persona of experience which you don't really have. That study you linked too by IBM does not clarify the point you are trying to make, simply because IBM was also a backer of the Ceznic study. You can't back one study that shows one thing, and then do a study of your own that says something completely different. The results would be transparent to those who possess technical common sense.
I *can* make a pie chart that reports one view, and another that reports the exact opposite - stick it in a document filled with a bunch of words making claims of outlandish "paid for" data -- and pOOf! instant study. Doesn't make it true and certainly doesn't do anything for any reputation I might be trying to hold onto.
Are you suggesting that there isn't anything common on the net? Whereas common sense plays no part for users on the net. Saying that "common sense only works with common things" sure sounds like that is what you are saying. I would pit my common sense against any study you can find and my common sense will win every time.
When you reply next, take your time and think about everthing you type -- use the Preview button to ensure it looks right. Then hit Submit.
Try the "common sense" study. I mean come on...any study that shows a huge slant in the direction of a company that is known to be vulnerable the majority of the time simply should be disregarded [period].
Is there a study out there, that is fair, accurate, and backed my respectable organizations? I doubt it.. face it, money talks, and if you want a study to show favoritism then break out your check-book.
Anyhoo...These company's are stupid if they think any of their study's affect the people on Slashdot. A good majority of readers have some kind of clue and don't believe the hype.
I can make a pie chart show anything I want...
There is no way in hell I would believe that IE has less vulnerabilities than Firefox or Safari (Safari on Windows probable). Web application or not, Firefox will never fall to the likes of IE.
When will these companies ever stop spinning data in favor of who pays them the most? They have to know we are on to them and don't believe one bit of the hype they are spewing.
I disagree... Lockcrypt is far superior to Keepass on the multi-platform arena. It supports Mobile platforms and also can use a MySQL backend. And comes with a Firefox extension to make logging in easier.
* Add on Extension to Firefox's password database
* Adds strong encryption (not plain text)
* Easy one-click access to Site information for logging in.
Dia (http://projects.gnome.org/dia/) is an excellent alternative for Visio. It allows importing Visio drawings and using the same Visio templates.
OOCALC can open html tables anyway you want. Tons of "open source" OO plugins and addons allow me to do some things that were nearly impossible in MS Office due to cost and complicated instructions.
I agree with the coward. This is complete BS. My Firefox (both 2.x and 3.x beta) run great. I've never experienced any sort of slow down using a non-Apple app of any kind on my Macbook Pro.
Vladimir needs his mommy.
Let me guess. You actually still believe Bush is a good President, don't you?
Dude, someone should just slap you. I'd do it if I could find ya.
Re:Why did they buy ATI?
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
"Could that move end up dragging ATI down too?"
I sure hope so...ATI graphics suck and have always sucked. Every ATI card I have bought I ended up bringing back and paying the extra money for an NVIDIA. ATI never produces decent Linux drivers, probably never will. I would hate to see the AMD chip go, but ATI should burn in hell.
Your living in a dream world Microsoft. Making up fake statistics does not make it true. No matter how badly you want them to be true.
From a vantage point of someone with a tech support background, I personally have helped several of my friends, and family, downgrade their new systems (and a few old ones) that came with Vista, back to XP.
Most reasons were simply, "I just don't like it!"
Dude.
It was a promo for what's to come.
When is the last 81 min (non-animated) movie you watched in a theater?
JJ Abrams stated that he wants to make "America's Monster", like Japan has Godzilla.
Your trying to give too much credit or you expected too much from this.
I think that this movie was trying to present vantage point of how it would really been if a monster suddenly descended on a city. First you would just be sittin there talking with friends at a party, when BAM!! -- sudden and total chaos. Rest assured the storyline, and plot will be revealed in the next movie.
People should stop making up their minds about movies solely based on hype. I knew about the hype, and simply thought it was a cool idea. I didn't pre-judge the movie, that takes all the fun out of 'going to the movies'.
