Anti virus? Do you and which one

[Tbloke]

Do people put anti virus software on their android phones or is it a bit unnecessary like it is on a mac?
If you do use one which one and is it any good?

 

[SB13X]

LookOut, primarily due to the fact I'm messing about with non market apks.

 

[AngryHatter]

No, because they are 100% worthless.

 

[Sombre]

I use AntiVirus Free as it has saved me more than once.

Cheers,
Sombre.

 

[Rahxie]

I did use AVG's antivirus on my phone, but soon noticed my battery life was drained very quickly.

 

[AngryHatter]

I use AntiVirus Free as it has saved me more than once.

Cheers,
Sombre.

False positives are very useful.
Not one AV suite, to date - has identified a trojan, malware et cetera.
Not a one.

So what app was that?
Why is the name blocked?

 

[dylo22]

False positives are very useful.
Not one AV suite, to date - has identified a trojan, malware et cetera.
Not a one.

So what app was that?
Why is the name blocked?

And you know this how?? Based solely on your own experience and perception?

I'm not a fan of antivirus programs on android mainly because I think they are a resource hog, but to say that they are completely worthless is going a little far.

The AV on my pc haven't caught a virus/malware in last five years. Does it mean it's worthless and I should get rid of it?

 

[alostpacket]

Do people put anti virus software on their android phones or is it a bit unnecessary like it is on a mac?
If you do use one which one and is it any good?

Some people do and some people dont.

I would suggest trying to learn about your phone and then decide if it's right for you.

This quote is taken from my guide PocketPermissions (link in sig)

Anti-virus

The efficacy of anti-virus apps on Android is a controversial subject on even the best of days. Needless to say, there are some very differing opinions on the necessity of having anti-virus software protecting your phone. Both sides of this debate have some credible and respectable reasons for their choice, so I will try and present both sides as objectively as I can. In full disclosure though, I personally do not use anti-virus on my phone. That's a personal choice I made. Plenty of security experts whom I respect do chose to use anti-virus on their phones. So ultimately this will be a choice that is yours alone to make and not something where you should take cues from other people. That said, here are the pros and cons of each side as best as I know them.

One thing to remember though, is that each side may have some irrational or sensational arguments. These stem from either a sense of emotional justification or a vested interest in selling software. Put simply, neither side of the debate is above bad arguments and unintentional or intentional faulty logic.

Benefits

- Will protect you from past threats
- May protect you from a future threat
- Often can have additional features for privacy and data protection
- May have features to protect your phone if it is lost or stolen

Drawbacks

- May waste system resources like battery and memory
- It's hard to protect from future/unknown threats
- Can potentially cause serious harm to the OS (very rare but not unheard of)
- May provide a false sense of security and encourage risky behavior

 

[Sombre]

False positives are very useful.
Not one AV suite, to date - has identified a trojan, malware et cetera.
Not a one.

So what app was that?
Why is the name blocked?

I blocked the name because you, and your friends, swear black and blue that there is no such thing as a malicious app (wonder what Google removed then...) so you don't need to know the name as you have nothing to fear....

For everyone else who isn't stupidly presumptious, install AntiVirus Free to protect yourself from reported malicious apps.

Cheers,
Sombre.

 

[AngryHatter]

I blocked the name because you, and your friends, swear black and blue that there is no such thing as a malicious app (wonder what Google removed then...) so you don't need to know the name as you have nothing to fear....

For everyone else who isn't stupidly presumptious, install AntiVirus Free to protect yourself from reported malicious apps.

Cheers,
Sombre.

Ok...then you are trolling as you have no proof.

Calling me names doesn't prove your point, in fact, it tends to show you are wrong and defensive for being called out.

Anyone with a brain will stay far away from this app.

 

[wayrad]

We have a candidate for the mysterious virus - I copied the following note from Antivirus Free's blurb at Appbrain:

"* download the Test Virus application if you want to see how the application works when it detects a virus"

 

[AngryHatter]

We have a candidate for the mysterious virus - I copied the following note from Antivirus Free's blurb at Appbrain:

"* download the Test Virus application if you want to see how the application works when it detects a virus"

Good work, man.

 

[Yeahha]

My AV program tends to post here, under my screen name.

 

[wayrad]

Good work, man.

I'm the other gender, but thank you.

 

[AngryHatter]

I'm the other gender, but thank you.

My apologies. It's not often that we encounter geeks of the female persuasion.

 

[ambientdroid]

I blocked the name because you, and your friends, swear black and blue that there is no such thing as a malicious app (wonder what Google removed then...) so you don't need to know the name as you have nothing to fear....

For everyone else who isn't stupidly presumptious, install AntiVirus Free to protect yourself from reported malicious apps.

Cheers,
Sombre.

Just out of interest, do you stick to the Android Market or get apps from other sources?

Where did that app that you posted above come from? If the Android Market, is it still there?

 

[Tbloke]

Yeah i would also love to know if anybody has ever caught anything nasty from the Market or do these things only occur with unofficial apps?

 

[wayrad]

Yeah i would also love to know if anybody has ever caught anything nasty from the Market or do these things only occur with unofficial apps?

A number of Market apps were infected with the DroidDream trojan. NONE of the "antivirus" apps were updated to detect it until well after the news had broken, Google had been alerted, the apps had been remotely deleted, and a patch pushed to the affected phones.

By the way, none of the current Android malware is a true virus. If you see it called that, it's usually a sign that someone is either uninformed or patronizing you.

