Hackers target Android as mobile malware soars
1 of 2 
By Stewart Mitchell
Posted on 16 May 2012 at 09:27
The majority of all mobile phone malware targets the Android platform, with the number of threats soaring, according to a report from F-Secure.
The report suggests Google's claims the platform is largely secure are misguided. Last year, Google's head of open source Chris DiBona labelled security companies selling mobile phone security software as “scammers and charlatans”.
Research from F-Secure suggests otherwise, listing a growing arsenal of weapons targeting the popular platform – with Android dominating the landscape and Symbian finishing a distant second.
“A comparison between the number of malicious Android application package files (APKs) received in Q1 2011 and in Q1 2012 reveals a staggering find — an increase from 139 to 3,063 counts,” F-Secure said in its 2012 Mobile Threat Report.
“This growth in number can be attributed to malware authors crafting their infected or trojanised applications to defeat anti-virus signature detection, distributing their malware in different application names, and trojanising widely popular applications," it said.
This growth in number can be attributed to malware authors crafting their infected or trojanised applications to defeat anti-virus signature detection
While the company said Android threats were becoming more sophisticated, the main profit generator remained SMS-sending malware that makes money by sending messages to premium numbers.
The results came security experts at F-Secure ammunition to hit back at DiBona's comments from last year.
“75% of mobile malware now targets Google's Android,” posted senior researcher Mikko Hypponen on Twitter. “Six months ago, @cdibona of Google called mobile security companies 'charlatans and scammers', and said we should be ashamed of ourselves.”
All operating systems are only as secure as the person using it is careful. There are some really dodgy looking apps in the play store because it isn't in anyway controlled as well as it could be. Also, the option on Android phones to install unknown applications from outside the store is far too easy to activate and leave on. In fact, to update the Samsung apps (and store) on my phone you have to do exactly that but I turn it off again straight after updates for the Samsung apps have gone through.
By mr_chips on 16 May 2012 
To quote Mr Jefferson. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"
You just need to be careful what you install and stick to the official market as much as possible.
By DangerMouse1969 on 16 May 2012
Where does the malware come from?
While it's interesting that F-Secure's count of available Android malware has increased it says nothing about how many people have been infected. How many of those 3063 pieces of malware are/were available on the Market? If they were how long did it take Google to get rid of them?
To me it seems that the vast majority of people who use their phone on its default settings of Google Market ('Play') apps only don't have to worry too much about the need for AV software on a phone. We know AV companies over-hype the threat of viruses and malware on the Windows platform in order to sell expensive, bug-prone software that then still lets enough viruses and malware through the net to be a threat to the user's PC, and their bank account. Why would it be any different with mobile OS AV software?
By happyskeptic on 18 May 2012
"the main profit generator remained SMS-sending malware that makes money by sending messages to premium numbers"
I've never understood this. Why do the mobile companies allow it? It can't be too difficult for them to recognise fraudulent premium service numbers (from the complaints they'll be getting) then withhold the funds from them, can it?
By PhillipBiggs1 on 18 May 2012
"the main profit generator remained SMS-sending malware that makes money by sending messages to premium numbers"
I've never understood this. Why do the mobile companies allow it? It can't be too difficult for them to recognise fraudulent premium service numbers (from the complaints they'll be getting) then withhold the funds from them, can it?
By PhillipBiggs1 on 18 May 2012
"the main profit generator remained SMS-sending malware that makes money by sending messages to premium numbers"
I've never understood this. Why do the mobile companies allow it? It can't be too difficult for them to recognise fraudulent premium service numbers (from the complaints they'll be getting) then withhold the funds from them, can it?
By PhillipBiggs1 on 18 May 2012
"the main profit generator remained SMS-sending malware that makes money by sending messages to premium numbers"
I've never understood this. Why do the mobile companies allow it? It can't be too difficult for them to recognise fraudulent premium service numbers (from the complaints they'll be getting) then withhold the funds from them, can it?
By PhillipBiggs1 on 18 May 2012
advertisement
- Is it worth upgrading a media centre to Windows 8?
- Flickr redesign: is it enough to tempt photographers back?
- Hands on with the new Google Maps
- Nokia Lumia 925 review: first look
- Why I won't subscribe to Creative Cloud
- GoPro camera strapped to a remote-control helicopter: the ultimate boy's toy
- Acer Iconia A1 review: first look
- Acer Aspire P3 review: first look
- Acer Aspire R7 review: first look
- How we produce the PC Pro podcast
- Yes, I write down my passwords
- How to deal with a ransomware attack
- How secure is your Wi-Fi network?
- How QR codes caught out the security pros
- Why I do not trust Do Not Track... yet
- The hard disks you can "secure" with a single-digit password
- Why I've started using a password manager
- Time to kill off CAPTCHA
- Are today's young people Generation I (for insecure)?
- Ransomware that's better made than antivirus software
advertisement