However, having saw the movie, I have to say I was entertained through the majority of the movie. Which is fine by me. Hell, I'd pay to go see it again. No, I do not believe that many snakes could ever be on a passenger jet -- to try to pass this movie off as 'believable' is just plain silly. In fact, I do believe there were quite a few fictious snake species in the movie, which furthers my opinion of 'Snakes on a Plane' being just an entertaining (kind of horror-ish) movie.
To all of the snobby wannabe critics:
You should go find something new to do for a living, because you are just not very good at being a movie critic.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not what SMobile put in their report...it says that 20% of all the apps in the Android Market potentially expose private data. Some really need the access, which deflates that 20% quite a bit...the rest are questionable with requiring access to data/features of the phone when said access does not change the behavior of the app being installed. Again .. Read the Article ... and all of the subsequent articles linked.
And STOP changing the name of the article to a completely misleading description.
Maybe you should read the article. They didn't just go removing any app they wanted. The app they removed was clearly added to the market with no working feature other than to request permission for access to some potentially private data in the installer's phone. The developer was doing a PoC to show that there are a number of Android phone owners that just blindly install anything without reading the required warning. The developer did not put anything malicious in the code other than an installed counter. But very well could have just made the app send all the allowed data back to him...but he didn't. And Google only exercised the remote removal of the remaining installations of this app. You need to just chill with the outrage...
Seriously...Google does not just remotely remove apps. It is in the Terms of Use stating that they reserve the right to remotely uninstall a malicious app from phones in an effort to thwart something malicious from propagating further. The title the OP submitted clearly states that Google just does this...period.
Steve Jobs? Is that you posting anonymously?
Give me a break. 1/3 Of Android phones are already accounting for 96% of mobile web traffic, which makes Android the leader over the iPhone for Web Traffic http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/27/admob-report-11-devices-account-for-96-percent-of-android-traffic-motorola-droid-takes-the-lead/. The Market Place has more than 50,000 apps already, up from merely 10,000 a month ago.
Motorola/Verizon sold more Droid's in the first 74 days than the iPhone did in the first 74 days of its existence http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/03/16/flurry-more-droid-devices-than-iphones-sold-in-first-74-days-on-the-market/.
What was that you were saying about Android momentum? And let's not even try bringing Nokia into this battlefield...since they are still pushing Symbian(^3) which just shows they don't have the innovation mojo to even compete anymore.
I've been looking for me for a year...and there I was right in plain view. *shakes fist* darn you Parents for creating a son, a son without it. if you have to ask what it is, you don't have it either. gVibe
I'm going with the monumentally stupid. Considering the military has known about this for several weeks, and prior to the breaking of the story, DoD contractors were tasked with finding a secure high-powered transmitter for video/audio feeds to be installed on the unmanned drones. The timing of all this might be indication of what's to come next from the insurgency.
Spell much? Its Department of DEFENSE ... not DEFENCE. That little red underline should tell ya, your spelling it wrong.
Lets use simple math...the App Store has been open for how long? the Android App Store? Ok then...STFU until the Android App store has had time to mature.
LOL
Have you bothered to read any of the other comments besides mine? Its clear that Ceznic partnered with Microsoft before publishing this study. Yes every study is biased and slanted, most likely because of payment. So I do not trust nor believe studies that immediately claim things like IE being more secure than FF. Technical common sense comes from years of Internet use and before that ARPANET. Did you work on the original ARPANET?
I really do think that nickname you use is a misnomer trying to create a persona of experience which you don't really have. That study you linked too by IBM does not clarify the point you are trying to make, simply because IBM was also a backer of the Ceznic study. You can't back one study that shows one thing, and then do a study of your own that says something completely different. The results would be transparent to those who possess technical common sense.
I *can* make a pie chart that reports one view, and another that reports the exact opposite - stick it in a document filled with a bunch of words making claims of outlandish "paid for" data -- and pOOf! instant study. Doesn't make it true and certainly doesn't do anything for any reputation I might be trying to hold onto.
Are you suggesting that there isn't anything common on the net? Whereas common sense plays no part for users on the net. Saying that "common sense only works with common things" sure sounds like that is what you are saying. I would pit my common sense against any study you can find and my common sense will win every time.