 

[dylo22]

A number of Market apps were infected with the DroidDream trojan. NONE of the "antivirus" apps were updated to detect it until well after the news had broken, Google had been alerted, the apps had been remotely deleted, and a patch pushed to the affected phones.

By the way, none of the current Android malware is a true virus. If you see it called that, it's usually a sign that someone is either uninformed or patronizing you.

To be fair, no antivirus app can detect new malwares. This is the same with AVs on PCs. They can only detect what is in their definitions. A lot of people make the argument that AVs are worthless because it didn't detect new exploits (ones that have never been seen or analyzed). This argument makes absolutely no sense! Think about it, how can an AV app scan for something when it doesn't even know what it is looking for. In the case of droiddream, how in the world could an AV detect it when nobody even knew the exploit existed in the OS.

The reason we run AVs on PCs is to protect us from KNOWN threats. It is NOT there to protect us from new ones. The same can be said for Android. People really have to understand that.

 

[sonofaresiii]

To be fair, no antivirus app can detect new malwares. This is the same with AVs on PCs. They can only detect what is in their definitions. A lot of people make the argument that AVs are worthless because it didn't detect new exploits (ones that have never been seen or analyzed). This argument makes absolutely no sense! Think about it, how can an AV app scan for something when it doesn't even know what it is looking for. In the case of droiddream, how in the world could an AV detect it when nobody even knew the exploit existed in the OS.

The reason we run AVs on PCs is to protect us from KNOWN threats. It is NOT there to protect us from new ones. The same can be said for Android. People really have to understand that.

If Google has removed and will continue to remove all known threats, and it can't detect new threats, what's the point?

The only argument I'm seeing here-- and I'm not saying it's not valid-- is that Google may slip up and let an old virus through.
Personally, I don't believe they're going to.

 

[dylo22]

If Google has removed and will continue to remove all known threats, and it can't detect new threats, what's the point?

The only argument I'm seeing here-- and I'm not saying it's not valid-- is that Google may slip up and let an old virus through.
Personally, I don't believe they're going to.

Google will only remove apps when they are alerted. Remember, the droiddream apps were only removed because some curious individual discovered them. Which was 4 days after the the apps were posted and many people have already downloaded them. There's nothing preventing another company or hacker to use the exploit in another app (perhaps packaged differently) and post them in the market. What happens if these malicious apps weren't discovered until weeks or months later?

 

[AngryHatter]

To be fair, no antivirus app can detect new malwares. This is the same with AVs on PCs. They can only detect what is in their definitions. A lot of people make the argument that AVs are worthless because it didn't detect new exploits (ones that have never been seen or analyzed). This argument makes absolutely no sense! Think about it, how can an AV app scan for something when it doesn't even know what it is looking for. In the case of droiddream, how in the world could an AV detect it when nobody even knew the exploit existed in the OS.

The reason we run AVs on PCs is to protect us from KNOWN threats. It is NOT there to protect us from new ones. The same can be said for Android. People really have to understand that.

Not entirely true.
Some AV packages for PC use sandboxes similar to the Android that detect "suspicious behavior."
Some learn behavior.

 

[ambientdroid]

To be fair, no antivirus app can detect new malwares. This is the same with AVs on PCs. They can only detect what is in their definitions. A lot of people make the argument that AVs are worthless because it didn't detect new exploits (ones that have never been seen or analyzed). This argument makes absolutely no sense! Think about it, how can an AV app scan for something when it doesn't even know what it is looking for. In the case of droiddream, how in the world could an AV detect it when nobody even knew the exploit existed in the OS.

The reason we run AVs on PCs is to protect us from KNOWN threats. It is NOT there to protect us from new ones. The same can be said for Android. People really have to understand that.

I'll just leave this here.

Heuristic analysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dylo22]

I'll just leave this here.

Heuristic analysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I stand corrected, perhaps AVs can detect future malware. BUT (and this is a big but) the effectiveness of heuristic analysis is still fairly low. Heuristic analysis is basically a best guess effort of identifying new malware based on past experiences. With guessing there also comes the increase of false positives. Although it is possible, the usefulness is questionable. This quote is taken form the link you provided.

"Although heuristic analysis is capable of detecting many previously-unknown viruses and new variants of current viruses, the effectiveness is fairly low regarding accuracy and the number of false positives. This is because computer viruses, just like biological viruses, are constantly changing and evolving. Since heuristic analysis mostly operates on the basis of past experience (by comparing the suspicious file to the code and functions of known viruses), it is likely to miss new viruses that contain previously unknown code or methods of operation not found in any known viruses. Fortunately, heuristic analysis is also evolving along with the viruses. As new viruses are discovered using alternative methods of detection, information about them are added to the heuristic analysis engine, thereby providing it the means to detect any new viruses based on the previously-unknown code."

In the case for android, heuristic analysis doesn't really come into play considering there's not much of a history for it to learn and discover from. The droiddream exploit is one of the first root exploit we seen for android. I doubt any AVs could have caught this ahead of time.

Not entirely true.
Some AV packages for PC use sandboxes similar to the Android that detect "suspicious behavior."
Some learn behavior.

I understand sandboxes as in isolating it in environment that is separate from the main system, but I'm not sure how that could help in identifying new malware. In order to detect "suspicious behavior" and learn, don't you need to compare to something first? I don't know...I could be wrong. I haven't done extensive research in this. But if what you say is true, then great. It makes AVs more useful, not less.

I'm confused, are you guys defending AVs' usefulness or their complete uselessness? Right now, it sort of sounds like you guys are saying AVs are useful due to these advance detection features.

 

[AngryHatter]

They are useless...for the Droid.