Taliban App's Publication Points To Holes In Google's App Review Process (techcrunch.com) 80
An anonymous reader writes: A propaganda app developed by the Taliban was live on the Google Play store for two days before being removed, raising questions about Google's app review process, which includes a combination of human editors and algorithms. According to a Taliban spokesperson speaking with Bloomberg, the app was "part of our advanced technological efforts to make more global audience." Its creation signaled how the group was expanding its use of technology to reach a wider audience. When the app was first removed two days after it went live, the Taliban claimed it was due to "technical issues." In actuality, Google removed the app itself, as it was in violation of its policy that bans apps promoting hate speech, violence and illegal activities. The app's publication is a high-profile example of a failure in Google's app review process, and one that raises questions about how thorough its human reviewers are with the apps they test. The company announced last March that it had actually begun using algorithms along with an internal team of reviewers to analyze apps for policy violations prior to publishing. It said apps would be reviewed by this team, hands-on, before the apps go live on Google Play. Since Google relies heavily on its community of users and developers to flag apps for additional review, some apps are bound to fall through the cracks, leaving Google to reactively ban them instead of prohibit their publication in the first place. It's fair to say Google's review process isn't perfect and could use some tweaking.
Because two days means huge failure (Score:5, Insightful)
Two days of a bad app being available doesn't seem like the end of the world to me. They caught it, removed it, all done. If that's the price for not having a walled garden I think it's worth paying.
One of these is like the other (Score:3)
It's a walled garden. It just has slightly different walls.
Re: (Score:2)
The kind with (unlocked) doors in them.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlocked... that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
When a door cannot be passed because it is prevented from opening, and those who manage the door refuse to open it... that door is not unlocked.
Google's app store definitely has walls, and the doors definitely have locks, and it definitely has rules about who, and what, Google will open those doors for.
You can peruse the Google App Store Developer Policy Center [google.com] to learn about the walls and locks.
I'm not saying Apple's good. I'm just saying Google's
Re: (Score:2)
We're discussing Google here. Not Android. However, I already made the point [slashdot.org] that Android is more open than Google's app store is; it is also more open than iOS is.
Re: (Score:2)
We're discussing Google here. Not Android. However, I already made the point [slashdot.org] that Android is more open than Google's app store is; it is also more open than iOS is.
Yeah, and Android has the Malware numbers to prove it!
Re: (Score:3)
It's a walled garden. It just has slightly different walls.
Not really. I have submitted several apps, and they were available nearly instantly. As far as I can tell, there is no app review process. They just remove apps in response to complaints, not proactively.
Re: (Score:2)
You're letting order of operations hide the net effect from you. You can read this for the official policies. [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Google has every right to decide what applications it will and won't accept in its app store; and what developers it will and won't accept. In so doing, however, they create a walled garden -- some are allowed in, and some are not.
Android in general, on the other hand, can be more open, and that is something to be grateful for, in my view, inasmuch as Google's app store content policies [google.com] impose limits I can do without.
Re: (Score:2)
Two days of a bad app being available doesn't seem like the end of the world to me. They caught it, removed it, all done. If that's the price for not having a walled garden I think it's worth paying.
If it were two days of a banking trojan that during that time stole your credentials...would you feel the same?
This was not a mistake ! (Score:2)
I'll bet the app was downloaded by 95% of the big fish. Small fish would have trickled in after the cut off date.
But maybe - just maybe - the release was planned and monitored by the dark agents. Then cut off so people wouldn't ask questions allowing Google to save face ("oh we caught it just in time").
Conspiracy? It's a conspiracy man!! just throwing it out there. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Two days of a bad app being available doesn't seem like the end of the world to me. They caught it, removed it, all done. If that's the price for not having a walled garden I think it's worth paying.
And you would be screaming bloody murder if this had happened on the iOS App Store.
Re: (Score:2)
Android, the choice of the open source aficionados and the Taliban
(politics makes for strange bedfellows)
Why ban it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Why not instead use it and feed them tons and tons of bogus data?
Let them waste their time responding to spam instead of hurting people.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not instead use it and feed them tons and tons of bogus data?
How about posting directions for making bombs that will blow up in their faces . . . ?
"The final step in producing Nitroglycerin is to put it into a container and shake it vigorously." . . . or . . .
