New Trojan Hijacks Android Smartphones

[tangent4ronpaul]

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/96565/20101231/new-trojan-hijacks-android-smartphones.htm

A malicious new piece of malware targeted at Android smartphones has appeared in China.

Lookout, a mobile security blog, run by San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security, reported that the malware, codenamed "Geinimi" is able to compromise personal data on a user's phone and send it to remote servers. "The most sophisticated Android malware we've seen to date, Geinimi is also the first Android malware in the wild that displays botnet-like capabilities," wrote "tim" on the blog.

...

Lookout cited some applications which carry the Trojan. They includes apps such as Monkey Jump 2, Sex Positions, President vs. Aliens, City Defense and Baseball Superstars 2010, which are available in Chinese app stores.

Though right now Android phones outside of China are shielded, the fact that there is a Trojan for the ubiquitous OS is unnerving. And with iPhone still secure -- or at least not having been attacked yet -- Android cannot afford to let this go by.

This isn't the first malware for the Android. In August Kaspersky Lab reported that a virus named TrojaN-SMS.Android OS.FakePlayer-A had surfaced for the OS. The virus took the form of a media player and would fire SMSes to expensive phone numbers running the user's bill through the roof. The virus had only infected devices in Russia.

The development of these viruses speaks of a shift among virus developers as they move from desktops to smartphones as the number of the devices grows.

[GunnyFreedom]

Oh come on, the only reason there aren't a proliferation of iPhone and iPad viruses is because they have such a pathetic market share that it just isn't a worthwhile targe... Oh wait...

[torchbearer]

Oh come on, the only reason there aren't a proliferation of iPhone and iPad viruses is because they have such a pathetic market share that it just isn't a worthwhile targe... Oh wait...


One system is an open source mecca with few restrictions, the other is a closed box of mac's choosing.
almost looks like the early battle of the pc vs mac.
pc won last round. open box is for liberty as closed private mac devices are for security.
though, there are ways to unlock the mac products, mac is constantly cracking down on it.

[GunnyFreedom]

One system is an open source mecca with few restrictions, the other is a closed box of mac's choosing.
almost looks like the early battle of the pc vs mac.
pc won last round. open box is for liberty as closed private mac devices are for security.
though, there are ways to unlock the mac products, mac is constantly cracking down on it.

OpenDarwin is 'closed box?' :confused:

I've never heard an open source operating system referred to as a closed box before. Learn something new every day. MacOS is open source, with it's OpenDarwin kernel based on the General Public License model. iOS is likewise open source, with it's OpenDarwin kernel based on the General Public License model.

Windows, on the other hand, is monolithic and closed source, with a proprietary kernel. Android OS is WAY more open than Windows, which simply demonstrates that vulnerability is not based on open or closed sources, since Windows is closed source and is vulnerable, Android is open source and is vulnerable, and OpenDarwin/MacOC/iOS is open source, but has somehow failed to become virus ridden.

I admit to being terribly confused as to how you came to describe MacOS and iOS as closed source. Would you like a copy of the iOS 4.0 sourcecode? It's available on the apple.com website:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/ios-40/

Maybe the MacOS 10.6.5 source code?

http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1065/

I mean, it's not like you have to go through Wikileaks to a third party source to get the source code for iOS and MacOS. It's published at Apple.com for goodness sake.

Because it's open source.

Like, for real and stuff.

The full versions of MacOS and iOS are open source, and the Darwin kernel for both of them is not only Open Source, it's even further based on the General Public License model.

MacOS operating systems have been like that for a decade now, so I am honest-to-goodness terribly curious as to where this 'monolithic closed source' ie "closed box" stuff that folks use to describe MacOS and iOS comes from.

Because it's certainly not true...

[brandon]

Mac tightly controls what software can be used with their OS. Of course there have been no viruses yet...Mac has to individually approve every app. Mac's API also gives software writers very little control over the internals of the phone. If you are cool with that then by all means get an iphone.

[GunnyFreedom]

Mac tightly controls what software can be used with their OS. Of course there have been no viruses yet...Mac has to individually approve every app. Mac's API also gives software writers very little control over the internals of the phone. If you are cool with that then by all means get an iphone.

The iPhone is an Apple, not a Mac. Anybody on the planet can write and sell Macintosh software at will. The iPhone can also take "unapproved" applications via Cydia, which many many users do in fact take advantage of. Because both systems are completely open-source, anybody who can code, can write software for them and sell them freely and find their apps on thousands or millions of end user devices.

I am somewhat astonished at how people, ten years later, still repeat the Microsoft party line propaganda regarding Macintosh and Apple software.

[specsaregood]

//

[MRK]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walled_garden_%28technology%29

A walled garden is a place where a provider only allows those applications that they have carefully reviewed and approved to be available to their customers.

The iPhone is an example of this. If you are a developer and you wish to make your software distributable to "Apple's customers" you must go through their approval process before your application will be available.

This is opposed to the distribution model available on your PC or Mac where you can freely download applications without having Apple's hand in the process allowing or forbidding what you're able to download.

[GunnyFreedom]

I thought it was clear that Brandon was actually referring to the iphone, even if mistaken by calling the company "mac". with that said, everything he said is true.


And last I checked the only thing "open sourced" on the MacOs was the microkernel. So only like 1% of the actual system.

