Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

rugk

Comparison to other Mobile Security solucions

Recommended Posts

Rugk............

:huh:

 

Your just hungry for learning aren't you. lol

 

Linux kernel security: ( Unix permissions, POSIX ACL, POSIX Capabilities, keyctl, LSM(SELinux, SMACK, TOMOYO Linux, AppArmor)

Linux kernel integrated firewalls: ( *ipfwadm (2.0 –) ipchains (2.2 –) Netfilter (2.4 – 3.x) nftables (3.13 –)

Windows Kernel: ( ACL only )

Windows kernel integrated firewall : ( windows filtering platform )

 

Do you see the difference ???

Android doesnt need a firewall. And even so, you need root access to be able to install it, configure it, etc. Thats how linux and android works.

Everyone uses android in a user mode, therefore i defer to Dan Womack's answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I think I understood something wrong.

 

Windows Mobile and Symbian are not Android OS, based on java and using a linux kernel.

 

I thought: "Windows Mobile and Symbian are not Android OS, but they (WM and S) based on java and using a linux kernel."

And that's right: "Windows Mobile and Symbian are not Android OS - Android OS based on java and using a linux kernel."

 

So Windows Mobile and Symbian of course are not based on Linux!

 

OK so I can summary...

 

  • Firewall: You would need root and it's not such important.
  • Web protection: I'm still waiting for an answer from @dwomack...
  • Privacy Advisor: There are two meanings of this...
  • Backup: It would be quite extensive to include it.
  • Parental control: Maybe this will included in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a small commemoration...

 

Web protection: I'm still waiting for an answer from @dwomack...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The conversation in this thread has gone far off-topic and I have hidden these posts to keep the thread on track. 

 

Web Protection: I have just reached out to our product managers again. Their response is that the product does not yet include this as it's a slightly different scanning engine. They are taking it as a suggestion for future versions. Thank you for your patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, that you forwarded this "Web protection" request.

 

But:

The conversation in this thread has gone far off-topic and I have hidden these posts to keep the thread on track.

"hidden" is good... :rolleyes: How can I make them visible! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To quote you from earlier post in the thread: 

 

:D

 

Yeah, but don't go off topic. We don't want to expand this topic with unimportant facts.

If you want to talk more you of course can create a new topic "How passionate is the moderator Marcos and how to send him a pizza (or something else)?" ;).

 

Or in this case "Where'd dwomack go?!"  ;)

 

Apologies for being gone so long guys. Had valid reasons for being gone but I should've given a heads up. My bad.

 

Now staying on topic: have we addressed the original points of the thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, a summary:

  • Firewall: You would need root and it's not such important. rejected
  • Web protection: Was forwarded to developers, maybe will be added in future versions. new suggestion
  • Privacy Advisor: There are two meanings of this...
  • Backup: It would be quite extensive to include it. rejected
  • Parental control: Maybe this will be included future versions. new suggestion

Yeah, we discussed all things.

 

And now: Thanks to Wikipedia! Because of you we have a great output of this topic: 2 new ideas for new features!

 

Edit: Please note that web protection is something different than phishing protection. Phishing protection is already included in EMS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...