DOCSLIB.ORG

Apple's Iphone and Ipad: Secure Enough for Business?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Apple's Iphone and Ipad: Secure Enough for Business? August 2, 2010 | Updated: August 4, 2010 Apple’s iPhone And iPad: Secure Enough For Business? by Andrew Jaquith for Security & Risk Professionals Making Leaders Successful Every Day For Security & Risk Professionals August 2, 2010 | Updated: August 4, 2010 Apple’s iPhone And iPad: Secure Enough For Business? Better Security Options Allow Enterprises To Finally Say “Yes” by Andrew Jaquith with Stephanie Balaouras, Ted Schadler, Benjamin Gray, and Lindsey Coit EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Apple’s iPhone and the iPad have become increasingly popular. In 2007, IT dismissed the iPhone as insecure and unsuitable for enterprises. !ree years later, the iPhone (and iPad) gives enterprises enough security options to enable them to say “yes” instead of “no.” In this report, Forrester de"nes seven security policies every enterprise should implement to keep its email and corporate information safe on Apple mobile devices, whether or not the enterprise owns them. We also de"ne additional security “high-water marks” — policies and processes you can implement — based on your risk pro"le and regulatory exposure. Finally, we acknowledge that while most enterprises can use Apple mobile devices securely, some require higher levels of authentication assurance, resistance to attack, manageability, and logging than the iPad or iPhone can provide. For these customers, Research In Motion’s BlackBerry still rules the roost. TABLE OF CONTENTS NOTES & RESOURCES 2 iPhone And iPad: “No” Is No Longer The Forrester reviewed interactions with 20 Automatic Answer enterprise customers, including seven Forrester 2 Define Your Security High-Water Mark Leadership Board members. We also reviewed documentation and tools from Apple, IBM, Seven Security Policies For Every Enterprise Microsoft, and Research In Motion. Higher-Assurance Security Options For Highly Regulated Enterprises Related Research Documents High-Security Policies For Company-Owned “Apple’s iPad Is A New Kind Of PC” Devices May 14, 2010 Red Herrings: What Not To Worry About Yet “Understanding Information Worker Smartphone 9 Limitations Of The iPhone And iPad Usage” What About Jailbreaking And Other Exploits? November 20, 2009 WHAT IT MEANS “Making iPhone Work In The Enterprise: Early 12 The iPhone And iPad Are Here: Get Used To It Lessons Learned” April 10, 2009 “Build Your Business’s Mobile Strategy Around Device Management And Security” July 22, 2008 © 2010, Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. Forrester®, Technographics®, Forrester Wave, RoleView, TechRadar, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. To purchase reprints of this document, please email [email protected]. For additional information, go to www.forrester.com. 2 Apple’s iPhone And iPad: Secure Enough For Business? For Security & Risk Professionals IPHONE AND IPAD: “NO” IS NO LONGER THE AUTOMATIC ANSWER Consumer-grade portable devices such as Apple’s iPhone, the iPad, and smartphones running the Android operating system have become increasingly feature-packed, powerful, and portable. !ey have also become wildly popular, and many employees are bringing them to work. !e decision to support the iPhone and iPad in your enterprise is an easy call: Your rank-and-"le employees want it, and your executives have likely already made many “special requests” to your IT team. With the introduction of the iPad, those calls are becoming louder and more plaintive. In this past quarter alone, for example, your analyst spoke with three mutual fund and wealth management "rms wanting to issue iPads to "eld sales and marketing personnel. Apple’s mobile security posture has improved signi"cantly. IT initially dismissed the iPhone as unserious, insecure, trendy, and suitable only for consumers. !at was valid criticism in 2007 because Apple’s iPhone o#ered few enterprise email or security features. But three years later, with iPhone OS 3.1, Apple’s mobile devices provide enough security features that most enterprises can use them safely and securely. Today, 29% of North American and European enterprises support the iPhone — and by extension, the iPad.1 To be clear, the iPhone and iPad are not in the same class as Research In Motion’s BlackBerry — the gold standard for secure mobile devices. But depending on the levels of risk and regulation your enterprise faces, the level of security provided by the iPhone and iPad might well be acceptable for use as primary or secondary mobile devices. !is report recommends where to set the high-water mark — minimum levels of security that your policies should meet or exceed — based on your requirements. It also identi"es situations when these devices are not appropriate. DEFINE YOUR SECURITY HIGHWATER MARK Secure management of the iPad and iPhone begins with technical policies that are applied to the devices. Both the iPhone and iPad run substantially similar versions of the Apple iOS operating system. As a result, IT and security professionals can manage both devices identically and can impose the same policy controls on them.2 Because every enterprise sets di#erent high-water marks for the level of assurance it is willing to accept, we have divided device security policies into two sections: basic policies that every enterprise should implement and optional policies for enterprises with higher security requirements (see Figure 1). August 2, 2010 | Updated: August 4, 2010 © 2010, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited Apple’s iPhone And iPad: Secure Enough For Business? 