I posted the link to the entire open sourced operating system, hosted on the apple.com website. Here it is again:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1065/

That's not 'just the 1% microkernel' that's the entire 100% operating system. The Darwin kernel simply adds the General Public License to the opened source.

It is because the entire OS is open source that people are able to run MacOS on Windows PC's. Apple says "it's not recommended" but people do it all the time. They can, because it's open source.

Following a recent court decision that jailbreaking was legal and could not be construed to void the warrantee, Cydia was able to commercialize and start charging for software. Thus, pretty much anybody with a keyboard can write and sell software for the iPhone and the iPad.

[MRK]

Following a recent court decision that jailbreaking was legal and could not be construed to void the warrantee, Cydia was able to commercialize and start charging for software. Thus, pretty much anybody with a keyboard can write and sell software for the iPhone and the iPad.

That's cool, I didn't read up on that court ruling and its effects for Cydia/anyone. If I get an iPhone I will definitely be checking that out.

[GunnyFreedom]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walled_garden_%28technology%29

A walled garden is a place where a provider only allows those applications that they have carefully reviewed and approved to be available to their customers.

The iPhone is an example of this. If you are a developer and you wish to make your software distributable to "Apple's customers" you must go through their approval process before your application will be available.

This is opposed to the distribution model available on your PC or Mac where you can freely download applications without having Apple's hand in the process allowing or forbidding what you're able to download.

Yes, but now that jailbreaking is considered 'legal' and not violative of the warranty, a lot more users are installing Cydia and installing all kinds of software that Apple has never reviewed. Though I do not have the statistics in front of me, I would not be surprised to learn that the number of jaibroken iPhones with Cydia was roughly equivalent to the number of Android users.

So why are not the jailbroken iPhones with Cydia picking up viruses?

The bottom line is that the security model for POSIX compliant systems is superior. That's ALL POSIX compliant systems, and not just MacOS and iOS. The enhanced security doesn't come from being Apple, it comes from a core Unix based security model inherited from NetBSD.

[GunnyFreedom]

That's cool, I didn't read up on that court ruling and its effects for Cydia/anyone. If I get an iPhone I will definitely be checking that out.

Yeah, you'll need to jailbreak before you upgrade to the latest OS iteration though, or wait. The jailbreak tends to run one decimal version behind current. When iOS comes out with 4.2, the 4.1 version is the one that can be jailbroken.

[specsaregood]

I posted the link to the entire open sourced operating system, hosted on the apple.com website. Here it is again:
http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1065/

That's not 'just the 1% microkernel' that's the entire 100% operating system. The Darwin kernel simply adds the General Public License to the opened source.

It is because the entire OS is open source that people are able to run MacOS on Windows PC's. Apple says "it's not recommended" but people do it all the time. They can, because it's open source.

I think the majority of that stuff that is open, was stuff that was already in BSD before they ported to the microkernel.

Show me a quote where they claim to have opensourced the entire OS. Thanks in advance.

From:http://www.apple.com/opensource/


Major components of Mac OS X, including the UNIX core, are made available under Apple’s Open Source license
That hardly reads to me like 100% of the OS. If it was, I'm sure they'd probably put it that way. :)



Following a recent court decision that jailbreaking was legal and could not be construed to void the warrantee, Cydia was able to commercialize and start charging for software. Thus, pretty much anybody with a keyboard can write and sell software for the iPhone and the iPad.

Sure, many more can write to it, but how many can they actually sell to? What % of the market do you really is jailbreaking their phones and purchasing unapproved apps?

[brandon]

I thought it was clear that Brandon was actually referring to the iphone, even if mistaken by calling the company "mac". with that said, everything he said is true.


Yep my bad, I meant apple.

[torchbearer]

yeah, i stand corrected too. i should have also included the apple app store is a bit closed ended.
(sorry i use mac for apple and vice versus- old habit)

[GunnyFreedom]

I think the majority of that stuff that is open, was stuff that was already in BSD before they ported to the microkernel.

Show me a quote where they claim to have opensourced the entire OS. Thanks in advance.

From:http://www.apple.com/opensource/

That hardly reads to me like 100% of the OS. If it was, I'm sure they'd probably put it that way. :)

Once again I point you to the source code library at http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1065/ Everything that was not under GNU GPL or other preexisting public licensing is covered under APSL, or Apple Public Source License. Can you look at that page and point to ANY major component of the actual MacOS operating system NOT covered in that list?

The only major component that I cannot find on this list is the "finder," which as an application external to the OS itself can easily be replaced with any one of the normal POSIX windowing systems. Everything else that I can think of is right there in the list from the link that I have now posted three times.

I can't look at that list and point to any primary component of MacOS that is not on the open sources list, can you?

Since the debut of OS X, the windowing system has been a separate application just like every other POSIX compliant system on the planet. The windowing system is NOT integral to the OS. Gnome, Enlightenment, X11, X Windows, Quartz Compositor, KDE. The POSIX standard dictates that the windowing system is a separate application from the actual OS, which is driven by the command line. Lo an behold, you can even install Gnome, KDE, etc in MacOS and run it happily.


Sure, many more can write to it, but how many can they actually sell to? What % of the market do you really is jailbreaking their phones and purchasing unapproved apps?

I don't have that data, but I clearly think it's a higher % than you do. I'm not sure that anybody has compiled data on the number of people jailbreaking their iPhones, but anecdotally I can say it's no small fraction. About 1/3 of iPhone users I run into are jailbroken, but that could well be due to the circles I run in.