"To become the Islamic Stomach Bomber, all you need to do is to produce Nitrogen Triiodide (NI3). This is done by combining ammonia with iodine, and is best done in your own stomach. Fill your mouth with iodine, and wash it down with ammonia. Then do the hokey-pokey. Allah and your virgins will be with yo
Re: (Score:2)
Well, The Taliban already have expert bomb makers and likely an existing distribution system for confirmed members. Doing something like that is most likely just going to get some kid hurt when he gets bored with sticking firecrackers in a frog's butt.
I think a lot of us used to blow things up as a kid. We aren't terrorist or anything. But I can see some bored kids continuing the tradition despite the chance of being labeled a terrorist and misinformation will get them hurt or dead.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, The Taliban already have expert bomb makers and likely an existing distribution system for confirmed members.
Actually, one of my spook friends told me that those Islamic terrorist couriers use some rather simple and ingenious methods to smuggle messages. Every good Muslim carries around a copy of the Quran with them. The average Quran has about 700 pages. No custom official will take the time to read all of the pages that a Muslim air passenger carries with them. So they replace one page of the real Quran with a page with encoded instructions. This is done by the publisher of the Quran, so a simple flip throu
Re: (Score:3)
Viola! You can carry messages, and transfer them to someone else later
So airport security should look out for muslim viola players?
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds about as sound as a billion dollar randomizer to choose right or left. Even U.S. history suggests this as we all now know that gangsters in the 20s and 30s used to hide their Tommy Gun in violin cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But what is he going to do with all those virgins in heaven without a dick?
So what exactly is wrong about the "Taliban App"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Last time I looked, the Taliban were a political faction in the war-torn country of Afghanistan. Back when they conquered Kabul - after ~20 years of continous war between local militia - they were welcome by the population as bringers of peace. Sure, their medieval opinions and the the many restrictions they imposed on individual freedom decreased their popularity in the years to follow, but their rule was not really unlike that of "US friends" like Saudi Arabia.
The Taliban are not "Al Quaida" or "ISIS", they actually were supported for years financially and by delivering weapons from the US. I understand that later on, the US disliked them because of differences on the handling of terror suspects based in Afghanistan. But what part of this actually reasoning to remove an App or theirs? If preaching a radical interpretation of Islam is "hate speech", I suppose all Apps published by Saudi Arabia etc. are banned, too? Or if having been an US-opponent in some war is reason enough for App bans, all Japanese, Italian and German Apps are banned, too?
Re: (Score:2)
That's history. They've morphed from being a repressive regime that tolerated & protected terrorists (which I guess you think is no big deal, although personally I think that should disqualify one from Google Play) to actually being a terrorist organization.
Re:So what exactly is wrong about the "Taliban App (Score:5, Interesting)
Whether the Taliban actually "tolerated & protected terrorists" while they were in power in Afghanistan is still a matter of dispute. Even western sources wrote that the Taliban indicated willingness to prosecute Osama & friends, but under their jurisdiction. The US insisted that they had to hand over the suspects to the US immediately, long before there was evidence presented connecting Osama to the 9/11 acts of terror. The Taliban standpoint on the terror suspects looked like a welcome pretense to quickly start a war against this "no-longer-our-bad-guys" group - which didn't even result in capturing Osama, who took shelter in yet another of those "friend"-countries ruled by religious fundamentalists.
Re: (Score:2)
The Taliban asked for evidence that Osama had anything to do with 911 before they handed him over. The United States never supplied any evidence then or since that Osama had any involvement.
Re:So what exactly is wrong about the "Taliban App (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
... while Apps from other medieval factions are "ok".
Could you please post a link the specific app(s) that you are complaining about? Does Saudi Arabia actually have an app that advocates beheading infidels?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners
That does NOT advocate executing anyone. Only killing of belligerents in battle, who are to be taken prisoner as soon as they stop resisting. That is not extreme in the least, and is about as mainstream as a policy can be.
Re: (Score:2)
now lets not bring reason into this discussion. Didn't you notice he said "Koran" and "smite the necks"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As your parent is likely a christian he is not an infidel ... ... and plenty of religions are counted as believers in islamic view.
Infidels are non belivers
Re: (Score:2)
Moron. Do you know what the Taliban would do to a person like you if they had their way? They would cut your head off, literally. They consider you an infidel. It is nice to sit in your suburban house and wax romantically about politics, but the Taliban would literally cut your head off if they were allowed to.
