Apple & Security vs Android/Google

stockhausen said:
Because there is a sub-forum called "Mobile Phones & Tablets" where such a question might be more appropriate perhaps?
Click to expand...

My question was more general to be honest, although I did call out Android specifically I'm calling out Google more widely, and thinking about security from a laptop/desktop perspective too.

If a mod thinks this should move to a more appropriate place then please do move it.

I honestly don't want to cause arguments, I'm trying to have a balanced conversation around security and privacy is all.
 
morbid42 said:
Apple hardware is years behind android yet more expensive, and you will be trapped with apple services
Click to expand...

I’m not sure why you think Apple phone hardware is years behind? Their chips are extremely powerful and ahead of the competition. Their screens are up there with the best. The cameras are are on par or beating the best Android phones, including the Pixel 4, as an overall package. Build quality is industry leading. So not sure what years behind you are referring to?

Being ‘trapped’ in the ecosystem isn’t really a problem. Many see the ecosystem as a big selling point, having everything work effortlessly across your devices.
 
Let’s try and keep the hardware out of this thread please, it’s about the security, not the hardware specs.

If this turns into an Apple vs Android hardware/spec battle then it’ll get closed.
 
Feek said:
From what I understand, Apple take security incredibly seriously these days and the fappening mentioned earlier was not down to any security issues with their system, simply the results of targeted phishing attacks.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect, it was down to a flaw in Apple's iCloud that allowed a brute force attack to happen because there was no limitation on attempted password guesses.

So you're saying a company gets a free pass if it's a targeted brute force attack? They're supposed to build in protection against these things. Would you hold the same opinion if it was a targeted attack that used SQL script injection for example?
 
Mekrel said:
This is incorrect, it was down to a flaw in Apple's iCloud that allowed a brute force attack to happen because there was no limitation on attempted password guesses.

So you're saying a company gets a free pass if it's a targeted brute force attack? They're supposed to build in protection against these things. Would you hold the same opinion if it was a targeted attack that used SQL script injection for example?
Click to expand...

https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/15/p...ng-celebrity-nudes-leak-was-not-apples-fault/

Hacker Ryan Collins pleaded guilty to stealing a number of nude photos — including ones of Jennifer Lawrence — from Apple’s servers. He was snared by the FBI, and in the process of the trial, it became clear that the hack didn’t involve Apple’s services being compromised through brute-forcing or password cracking, but rather that they were the result of social engineering, in the form of a phishing attack.

At the time when the images leaked online, rumors were running wild that Apple’s iCloud services had crumpled under brute-force password-hacking attacks. Apple denied this at the time, and claimed that the hacks were more likely to be a phishing scam. It is now becoming clear that this was indeed the case.
Click to expand...
 
LiE said:
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/15/p...ng-celebrity-nudes-leak-was-not-apples-fault/
Click to expand...

In that case, I apologise for being wrong in terms of it being used for that specific attack.

Reading into it more, it was assumed that a publicly available tool that could brute force iCloud was used.

According to the report, Balic informed Apple in a March 26 email that he had successfully got around the security of any iCloud account by using a hacking method called “brute-force,” which allows more than 20,000 password combinations to be tried. Balic also reported the flaw by using Apple’s online bug submission platform and recommended that the company should implement a feature in its iCloud service to prevent log-ins after a specific number of failed attempts.
Click to expand...
 
I think the question posed by the OP is confused.

Security - I see Apple and Google as both competent in this area and user's are more likely to the source of security breaches. For example, I would say most people have had their usernames & hashed/hashed and salted login details exposed, but if they're complex and unique passwords then they don't have too much to worry about.

Privacy - Clearly, Google's business model is at odds with true privacy. I use Google's services whilst knowing that they actively use my details to target me with ads but that's because I don't see an issue with them knowing those details. Apple don't rely on advertisement income as much obviously, although they've been known to listen to Siri recordings similar to Google and Amazon.
 
What's the risk, what could happen? I refuse to use Facebook or Twitter etc. but it's not really the privacy issue that bothers me. I just don't think it's very healthy to filter media exposure like that.

I think the privacy issue is mostly paranoia and tin foil hat stuff. Just get on with your life and enjoy it. Life's too short to spend worrying about things like that. :)
 
For me, one of the differences with Google is they are quite open about what information they have and how they use it. I don't feel like it's underhanded or sneaky, like maybe Facebook or others. They talked quite a lot in their recent Made By Google event about privacy and how you could control it. It is then your choice to take advantages of what the sharing of your data allows or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom