Android users-Pay now or pay later

A study by AV Test recently showed that paid for security apps work much better than free apps do. The study was done on the Android but AV Test claims it should be true for all smart phones. The study results showed that Kaspersky’s and F-Secure’s Mobile Security suites worked the best. They both were able to detect 50 percent of active malware samples used. The best free app was Zoner AntiVirus Free, which detected only 32 percent.  Although the paid apps worked better, still 50 percent is not all that good. According to AV Test, a company that tests apps for security issues, suggests that you should avoid using apps from developers without a reputation. Also avoid apps that have no reviews or poor reviews. Also be leery of developers that don’t have a website. There’s a free android app called Lockout which PC WORLD suggests all Andriod users should have. It checks all apps against a malware blacklist and lets you know if it is suspect.

Here is the article and a link to a PC World best practices page.

http://www.techworld.com.au/article/407139/android_paid_mobile_security_better_study/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/221213/keep_malware_off_your_android_phone_5_quick_tips.html

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Android users-Pay now or pay later

  1. Lookout should definitely be publicized more because more people need to know about the threats of smart phones. I know that if my phone (the original Driod) was to get hacked, the hacker(s) would have access to my email, Facebook account, token authenticators, maybe my bank account, and all my contacts. Smart phone security is now one of the most important and vital types of security out there simply because its a new security and we are just now getting good anti-virus systems for phones.

    • Were you surprised to see that even the best apps only caught 50% of the threats? I was a bit shocked by that to be honest. I know no program is perfect against all malware but still I expected more than that.
      I do agree lookout should be publicized more but considering it is free I am guessing the budget for advertising is rather small (and by small I mean non-existent). Apps like that rely on
      word of mouth’ advertizing so maybe you should tell all you friends and then
      have them tell their friends. etc.. OR- maybe you don;t tell anyone…after all if someone is looking to steal an identity they would take the easy target over the
      tough one every time. Still with only 50% success rate I would be worried about your bank account and other things on Andriod if I were you.

  2. While some droid users may not see security as a necessity, I think it is something very important. A free version can only bring you but so much security, which is why it is better to just shell out the money for the paid version and better security. And as you had mentioned, it is also important that droid users don’t trust app developers so easily and just download any security app that they may see. It is in good practice to look through the reviews of any app that you download and make sure that the developers are trustworthy since they are protecting your information.

    • I agree with all you say. I will ask you the same thing I asked the person above. Are you surprised that even the best apps only detected half of the threats?
      i think smartphones are just like any other device…people get them for the flash and sparkle and never even think about security. They download an app just because it’s cool…not caring one bit about what harm it may be doing. I wonder what can be done to better inform people about the reality of such threats?

      • I am a bit surprised and disappointed that something you’re paying for security can only detected 50% of threats to your information. If you’re paying money for security, it should be able to detect and stop all threats.

  3. I think this is something that smart phone creators should really provide for their customers for free. After all, these apps mostly get in because of vulnerabilities and design flaws of the company, not necessarily the user (for example, lax app screening procedures, insecure data management, etc.) I think in the future this will be something we see the big name smart phone platforms doing, even if it isn’t provided for free.

    • I agree will will see the platforms becoming more secure in the future (at least theoretically) especially if no one comes out with any better apps for security. My guess however when the first decent one comes out it will cost and arm and a leg.

  4. In my opinion, I believe that with the amount of people out there using smart phone devices today that their should at least be some better apps for security.

  5. 50% detection is pretty poor. I personally do not run any security software on my phone because there has not been any glaring reason for me to do so. I am more concerned with is physical security and how I can manage the data on the device when it is out of my hands.

    • I would agree about not having security software on an Android device. I have not seen a well designed security application that does not consume large amount of resources while draining the phone’s battery. Always be careful about what applications that you install on the device. Google development is starting to verify developers so that not everyone can release apps to the market.

Comments are closed.