• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

I really hate hackers...

rootabaga

Android Expert
Researchers Hack Android Apps With Up To 92 Percent Success Rate, Windows And iOS Also May Be Vulnerable

The way they accomplish this is by having the user install a malware-infected app, and then taking advantage of the shared memory of the apps to steal information from other apps, thereby completely bypassing Android
 
The way they prevent this is by having the user avoid a malware-infected app ...

Problem solved.

BTW, does anybody else not see the logical fallacy here? The only way to prove that Android (or any os) is vulnerable is to make it vulnerable.

Fail.
 
Problem solved.

BTW, does anybody else not see the logical fallacy here? The only way to prove that Android (or any os) is vulnerable is to make it vulnerable.

Fail.

I feel exactly the same way. I betcha alot of these hackers got hired by these companies to run security for them! PSA Hackers arent what they are portrayed to be on the news and such forth. Off course like in any walk of life ya got your bad people, but most of the time something is hacked just for the sake of being done because its said it cant be done. If hacking is so bad why would the govt hire them!
 
People need to watch the Linux documentary.

This is something g that bothers me greatly. Ever since it was created, crackers have been stealing and slandering the name hacker. Look at http://www.hackaday.com you will not find people stealing credit card info. A hacker is someone who uses technology in new and inventive ways. Developers essentially... Of which, I am. People who crack security systems and passwords ect, are just that. Crackers. Don't start going all white hat black hat. Its something the crackers made up. Stop using the hacker name badly and calling yourself a hacker if you ddos someone. Anyone who can use a keyboard will be able to ddos. It takes one google keyword and one command line (not even a script unless you save it as one, but why would you do that if its one line???) This has always frustrated me. So forgive this rant.

As per the article.


A system is as voulnerable as its user. If you decide to install a calculator that asks for system memory, phone calls, account info, data usage, control device state, access to other apps(big one.. Could be you card numbers..) Ect....... You deserve everything you get. Don't come crying to me when your devices battery has been consistently draining in 20 mins. Its why I got out of that line of business. People can be stupid sometimes. And its they're own fault.

Call me harsh but let your career be sucking up to these kinds of people for 5 years and wanting to strangle people (figuratively) for these kinds of actions lol.
 
BOYO your rant is welcomed :) your right on there is a major difference between hackers and crackers. People need to be more careful in what they do and install hitting the accept button until you see the finish button is no way to go just asking for it to be infected.
 
I really don't think that this is a problem to do with the 'hackers' in the original story. Due to the way that the software is written, there's a fault. They pointed out the fault, so its up to google to fix it. What did they do wrong?

If I notice a trip hazard at work, and I can't fix it, then I let the building know so they can. If Doctors find out that huge ammouns of high fructose corn syrup is bad for people, are they suppose to keep quiet because it may worry people who are eating it?
 
It's more like smoking at the gas pumps or diving into shallow water. These are obvious known risks, just like installing malicious apps. It doesn't invalidate the process of filling your tank or going swimming, just because it has potential hazards.

A beekeeper will respect the hive and benefit from it. An idiot will poke it with a stick and then get angry at the bees for stinging him (or her).
 
There are plenty of people out to harm others I do not consider these guys hackers I consider them criminals. I have done some hacking myself usually to get an OS to work the way I want it to. In Fact technically if you root your device then you have Hacked it. I think the definition of Hacker has been taken way out of context. Criminals engulf themselves in everything that they can to get something for nothing. When I first got into computers and was worried about security I talked to a security professional and he told me if I want true security on my device then unplug it and store it in a safe where no one can get to it. He also told me to never take it out. So that is the only way to truly be safe. Also these criminals use malicent apps that generally are not available at the legitimate sites. Security falls on the end user in the end. If you download from shady places then you get shady apps. I think Google, and Amazon do a good job of making sure the apps you get from their stores are non malicent. Are they 100% probably not someone will always find a way to sneak something in but both will pull the plug on you if they find out you are.

As far as android security its still very young yet. I mean Windows has been fighting this issues for over 30 years android what 10? Windows still suffers from major security issues. Why because criminals will always find a way to defraud someone. Even though Android is a Linux it still is more popular than any "Distro" out there and lets face it if your a criminal your not going to spend your time on something that only a handfull of people use. Your going to go where the money is.
 
WikiperiA ...

Hacker is a term used in computing that can describe several types of persons

  • Hacker (computer security), someone who seeks and exploits weaknesses in a computer system or computer network
  • Hacker (hobbyist), who makes innovative customizations or combinations of retail electronic and computer equipment
  • Hacker (programmer subculture), who combines excellence, playfulness, cleverness and exploration in performed activities
... Thom
 
Problem solved.

BTW, does anybody else not see the logical fallacy here? The only way to prove that Android (or any os) is vulnerable is to make it vulnerable.

Fail.

I agree that the problem is easily solved or avoided - the weakest part of security on any device is the user; some are weaker than others. While problems like this should be fixed, I wouldn't necessarily call them vulnerabilities.

One day my son's soccer coach told the kids that it's not the goalie's fault if the other team scores - the ball had to get past 10 other players first. The same logic applies here - you can't blame Android for what an app does when the user allowed installation of the app in the first place.
 
Back
Top Bottom