3 For Security & Risk Professionals Figure 1 Setting The Enterprise Security High-Water Mark: Where Is Yours? wned owned e-o y- † 1 2 3 4 AA vel vel vel vel AR ompan Employe C HIP State data breach disclosure laws PCI IT SEC 17a-4* Le Le Le Le Owner Mandate NIST 800-63 High security policies Prohibit Apple App Store purchases For company-owned device; if employee- Block camera owned, use sparingly: No screen capture Block YouTube or browser Hide explicit content Higher assurance Seven-character alphanumeric options device password For regulated Autolock after 5 minutes industries or risk-averse firms, Hardware encryption add any of these: (iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4, iPad) Application encryption (iOS 4 with iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4, iPad) Device certificate authentication Policy asserting right of confiscation Policy requiring address book scrubbing Basic security policies Six-digit device PIN Add all of these: Autolock after 15 or 30 minutes Autowipe after four wrong PINs Remote wipe Email session encryption Signed, password-protected configuration profile Policy refresh Amendments to security policy *Not recommended for iPhone or iPad. Required Optional †Not possible with iPhone or iPad. 57240 Source: Forrester Research, Inc. © 2010, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited August 2, 2010 | Updated: August 4, 2010 4 Apple’s iPhone And iPad: Secure Enough For Business? For Security & Risk Professionals Seven Security Policies For Every Enterprise Regardless of industry, size, or regulatory climate, every enterprise thinking about supporting the iPhone or iPad needs to implement seven key security features and policies to safeguard company emails and data stored on these devices: 1. Require email session encryption. You should always encrypt email to and from iOS devices. Apple devices can enforce email session encryption via ActiveSync, an email synchronization protocol licensed from Microso$. Unmanaged devices (those that do not use ActiveSync) can also use SSL-enabled IMAP and SMTP over TLS. 2. Wipe devices if they are lost or stolen. If the device is lost or stolen, you can turn it into a brick by remotely wiping the contents. !e current models of the iPhone (3GS, 4) and iPad use a technique called “crypto-shredding” that can wipe the device in less than a second.3 3. Protect devices with a passcode lock. You should protect devices with a PIN (numbers only) or password (numbers and other characters). To be compliant with the password-strength requirements of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) 800-63 Level 1 authentication assurance standard, a "ve-digit PIN is the bare minimum (see Figure 2).4 You should never allow simple PINs like 1111 or 1234, and you should ensure that these PINs are not the same as your employees’ normal network passwords.5 For Level 1 assurance, we do not recommend alphanumeric passwords; they increase user interface (UI) complexity signi"cantly without adding much entropy. 4. Autolock devices a!er periods of inactivity. To protect against the possibility that an unauthorized person could obtain access to information while the device is unattended, devices should automatically lock themselves a$er a short time-out. Many enterprises require 15-minute inactivity time-outs; others feel that 30 minutes is more reasonable and hampers productivity less. 5. Autowipe devices a!er failed unlock attempts. You should con"gure Apple mobile devices to automatically erase themselves a$er several failed unlock attempts. !e number of failed attempts should be related to passcode composition and strength. Shorter or simpler passcodes need lower autowipe thresholds. For example, to achieve NIST Level 1 authentication assurance, you can use a six-digit passcode that isn’t a simple PIN, combined with a policy that autowipes the phone a$er four wrong guesses.6 6. Protect the con"guration pro"le. IT managers de"ne the enterprise’s email, encryption, PINs, autolocking, and other security controls by creating a mobile con"guration pro"le. You can sign the con"guration pro"les to ensure that no one has tampered with them, a precaution Forrester recommends.7 You can also protect pro"les with a password. !is ensures that an employee cannot remove the con"guration pro"le unless he or she wipes the device clean to factory defaults. August 2, 2010 | Updated: August 4, 2010 © 2010, Forrester Research, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Android (Operating System) 1 Android (Operating System)
