iphone mobile security

I'm not going to go searching out a paper by someone I've never heard of who presented at a conference I've never heard of. If you expect to use that paper as proof of your opinions, the burden of supplying that proof lies on you, not me.

As for the "4 for iOS," that's not at all unexpected. I wouldn't argue that number. Of course, they're all going to be malware for jailbroken phones.

> I'm not going to go searching out a paper by someone

> I've never heard of who presented at a conference I've

> never heard of

Amazing.

You can find Dr. Felt's Berkley home page at www.cs.berkeley.edu/~afelt/. She's now working for Google.

> As for the "4 for iOS," that's not at all unexpected.

That kind of defeats your claims of "no iOS malware", doesn't it? As I said, I would have agreed with you if you said "very few".

Jeff

That kind of defeats your claims of "no iOS malware", doesn't it?

No. I have never said that there was no malware at all for iOS. I said that there was no malware for a non-jailbroken iOS device. The truth of that statement remains unchallenged by actual evidence.

> I said that there was no malware for a non-jailbroken iOS device.

> The truth of that statement remains unchallenged by actual evidence.

Not true, as FinFisher demonstrated.

Jeff

Not true, as FinFisher demonstrated.

Demonstrated how? There is no evidence that FinFisher was able to infect non-jailbroken iOS devices. If you have such evidence, present it. I've never been able to find such evidence.

I'm retiring from this thread.

/eom

<Edited By Host>

> There is no evidence that FinFisher was able to infect non-jailbroken iOS devices

The vector was an iTunes bug.

The iTunes bug you refer to allowed an attacker to install malware on Windows machines running iTunes. It required that the wireless network that Windows user was on be compromised. No exploit for iTunes on a Mac was ever discovered, and this is absolutely irrelevant to how FinFisher might work on iOS.