Apple WWDC has many improvements for iOS10, including open harassment interception interface, so that third-party mobile security software can intercept and remind harassing phone hot topics. Apple demonstrated on the spot the process of alerting harassing phone calls through Tencent's mobile phone butler, which is considered to please Chinese mobile phone users and even be seen as a marketing campaign for Apple to promote iPhone sales in China.
Unlike Apple's large-scale open harassment interception interface to third-party security software, a large number of Chinese Android mobile phone companies are creating their own "mobile security software" and restrict the use of third-party mobile phone security software through mobile phone rights management.
So, why does Apple open iOS's harassment blocking interface? How can Android phone manufacturers better join anti-spam and fraudulent calls?
Apple's open harassment interception interface of the real reason
Teacher Yan Shi does not agree with what netizens said: “Apple's release of harassment interception interface is to please Chinese users for marketingâ€. Because I have been an analyst and consultant for the mobile phone security industry for 10 years, I deeply understand the current Chinese mobile phone users suffer from spam messages and harassing phone calls. I know this is one of the biggest pain points for mobile phone users.
According to statistics from the Ministry of Public Security, in the past 10 years, China's telecommunications fraud cases have been growing at a rapid rate of 20% to 30% every year. In 2015, public security agencies nationwide broke 560,000 telecommunications fraud cases, an increase of 32.5% year-on-year, causing a total economic loss of RMB 22.2 billion. .
In the process of online registration, online shopping, express delivery, car buying, and house purchase, personal information has suffered serious leakage, which has led to the occurrence of precise telecommunication fraud. Not long ago, I personally experienced this "online purchase refund" fraud. A phone call was received on the third day after a bookstore online booked that the store was out of stock and required a refund and sent a link to the site. This link to the website completely mimics the online shop page.
It is difficult for ordinary consumers to identify the authenticity. Simply entering the payment account number and password on the website will be stolen by fraudsters and the funds will be stolen. Similar "precise frauds" occur frequently and many cell phone users suffer huge losses. Therefore, cracking down on fraudulent messages and fraudulent calls has become a must for society as a whole.
Third-party mobile phone security software is the most effective tool for users to prevent fraudulent messages, fraudulent calls, and phishing URLs. However, iOS has been restricting and preventing third-party mobile phone security software from intercepting and reminding users of "privacy security." Although Apple's reason is reasonable, it is a manifestation of "lazy politics."
Apple's approach has forced many iPhone users to implement harassment interception in two ways:
First, jailbreak the iPhone and use jailbreak version of mobile security software;
Second, use the "non-jailbreak version + contact list blacklist" method introduced by some mobile phone security software to implement interception.
The first method causes iOS to be in an insecure state and is easily infected by viruses and malicious plug-ins. The second method is complicated to operate and requires importing hundreds of "black list" numbers into the phone contacts, causing the phone address book to open. Slower, even the iPhone crashed, affecting normal use.
(The picture shows the number of blacklist numbers imported into the address book)
Therefore, it became very urgent to open iOS's harassment blocking interface. In addition, a large amount of Chinese iPhone users' Tucao made Apple feel the pressure. It is said that in order to cooperate with Apple's open harassment blocking interface, Tencent's mobile butler team went to the Apple headquarters several times, only to debug good products and let Apple give up "privacy security" concerns.
Android phone companies should not "cross the river to remove the bridge"
Android phones have always been able to install third-party mobile security software to intercept and alert these harassing phones and spam. This has also been considered by Android phone users as one of the biggest advantages over the iPhone.
However, recently I have experienced several Android phones but found that they are restricting third-party security software to obtain higher privileges through the Android system's underlying permissions, and even suggest that third-party security software is at risk. At the same time, many mobile phone brands have developed their own "mobile phone security software," built in the bottom of the system, so that the phone will have security capabilities.
(The picture shows a security software was intercepted during installation)
For Android vendors' practices, Miao Shi thinks they have two aspects to consider:
First, security concerns the rights of mobile phone systems. Android vendors have encountered some third-party security software that uses high authority to promote other applications and even disrupts the use of mobile phone users. For example, several Android phone companies collectively cancelled a third-party mobile phone in 2014. Security software, protesting its private download of its own application market, replacing mobile phone brands with their own application market.
Mobile phone manufacturers' restrictions on the activation of third-party security software are also similar to the use of system authority to engage in unfair competition and certain security software, which is against the relevant regulations of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.
Second, Android mobile phone manufacturers hope to achieve the integrity of the system, match the mobile phone's UI with software, and provide a better harassment blocking experience. It also hopes to obtain harassment interception data through massive amounts of smart networked mobile phones owned by its own. After all, big data is one of the key elements of future business competition.
However, the practice of blocking third-party security software is suspected of crossing bridges and will reduce the accuracy of harassment and interception. There are two main reasons:
First, the current harassment interception is mainly achieved through the "cloud" mass harassment intercept database. At first, the Android mobile phone's own "mobile security software" was accessed through a database of third-party mobile phone security software.
In addition, third-party security software can not only achieve harassment interception, reminders, but also identify malicious applications that call the system's dangerous permissions. Disabling users from installing third-party software can cause Android permissions to be abused. What is more worth mentioning is that some mobile phone manufacturers gain value-added service revenues through “pre-installed applicationsâ€. These applications are built into the bottom layer of the system and users cannot uninstall them.
However, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has banned this pre-installation practice. Enterprises are taking risks for profit, and even some cottage companies will pre-install malicious deduction applications. If there is no supervision of third-party security software, this practice is even more rampant, completely contrary to fair competition and in violation of the Consumer Protection Law.
Second, compared to mobile phone manufacturers, third-party security software companies are closer to users, with more professional "cloud security" R & D capabilities and big data support capabilities.
If Android vendors block third-party security software, they will not be able to allow more mobile phone users to report these malicious numbers to the “cloud†database of third-party security software when they encounter spam messages and harass the phone, which means these harassment interception numbers. The library is difficult to update in real time. This also means that the accuracy of interception will be greatly reduced.
Therefore, this is like a matter of “every glory, loss, and lossâ€. Security software companies cannot obtain more harassment interception data and cannot provide accurate interception capabilities, nor can they provide accurate interception data for mobile phone companies’ own security software. Ultimately, it will affect the interests of mobile phone users.
Therefore, I suggest Android mobile phone manufacturers to restore the third-party mobile security software permissions, if you worry about the high authority affect the system security and UI integration, you can fully communicate with third-party mobile security software, cooperation, and discuss the opening of the permissions Degrees, it is also possible to customize products for these professional security software companies to realize the integration of the UI.
Moreover, security companies have been increasing investment in R&D. With the participation of giants such as Tencent, Baidu, and Alibaba, mobile security has become a public good. Tencent founder Ma Huateng proposed that “Tencent has no limit to invest in security†at the just-concluded Internet+ Summit. The achievements in the independent killing engine, cloud killing, and big data security are significant, and there is no need for mobile phone manufacturers to “repeat†again. Sexually invest in doing things that are not good for themselves.
Cracking down on telecommunication fraud requires the efforts of the entire industry chain. Mobile phone manufacturers, security software companies, operators, and banks should all participate in these tasks. Only in this way can “achieve concerted efforts†and truly provide a good environment for mobile phone users. , protect the interests of mobile phone users before the "Personal Information Protection Act" and other policies are issued.