When you reply next, take your time and think about everthing you type -- use the Preview button to ensure it looks right. Then hit Submit.
TTFN
Try the "common sense" study. I mean come on...any study that shows a huge slant in the direction of a company that is known to be vulnerable the majority of the time simply should be disregarded [period]. Is there a study out there, that is fair, accurate, and backed my respectable organizations? I doubt it .. face it, money talks, and if you want a study to show favoritism then break out your check-book.
Anyhoo...These company's are stupid if they think any of their study's affect the people on Slashdot. A good majority of readers have some kind of clue and don't believe the hype.
I can make a pie chart show anything I want ...
There is no way in hell I would believe that IE has less vulnerabilities than Firefox or Safari (Safari on Windows probable). Web application or not, Firefox will never fall to the likes of IE.
When will these companies ever stop spinning data in favor of who pays them the most? They have to know we are on to them and don't believe one bit of the hype they are spewing.
I disagree ... Lockcrypt is far superior to Keepass on the multi-platform arena. It supports Mobile platforms and also can use a MySQL backend. And comes with a Firefox extension to make logging in easier.
Lockcrypt (http://www.lockcrypt.com)
.NET Mobile Versions
* Central Database (Flat File or MySQL)
* Strong Encryption
* Multiple Languages
* Customizable Account Types
* Import and Export
* AutoType
* Firefox Extension
* J2ME and
* Secure Clipboard
* Easy to Use Interface
Secure Password (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4429)
* Add on Extension to Firefox's password database
* Adds strong encryption (not plain text)
* Easy one-click access to Site information for logging in.
Dia (http://projects.gnome.org/dia/) is an excellent alternative for Visio. It allows importing Visio drawings and using the same Visio templates.
OOCALC can open html tables anyway you want. Tons of "open source" OO plugins and addons allow me to do some things that were nearly impossible in MS Office due to cost and complicated instructions.
I agree with the coward. This is complete BS. My Firefox (both 2.x and 3.x beta) run great. I've never experienced any sort of slow down using a non-Apple app of any kind on my Macbook Pro. Vladimir needs his mommy.
...how difficult it is to divide by one... Wait Wait...I'm thinking.Let me guess. You actually still believe Bush is a good President, don't you? Dude, someone should just slap you. I'd do it if I could find ya.
"Could that move end up dragging ATI down too?"
I sure hope so...ATI graphics suck and have always sucked. Every ATI card I have bought I ended up bringing back and paying the extra money for an NVIDIA. ATI never produces decent Linux drivers, probably never will. I would hate to see the AMD chip go, but ATI should burn in hell.
Your living in a dream world Microsoft. Making up fake statistics does not make it true. No matter how badly you want them to be true. From a vantage point of someone with a tech support background, I personally have helped several of my friends, and family, downgrade their new systems (and a few old ones) that came with Vista, back to XP. Most reasons were simply, "I just don't like it!"
Dude.
It was a promo for what's to come.
When is the last 81 min (non-animated) movie you watched in a theater?
JJ Abrams stated that he wants to make "America's Monster", like Japan has Godzilla.
Your trying to give too much credit or you expected too much from this.
I think that this movie was trying to present vantage point of how it would really been if a monster suddenly descended on a city.
First you would just be sittin there talking with friends at a party, when BAM!! -- sudden and total chaos. Rest assured the storyline, and plot will be revealed in the next movie.
-gVibe
People should stop making up their minds about movies solely based on hype. I knew about the hype, and simply thought it was a cool idea. I didn't pre-judge the movie, that takes all the fun out of 'going to the movies'. However, having saw the movie, I have to say I was entertained through the majority of the movie. Which is fine by me. Hell, I'd pay to go see it again. No, I do not believe that many snakes could ever be on a passenger jet -- to try to pass this movie off as 'believable' is just plain silly. In fact, I do believe there were quite a few fictious snake species in the movie, which furthers my opinion of 'Snakes on a Plane' being just an entertaining (kind of horror-ish) movie. To all of the snobby wannabe critics: You should go find something new to do for a living, because you are just not very good at being a movie critic.