• Ilandar
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Was there something specific in there that actually backed up your claim? A link to a generic landing page is not what I was asking for. As I have said repeatedly, I do not deny that there are exploits which are theoretically feasible and have been carried out on some scale. What I am asking for is evidence that every old Android device has already been compromised (your claim) and/or for data that proves this is a widespread issue.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Was there something specific in there that actually backed up your claim? A link to a generic landing page is not what I was asking for.

      My previous comment contains two links. The second one points to a list of vulnerabilities in Qualcomm closed-source firmware that were fixed.

      For your convenience, here it is again: [link]

      What I am asking for is evidence that every old Android device has already been compromised (your claim) and/or for data that proves this is a widespread issue.

      Cybercrime groups obviously aren’t going to publish reliable statistics on the crimes they’ve committed. One should generally assume that known vulnerabilities are already actively exploited unless there is evidence to the contrary.

      • Ilandar
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know why you keep linking examples of known vulnerabilities .This is not what I am asking for, and I have never once denied their existence. If you can’t provide evidence to support your claim that every old Android device has already been exploited and is “the property of an overseas crime ring” then just say so. Stop shifting the goalposts and pretending otherwise - it’s a waste of my time and yours.