E
EddieM
Yeah, pretty much.
Some apps are trusted enough to run continually in the background. Most aren't.
So, their apps patch the OS?
Yeah, pretty much.
Some apps are trusted enough to run continually in the background. Most aren't.
British government manages to waste UK tax money while trying to develop some IT software,
Because it's done by the makers of the OS it can also work more effectively in the background. The government version is quite restricted by standard controls and battery saving tools in Android and iOS.
Not the right terms but yes, it hooks into the OS and the OS knows to run it with different criteria.So, their apps patch the OS?
Everything with an OS can and has been exploited that way. If you can perform updates of any core software then it's possible to update that with something malicious. There's lots of protections built in to try to prevent it but it's never impossible.There has to be a mechanism to put it their in the first place and later update it. Routers have often been exploited that way.
https://www.wired.com/2012/06/beard-gallery/ampThey had one of them on the TV - beard and glasses so must be ok. University as usual in the CV19 area
According to Tamir Kahson, there's a direct correlation between the success of a programming language and the length of the facial hair on the face of the man who built it. And he may have a point.
Not the right terms but yes, it hooks into the OS and the OS knows to run it with different criteria.
Everything with an OS can and has been exploited that way. If you can perform updates of any core software then it's possible to update that with something malicious. There's lots of protections built in to try to prevent it but it's never impossible.
Depends what you mean. They have certificates and so on needed to push updates to devices but they both claim not to be able to break individual device encryption.Hmmm. Do Apple and Google have backdoors into their OS's?
Depends what you mean. They have certificates and so on needed to push updates to devices but they both claim not to be able to break individual device encryption.
Not really. They have OSs that control the behaviour of the apps that they run based on if they've been authorised by them. It's a long standing concept in software design. (Ring 0 to 3).Well it's obvious that Apple & Google must have a method of altering the behaviour of their OS's via an app. That's worrying in itself.
Well it's obvious that Apple & Google must have a method of altering the behaviour of their OS's via an app. That's worrying in itself.
Not really. They have OSs that control the behaviour of the apps that they run based on if they've been authorised by them. It's a long standing concept in software design. (Ring 0 to 3).
As to them changing the behaviour of their OS's, that's what they do every time they push out an update.
Not necessarily, I'm not an Android expert. But different levels of trust are baked into OSs.So you're saying the Google and Apple apps are ring 0 apps and the NHS one is a ring 3 app? Hmmmm.
Not necessarily, I'm not an Android expert. But different levels of trust are baked into OSs.
With anything man made there will always be mistakes and mischief makers but we must not let it interfere with progress and the greater good.Not the right terms but yes, it hooks into the OS and the OS knows to run it with different criteria.
Everything with an OS can and has been exploited that way. If you can perform updates of any core software then it's possible to update that with something malicious. There's lots of protections built in to try to prevent it but it's never impossible.