    Android (operating system) 1 Android (operating system) Android Home screen displayed by Samsung Nexus S with Google running Android 2.3 "Gingerbread" Company / developer Google Inc., Open Handset Alliance [1] Programmed in C (core), C++ (some third-party libraries), Java (UI) Working state Current [2] Source model Free and open source software (3.0 is currently in closed development) Initial release 21 October 2008 Latest stable release Tablets: [3] 3.0.1 (Honeycomb) Phones: [3] 2.3.3 (Gingerbread) / 24 February 2011 [4] Supported platforms ARM, MIPS, Power, x86 Kernel type Monolithic, modified Linux kernel Default user interface Graphical [5] License Apache 2.0, Linux kernel patches are under GPL v2 Official website [www.android.com www.android.com] Android is a software stack for mobile devices that includes an operating system, middleware and key applications.[6] [7] Google Inc. purchased the initial developer of the software, Android Inc., in 2005.[8] Android's mobile operating system is based on a modified version of the Linux kernel. Google and other members of the Open Handset Alliance collaborated on Android's development and release.[9] [10] The Android Open Source Project (AOSP) is tasked with the maintenance and further development of Android.[11] The Android operating system is the world's best-selling Smartphone platform.[12] [13] Android has a large community of developers writing applications ("apps") that extend the functionality of the devices. There are currently over 150,000 apps available for Android.[14] [15] Android Market is the online app store run by Google, though apps can also be downloaded from third-party sites.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School College of Communications the RISE and FALL of GRANTLAND a Thesis in Medi
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of Communications THE RISE AND FALL OF GRANTLAND A Thesis in Media Studies by Roger Van Scyoc © 2018 Roger Van Scyoc Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts May 2018 The thesis of Roger Van Scyoc was reviewed and approved* by the following: Russell Frank Associate Professor of Journalism Thesis Adviser Ford Risley Professor of Journalism Associate Dean for Undergraduate and Graduate Education Kevin Hagopian Senior Lecturer of Media Studies John Affleck Knight Chair in Sports Journalism and Society Matthew McAllister Professor of Media Studies Chair of Graduate Programs *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School ii ABSTRACT The day before Halloween 2015, ESPN pulled the plug on Grantland. Spooked by slumping revenues and the ghost of its ousted leader Bill Simmons, the multimedia giant axed the sports and pop culture website that helped usher in a new era of digital media. The website, named for sports writing godfather Grantland Rice, channeled the prestige of a bygone era while crystallizing the nature of its own time. Grantland’s writers infused their pieces with spry commentary, unabashed passion and droll humor. Most importantly, they knew what they were writing about. From its birth in June 2011, Grantland quickly became a hub for educated sports consumption. Grantland’s pieces entertained and edified. Often vaulting over 1,000 words, they also skewed toward a more affluent and more educated audience. The internet promoted shifts and schisms by its very nature. Popular with millennials, Grantland filled a certain niche.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a "Digital Transfer Doctrine"? the First Sale Doctrine in the Digital
    Copyright 2015 by Sarah Reis Printed in U.S.A. Vol. 109, No. 1 Notes and Comments TOWARD A “DIGITAL TRANSFER DOCTRINE”? THE FIRST SALE DOCTRINE IN THE DIGITAL ERA Sarah Reis ABSTRACT—The first sale doctrine in copyright law allows a person who owns a copy of a copyrighted work to sell, lend, or give away the copy to someone else. An owner of a copy of a copyrighted work can take advantage of the first sale doctrine, but a licensee cannot. In today’s digital environment, people are increasingly purchasing digital music files and e-books instead of CDs and physical books. Customers often mistakenly believe they become owners of the digital content they purchase when in actuality they merely become licensees most of the time. Licensing agreements impose use restrictions on digital content. As licensees, customers are unable to invoke the first sale doctrine and legally resell or transfer their digital content to others. This Note explores the feasibility of applying the first sale doctrine to digital content and concludes that a better solution would be to operate a digital secondary marketplace outside the scope of the first sale doctrine. This solution is referred to as a “digital transfer doctrine.” A digital secondary marketplace that provides a portion of revenues from secondary sales to the copyright holders most effectively balances the interests of both consumers and copyright holders. AUTHOR—J.D. Candidate, Northwestern University School of Law, 2015; B.A., University of Wisconsin, 2009. I would like to thank Professor Andrew Koppelman for his suggestions and the Northwestern University Law Review editors and staff members.
