WSJ
- WSJ
MarketWatch
- MarketWatch
Barron's
- Barron's
SmartMoney
- SmartMoney
AllThingsDigital
FINS
- FINS
Factiva
- Factiva
More
- BigCharts
- Virtual Stock Exchange
- Financial News
- WSJ Asia
- WSJ Europe
  - WSJ Deutschland
- WSJ Americas
  - en Español
  - em Português
- WSJ Classifieds
- WSJ Radio
- WSJ Wine

A 400 Percent Increase in Android Malware? Way to Capitalize on Today's I/O Keynote, Juniper.

May 10, 2011 at 2:41 pm PT

Disturbing news from Juniper Networks on this first day of Google I/O: Mobile security vulnerabilities have hit an all-time high–particularly in the Android ecosystem. According to Juniper, Android malware attacks have increased 400 percent from the summer of 2010. An unsettling metric, and not just for Android fans. This surge in security threats is being driven largely by an increase in mobile application downloads, which seems to be the attack vector of choice. So really, anyone with a smartphone capable of running apps is a potential target. That said, some operating systems–Apple’s iOS, for example–are known to be far less vulnerable than others, as commenters note below.

Tagged with Android, apps, Google I/O, Juniper Networks, malware, newsbyte

comments so far. Add yours.

Anonymous

”
So really, anyone with a smartphone capable of running apps is a potential target.”

Ah that’s why Apple doesn’t bother to curate their store…
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1200030562 Doug Broussard

So, to summarize the Juniper Press Release (which I’ve read):

“Lots of big scary mobile threats, but none that target iOS or Apple products. In fact, all the active vectors are from Android-based software and piracy. Therefore, everyone with a mobile device no matter the OS is at equal risk.”

Funny how iOS doesn’t have all these problems, yet you never hear about the security risks of Google’s “open” approach. Maybe we’re not there on the narrative timeline yet.

Google’s lobbyist had the temerity to suggest to a congressional panel today that an “open” app store was better for user privacy. LOLs and stuff.
Anonymous

2+2=3, right? “No malware attacks on iOS; therefore iOS is just as threatened as Android with 400% increase since last summer.”
It’s hard to get someone to understand something when their paycheck depends upon their failure to understand.
Anonymous

Yeah, a really masterful job of analysis. “I know, let’s read a report, and then describe it as saying EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.”
Anonymous

I’m sorry, where is it that I said malware threats to iOS were equivalent to those on Android? What I said was since apps are now a vector, any device that’s capable of running them is a potential target.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Deni-Ree/100000813565409 Deni Ree

thanx John for the story… you don’t need to bother with the few jack-a**es that enter ridiculous comments. give us the facts and we’ll decide.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Deni-Ree/100000813565409 Deni Ree

how did you decipher what “tomlawler” posted. I don’t even think he/she understand what they posted..
http://www.facebook.com/people/Deni-Ree/100000813565409 Deni Ree

I do know you used the english language. but what the heck is that nonsense…
Anonymous

The article was edited after the comments above appeared, and, apparently before you read the article and comments. Great job of brownnosing John, though, but if you don’t know what you’re talking about, STFU. The original article made no sense, but it wasn’t JP’s fault, entirely. Juniper’s press release, as aptly pointed out by @facebook-1200030562:disqus, reported findings that indicated virtually all mobile malware was of Android origin, but then said that all mobile OS’s were equally threatened. JP basically repeated the nonsense in the original write of the article, to which several people responded, including myself. JP then rewrote the article to make it look less insane. You joined the thread after the rewrite and then took it upon yourself to defend JP’s honor, rather than realizing the comments were critical of Juniper.

John, perhaps you could reprint your original version of this article to clarify for poor Deni…
Anonymous

The post was not re-written. I simply added this single sentence to its conclusion specifically noting the point that commenters were making.
…..
“That said, some operating systems–Apple’s iOS, for example–are known to be far less vulnerable than others, as commenters note below.”
…..
Otherwise, it’s identical. If you want the original, re-read the post above and ignore the final sentence.