Doctors Without Borders worked in Afghanistan for 30 years, delivering health care to all in need regardless of their politics or religion. They were unarmed and were respected by everyone.
They only ran into trouble when the US forces under Colin Powell started a program in which they delivered health care, food and other services to local people, in return for informing on the "terrorists." That made all foreign medical service providers suspect.
I wonder where you got the idea that the Taliban would cut of
Re: (Score:2)
I think Saudi Arabia is a hot bed of disgusting thought. The question is how best to deal with this (especially if we're dependent on them for oil). As dependency drops I hope that our government(s) tolerance for an oppressive theology diminishes.
Of course it would help if private citizens would not be so cowardly and not hesitate to denounce those bra
Re:So what exactly is wrong about the "Taliban App (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Jesus teaches that wrath, vengeance, destruction, etc. on unbelievers is the sole p
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that is a difference that is relevant. It is either that they believe in Jesus Christ or they take the atheist views of it being fictional. Either way, the quoted section describes someone in the future doing something that may or may not happen. The Taliban encourages people in the present to do something.
In other words, there is a difference between saying "tom will kill someone next month" and "you should kill someone next month" for whatever reason.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem I have with this news is that there is no mention of any particular content of this App that the ban is reasoned with. If Google was imposing consistent rules to ban religious fundamentalism - fine with me. Start banning the historic scriptures of basically every large religion, all of which are clearly calling for violence against non-believers of their faith. Yet, there are dozens of Apps which convey, for example, hate messages like: "[W]hen the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance of them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord . . . (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)." or “[H]e that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36).
Perhaps because the taliban has sanctions against it and the bible thumpers do not?
Re: (Score:2)
(especially if we're dependent on them for oil)
We are not dependent on SA for oil. America is mostly self-sufficient in oil, and what we do import comes mostly from Canada and Mexico.
As dependency drops I hope that our government(s) tolerance for an oppressive theology diminishes.
To his credit, Obama's administration vigorously protested the recent execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr [wikipedia.org]. So there is some hope that America will grow a backbone, and oppose despotism from "allies" as well as enemies.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good question. Unfortunately most publications reporting on the story are think on the tooth in terms of what if any actual hate speech was being espoused by the software.
One could 'assume' that any sort of movement espousing and promoting Sharia which is very very poor on Women and homosexuals would certainly fall into the category of hate speech. Though banning it falls into banning their own quaint ethic customs. I guess the question is if the KKK, or at the least segregation promoting apps also
Re: (Score:1)
Meanwhile, Google still allows Apps created by Israel. If Google was being even handed they would ban Apps both by the Taliban and by Israel.
Hate Speech? (Score:2, Flamebait)
When "Trump 2016" = Hate Speech, that label has lost all meaning.
No, I am not voting for him, he is a douchebag. But when Precious Snowflakes can't handle a few chalk marks without running off to the Campus President, and he caves (of sorts) I weep for our country!
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. The ONLY person I see advocating gassing of Mexicans is you. I realize that you're trying to make some sort of snarky comment on Trump, but how would you feel if I said "Kill all the babies" in response to Hillary's Abortion stance?
Yeah the difference is that Hillary has said she supports killing unborn babies (as she calls them), while Trump hasn't said anything close to "Gas the Mexicans".
Pick on Trump all you want, but make sure it is something real, not imaginary.
So where can I get it now? (Score:2)
A Taliban smartphone app?? What is that? What does it do? I want it on my phone! Where can I get it now if it has been removed?
Re: (Score:2)
You can send 'em mine. I'll even email 'em back.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You're pretty stupid.
Just like Facbook et al... (Score:1)
They've outsourced the reviewing to teams located in third world countries, because they are cheap.
Guess what religon most of them are ?
So "Death to the Infidels" or "kill all the jews" gets a sly wink and a nod, while "Mohammud was a murderous pedophile sex offender" while true, is immediately censored.
Taliban are a Sunni anti-West terror grroup. (Score:1)
The recent suicide bombing in Lahore Pakistan which killed Christian woman and children celebrating Easter in the park was done by the Taliban.
Censorship? (Score:1)
When is a monopoly large enough for such things to become censorship?
Or is it only censorship when Apple does it?