Tesco’s Mobile Trial Opted For Android Because It Was Less Secure
Written by Evan SchumanJune 1st, 2011
In what may be a first in retail IT, the more-than-5,000-store Tesco chain chose the mobile platform it would experiment with based on a determination that it was the least secure. The trial is about a Wi-Fi system in each store that should map for customers the closest route between selected products. But the reason the chain opted to trial this system on Android is deliciously counter-intuitive.
The security issue cropped up because the chain wanted to do extensive beta testing with customers before offering the final version of the application to the world. Security policies with Apple's iPhone and Research in Motion's BlackBerry, among others, require that only tested and approved apps can be installed on their phones. Android's more lax application security process made it the more desirable platform. "The service is only available publicly to Android phone owners at this time, because we don't want the app in its current state going into the public app stores. Only Android easily offers the ability to install apps from 'Unknown Sources,'" wrote Nick Lansley, who manages IT R&D projects at Tesco.
This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.
Already a Subscriber? Login Here
2 Comments | Read Tesco’s Mobile Trial Opted For Android Because It Was Less Secure
Leave a Reply
Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
-Christine
June 2nd, 2011 at 8:39 am
You’re confusing “security” with “proprietary vendor lock-in”, which is exactly what Apple wants you to do. Apple’s no-external-apps policy exists for only one reason: to ensure Apple’s cut of every app sold to run on their platform.
June 6th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
Calling Android insecure because it is more accessible to developers and gives users more control is like saying a computer with a keyboard is less secure than one without. Sure, a computer without a keyboard will make it much harder for the user to do something stupid, like download and install malware, but there are other more sensible ways to protect a system without tying the user’s hands and making it harder for the user to do anything. Android has a much more robust local security policy than the iPhone. This, and appropriately-worded warnings when an unsigned app is about to be installed (along with basic commonsense), is enough to make the system as secure if not more so than the iPhone. Paranoid Android users can still limit themselves to Google-vetted apps if they so choose. The only difference is that Android gives the user that option.