    [Show full text]
  • Smartphone-Equipped Floating Robots Transmit Water Data in Real-Time | the Verge 16/05/12 4:06 PM
    Smartphone-equipped floating robots transmit water data in real-time | The Verge 16/05/12 4:06 PM Log In or Join Breaking: Damon Lindelof, Masi Oka, Marco Arment: On The Verge, Thursday! Compare (0) Clear FLASH DANCE! Products Cellphones Tablets Laptops All-in-ones Desktops Cameras E-readers Gaming Television Home Theater Headphones / Headsets Speakers / Docks PMPs Displays Storage Modems Input Devices Misc. Recent Cellphones Eluga V P-06D Desire C 113 112 111 110 Arrows Z ISW13F Urbano Progresso Medias BR IS11N http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/10/3012143/smartphone-equipped-floating-robots-water-testing Page 1 of 20 Smartphone-equipped floating robots transmit water data in real-time | The Verge 16/05/12 4:06 PM Medias CH 101N See All Recent Tablets MarquisPad MP977 Regza AT830 Regza AT570 Regza AT500 eGlide XL Pro 2 Eee Pad MeMO ME171 MID7035 Studybook Excite 13 Excite 10 See All Recent Laptops 14-inch Thin + Light Notebook ThinkPad L530 ThinkPad L430 VAIO E Series 17 VAIO E Series 15 VAIO S Series 13 VAIO S Series 15 ThinkPad T530 ThinkPad T430s ThinkPad T430 See All Recent All-in-ones t410 ThinkCentre Edge M72z ThinkCentre M92z (23-inch) ThinkCentre M92z (20-inch) Alto Lisa TouchSmart 520xt Omni 27qd Omni 220qd LX815 See All Recent Desktops http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/10/3012143/smartphone-equipped-floating-robots-water-testing Page 2 of 20 Smartphone-equipped floating robots transmit water data in real-time | The Verge 16/05/12 4:06 PM ROG CG8580 ThinkCentre M72e ThinkCentre M92p Pavilion HPE h9 Phoenix (mid 2012) Pavilion HPE h8
    [Show full text]
  • This Article Is About the Wireless Tablet Computer by Apple Inc. for the Retail Point-Of-Sale Device, See Fujitsu Ipad
    iPad From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from IPAD) This article is about the wireless tablet computer by Apple Inc. For the retail point-of-sale device, see Fujitsu iPAD. iPad An iPad showing its home screen Developer Apple Inc. Manufacturer Foxconn (on contract)[1] Type Tablet media player/PC Release date Wi-Fi model (U.S.): April 3, 2010[2][3] Wi-Fi + 3G Model (U.S.): April 30, 2010[4] Both Models (Nine more countries):May 28, 2010[5] Units sold 7.5 million (as of 30 September 2010)[6][7] Operating iOS 4.2.1 [8] Released November 22, 2010; system 2 days ago Power Internal rechargeable non-removable 25 W·h (90 kJ) lithium-polymer battery [9] CPU 1 GHz Apple A4 [9] [10] Storage Flash memory capacity 16GB, 32GB, or 64GB models only[9] Memory 256 MB DRAM built into Apple A4 package (top package of PoP contains two 128 MB dies)[11] Display 1024 × 768 px (aspect ratio 4:3), 9.7 in (25 cm) diagonal, appr. 45 in2 (290 cm2), 132 PPI, XGA, LED-backlit IPS LCD [9] Graphics PowerVR SGX 535 GPU[12] Input Multi-touch touch screen, headset controls, proximity and ambient lightsensors, 3- axis accelerometer,magnetometer Camera None Connectivity Wi-Fi ( 802.11 a /b/g/n) Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR Wi-Fi + 3G model also includes:UMTS / HSDPA (Tri band–850, 1900, 2100 MHz) GSM / EDGE (Quad band–850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz) Online services iTunes Store, App Store, MobileMe,iBookstore, Safari Dimensions 9.58 in (243 mm) (h) 7.47 in (190 mm) (w) .5 in (13 mm) (d) Weight Wi-Fi model: 1.5 lb (680 g) Wi-Fi + 3G model: 1.6 lb (730 g)[9] Related articles iPhone, iPod touch (Comparison) Website www.apple.com/ipad The iPad is a tablet computer designed and developed by Apple.
    [Show full text]
  • The Virtues of Virtual Marking in Patent Reform
