Is Google betraying our trust

[gefalu2008]

It is a responsibility of persons downloading stuff to try to do security checks. However, a much greater responsibility is due to the company that provides downloading services.

What the security company quoted above noted was that Google did not eliminate all the instances of a particular malware that Google had already identified. Google thought that there was only one cockroach in the kitchen.

Unrealiable service providers make the lives of ordinary users nasty, difficult and short.

What would be a proverb that would suit the case of this megacompany we would like to love?

Could Google at least promise not to let us down again? And restore iGoogle for forever. And do no evil.

[KiwiNZ]

Could Google at least promise not to let us down again? And restore iGoogle for forever. And do no evil.

So you want promise from Google that no one will put more malware up.
Why should they never replace I google, by that logic we would still have the first release of Ubuntu.
Its a computer company what evil can they do?

[Mikeb85]

Google is actually pretty good for a corporation. How about Oracle trying it's best to apply proprietary licenses to stuff Sun GPL'd? How about Apple pretending it's store doesn't have malware (and sweeping it under the rug)? How about Microsoft's tactics from the beginning of time?

Google's not trying to collect 'your' information. They just collect information, period. Their stated goal is to be a hub for all the information in the world, for anyone to access - advertising is merely a necessary evil, as developers need to eat. Show me a huge corporation who has contributed half as much to open source or even humanity in general as Google...

[alexan]

The application itself don't contain malaware. To bypass PlayGoogle system it ask to download a dropbox file (which was uploaded only after Google allowed the app in the store)
To be effective the malaware require the user to accept installation of the package, which are barely two click.. but the last one is this:



If an app require to install you a service that cost you money and you agree... there's very little a machine can do to bring you security.
Security only work if it's in your brain.

Anyway, I do suppose that Google has the address+name+billing of those who deployed the application. All they need to do is pass the data to the local police

[alexan]

Relevant addition:
I do suppose that Google has the address+name+billing of those who deployed the application. All they need to do is pass the data to the local police
My machine made me do stuff that cost money from my service?
1. Google knows names (they can be faked, but investigated trough IP/stuff)
2. mobile network provider knows their names (they can be faked, but investigated trough IP and physical location)
3. money are send to the some identity (account banks can be faked too?)

Acta, pipa, sopa and all that s--ff (hi-) to protect big companies with their business.... and nothing done for people's money?

[morgan141]

The application itself don't contain malaware. To bypass PlayGoogle system it ask to download a dropbox file (which was uploaded only after Google allowed the app in the store)
To be effective the malaware require the user to accept installation of the package, which are barely two click.. but the last one is this:

If an app require to install you a service that cost you money and you agree... there's very little a machine can do to bring you security.
Security only work if it's in your brain.

Anyway, I do suppose that Google has the address+name+billing of those who deployed the application. All they need to do is pass the data to the local police

Precisely. There are three key things that you should always check before installing an app:

1. Permissions
2. User reviews
3. Number of downloads

If you don't bother checking these then you really only have yourself to blame when you get malware. I mean seriously, I could distribute a .deb file that formats your hard drive. Would that be canonical's fault if you lost all your data?

Clearly google should look at removing such apps as quickly as possible, but unless you include apple style vetting then it does take time to catch them. The above features I mentioned though are more than ample to protect against malware that does appear.

[gefalu2008]

Why should they never replace I google, by that logic we would still have the first release of Ubuntu.

Actually Google is not replacing iGoogle. They are bringing the service to an end. There is no replacement. Not by Google, not by any other company.

It is like Canonical making it impossible for anyone to use Ubuntu. In a world in which there would be no other Linux distributions. Well, that would be even worse than what Google is planning to do...

What Google is planning to do with iGoogle is evil - for us who trusted the company so many years.

[xedi]

What Google is planning to do with iGoogle is evil - for us who trusted the company so many years.

They are replacing it kinda. The rationale is that the chrome platform with its apps and customization will provide all the services you need and have with iGoogle. You may disagree with it or not, but proclaiming that google thinking that chrome is the better way and thus shutting down a FREE service is evil and violating trust is unnecessary hyperbole.

[snip3r8]

Android may be a Linux users friend now , but if and when Ubuntu for mobile comes out , it will be your enemy! Cue dramatic music!

[Bachstelze]

Only if you trusted Google in the first place... One of the reasons I am still reluctant to get an Android phone is that in order to use the Android market, you need a gmail address. Not even a Google account on another address will do, you need a gmail address, period. That's fishy to me, why do I need to have an email address with you if I just want to download some apps? They want everyone to be on gmail, just like Microsoft wants everyone to run Windows.