F-Secure Gets Called Out On Mobile Virus FUD

from the are-your-BS-definitions-up-to-date? dept

Finnish anti-virus firm F-Secure has developed quite a reputation — not necessarily for their products, but because of the ridiculous amount of hype they’ve spun regarding the largely theoretical threat of mobile malware and viruses. Other vendors and smartphone OS developers have made fairly general comments that the actual threat has been overhyped, but now one of the company’s rivals has called it out by name, claiming F-Secure has created a market for their product through their incessant fear-mongering. An F-Secure exec, unsurprisingly, denies the claim, but perhaps he hasn’t been at the company long enough to remember the many various instances it’s done exactly that. The truth remains that the risk of infection by a mobile virus is extremely low, while their potential for damage is limited by many factors. The F-Secure guy says he can’t understand why anything they’ve done is bad for business, which is hardly surprising, really — but creating a market that’s based only on irrational fear your company whips up really isn’t a great plan for long-term success.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “F-Secure Gets Called Out On Mobile Virus FUD”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
16 Comments
Sanguine Dream says:

Lawsuit?



Other vendors and smartphone OS developers have made fairly general comments that the actual threat has been overhyped, but now one of the company’s rivals has called it out by name, claiming F-Secure has created a market for their product through their incessant fear-mongering. An F-Secure exec, unsurprisingly, denies the claim, but perhaps he hasn’t been at the company long enough to remember the many various instances it’s done exactly that.

So in about six months (or however long it takes them to realize they aren’t making any money) F-Secure is gonna sue that rival that called them out.

kurt (user link) says:

read the end of the article

if you folks are just about done with your usual knee-jerk anti-anti-virus reactions you might want to take a close look at the end of the referenced article where the f-secure representative said mobile malware was not a big problem…

it’s hard to take ca’s claims that f-secure is making mobile malware out to be a huge risk when f-secure is quoted by the media as saying the opposite…

jobe says:

I have looked somewhat into the problem of mobile security and there really are problems. I can’t imagine these will disapear with new and more sophisticated models either :-). Allso i find it quite natural that phone manufacturers don’t flash these issues openly. F-secure have developed budget antiviruses for a long time but what their mobile product does i don’t know. Obviously enough that it’s competitors don’t trust it to die naturally though. IMHO this article is part of the real FUD attack.

Todd says:

America's "war on drugs" is a myth

After the US Army occupied Afghanistan, opium production soared to new heights. Likewise, after taking out Manuel Noriega in Panama, the flow of cocaine into the US increased substantially.

There are plenty of “drug lords” that contribute lots of money to US politicians and other government officials so that they look the other way and allow the flows of drugs to continue unabated.

It would take a lot of guts for any politician to try to do anything significant to go against these forces. The last one to seriously try was Robert F. Kennedy and we all know what happened to him.

Every once in a while the Feds need to make a big bust just to make the public think they are really trying to stem the flow. Most of the law enforcement activity is is aimed at users rather than the suppliers, which has little if any effect other than to put a lot of small dealers and users in prison.

By de-criminalizing drugs and treating them as we do alcohol, you would remove most of the profit and then the drug pushers would have to find something else to do.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...