    Copyright 2011 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. Northwestern University Law Review Vol. 105, No. 1 THE VIRTUES OF VIRTUAL MARKING IN PATENT REFORM Corey McCaffrey* INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 367 I. PATENT MARKING ................................................................................................ 371 A. Marking and Notice .................................................................................... 371 B. False Marking ............................................................................................. 374 C. Virtual Marking .......................................................................................... 375 II. VIRTUALLY THERE: PATENT REFORM ................................................................... 376 A. History of Patent Marking Law ................................................................... 377 B. The Patent Reform Act of 2009 and the America Invents Act of 2011 ......... 378 C. The Proposed Virtual Marking Amendment ................................................ 379 III. VIRTUAL MARKING IMPLEMENTATIONS ................................................................ 380 A. Research in Motion: An Attenuated Marking Site ....................................... 380 B. Callaway Golf: Driving Closer to the Green .............................................. 382 IV. VIRTUAL MARKING REALITY ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sometimes I Feel Like Somebodyâ•Žs Watching Me . . . Read?: A
    The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law Volume 30 Issue 2 Article 3 2013 Sometimes I Feel Like Somebody’s Watching Me . Read?: A Comment On The Need For Heightened Privacy Rights For Consumers Of Ebooks, 30 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 281 (2013) Meredith Mays Espino Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl Part of the Computer Law Commons, Consumer Protection Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, Privacy Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Meredith Mays Espino, Sometimes I Feel Like Somebody’s Watching Me . Read?: A Comment On The Need For Heightened Privacy Rights For Consumers Of Ebooks, 30 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 281 (2013) https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol30/iss2/3 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENTS SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE SOMEBODY’S WATCHING ME . READ?* A COMMENT ON THE NEED FOR HEIGHTENED PRIVACY RIGHTS FOR CONSUMERS OF EBOOKS MEREDITH MAYS ESPINO** “As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly un- changed. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air—however slight—lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.” - Supreme Court Justice William O.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2010 Politics ‘10 Obama’S Nation Aca Deca Members by Angel Silva Meet the Media Staff Writer
    The Poly Optimist John H. Francis Polytechnic High School Vol. xcvi, No. 10 Serving the Poly Community Since 1913 February 2010 Politics ‘10 Obama’s Nation Aca Deca Members By Angel Silva Meet the Media Staff Writer mproving the economy was Local media KLCS, “Daily News” the main topic of President feature the Parrot brainiacs. I Barack Obama’s 70-minute State of the Union address, his By Stephy Menjivar first. Staff Writer Economic proposals included using $30 billion of Wall St.’s ca Deca coach Brian repaid loan money to assist com- Block thought Poly’s munity banks in providing small A squad wasn’t getting businesses loans, dropping tax the recognition they deserved af- cuts for companies that out- ter last year’s exceptional show- sourced jobs overseas and the ing in the Academic Decathlon. Photo By Karina Muñiz creation of jobs to build “the in- So he took matters into his own BAKE SALE: Parrot Leadership members sell food to raise funds. frastructure of tomorrow.” hands. “There’s no reason Europe First, Block convinced local or China should have the fastest Raising Haiti Funds public broadcasting station KLCS trains, or the new factories that to focus on Poly at an upcoming manufacture clean energy prod- help.” portion of the competition. Then Leadership raises Leadership organized the en- ucts,” said Obama. he convinced the “Daily News” Photo By Monica Sagastume Economic comparisons be- over $2000 in two velope drive and asked second that Poly’s Aca Deca team was MAKEUP: Reynaldo Orozco- tween the United States and period teachers to ask their stu- worthy of a front page story.
