Feeds

Google rejects spy-happy Android app

Eventually

Security for virtualized datacentres

Google has decided that eavesdropping is a step too far for even Android's laissez-faire attitude to application vetting, and rejected such an app despite waving it through first time.

Secret SMS Replicator was initially approved by Google and listed in the Android Marketplace, but Switched explains that 18 hours later the application was pulled and is now only available in its less-secret incarnation as a back-up tool, showing that even Google feels unwarranted interception of communications is a little bit too evil.

SMS Replicator sends a copy of every SMS received to a selected number, and the Secret version provides no indication on the user's phone that such a copy has been made - making it ideal for those wishing to spy on partners or children without all that mucking about with hats and false moustaches.

Such applications already exist on mobiles, with some capable of recording phone calls as well as messages; but this is notable thanks to Google's approval, and subsequent removal from the Android Marketplace.

Symbian Signed has approved such applications in the past, making it clear that it doesn't consider moral judgements to be part of its remit. One can be pretty certain that Apple would allow no such thing even if the lack of multitasking on iOS would make it technically difficult anyway.

Google has always applied the lightest of touches to the Android Marketplace, but by rejecting Secret SMS Replicator the company has shown that there is a line it won't cross.

Not that this means the application will go away: Android apps don't have to be approved, and with the paranoid doing the installation on their partner's temporarily-purloined handset, no on-screen warnings about unsigned applications are going to discourage installation. The developer, DLP Mobile, doesn't have Secret SMS Replicator listed for direct sale yet, but we can't imagine there's anything more than the necessary billing system that's holding them back.

So the message is clear - if you want to keep your affair secret than you need to have an iPhone, or something equally well locked down. Android users will just have to stay faithful, or take their chances. ®

Protecting against web application threats using SSL

More from The Register

next story
Brit telcos warn Scots that voting Yes could lead to HEFTY bills
BT and Co: Independence vote likely to mean 'increased costs'
Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer
More than 5,500 jobs could be axed if rescue mission fails
New 'Cosmos' browser surfs the net by TXT alone
No data plan? No WiFi? No worries ... except sluggish download speed
Radio hams can encrypt, in emergencies, says Ofcom
Consultation promises new spectrum and hints at relaxed licence conditions
Blockbuster book lays out the first 20 years of the Smartphone Wars
Symbian's David Wood bares all. Not for the faint hearted
Bonking with Apple has POUNDED mobe operators' wallets
... into submission. Weve squeals, ditches payment plans
This flashlight app requires: Your contacts list, identity, access to your camera...
Who us, dodgy? Vast majority of mobile apps fail privacy test
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
WIN a very cool portable ZX Spectrum
Win a one-off portable Spectrum built by legendary hardware hacker Ben Heck
Saudi Petroleum chooses Tegile storage solution
A storage solution that addresses company growth and performance for business-critical applications of caseware archive and search along with other key operational systems.
Protecting users from Firesheep and other Sidejacking attacks with SSL
Discussing the vulnerabilities inherent in Wi-Fi networks, and how using TLS/SSL for your entire site will assure security.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.