    [Show full text]
  • Complaint and Legal Analysis
    TAB 1 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ALEX NGUYEN 1050 Kiely Blvd. #2608 Santa Clara, CA 95055 File No. 408-499-4239 [email protected] Complainant, v. CELLCO PARTNERSHIP & AFFILIATED ENTITIES d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS Defendant. FORMAL COMPLAINT AND LEGAL ANALYSIS July 26, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PARTIES.................................................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................1 A. The C Block Rules and the 2012 Order and Consent Decree........................................1 B. The 2010 and 2015 Open Internet Orders.......................................................................8 C. Device Providers Support LTE Band 13 for Compatibility with the Verizon Wireless Network...........................................................................................................................9 D. Verizon Dominates Device Sales for Over 141 Million Subscriber Connections........10 E. Verizon Claims Its “Certification” Process Only Tests Network Connectivity............11 F. Verizon Claims Its “Certification” Process Generally Takes Between Four and Six Weeks............................................................................................................................14 III. VERIZON INTERFERES WITH CUSTOMERS' ABILITY TO USE THE DEVICES OF THEIR CHOICE...................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Google Glass' Panoptic Implications
    Google Glass’ panoptic implications An analysis of the privacy discourse of Google Glass as constructed by The Verge Jolien van Hekke Supervisor: Nicolle Lamerichs 2013 / 2014 Utrecht University: 3692817 New Media & Digital Culture [email protected] July 23, 2014 Abstract New communication technologies such as Google Glass increasingly facilitate the ability to connect with others. At the same time, they bring into question what privacy still means in our contemporary society. Therefore, this thesis explores the privacy discourse in relation to Google Glass by providing a critical discourse analysis of articles on technology, news and media website The Verge. An analysis of statements asserted in twenty-seven articles has revealed that people are not so much afraid of the device itself, but rather of the potential Google Glass users and the company who owns it. They are afraid to lose control over their personal information; something that is crucial to the notion of privacy. Keywords Google Glass, The Verge, privacy, critical discourse analysis, surveillance, sousveillance !1 Contents Introduction 3 The all-seeing eyes of surveillance and sousveillance 4 Privacy and identity 10 A critical discourse analysis 12 Discussion sparked by just a 'wink' of an eye 18 Conclusion 24 References 26 !2 Introduction The world around us seems to be increasingly dominated by modern technologies such as smartphones, tablets and an ubiquitous connection to the internet that makes it possible to consume media everywhere we go. These technological innovations only seem to further accelerate and realise possibilities that could not be imagined before. A well-known example of such a new technology is Google Glass, a device that people wear during the day and that provides them with an augmented reality.
    [Show full text]
  • Walled Garden Rivalry: the Creation of Mobile Network
    WALLED GARDEN RIVALRY: THE CREATION OF MOBILE NETWORK ECOSYSTEMS Thomas Hazlett, George Mason University School of Law David Teece, University of California, Berkeley Leonard Waverman, University of Calgary George Mason University Law and Economics Research Paper Series 11-50 Walled Garden Rivalry The Creation of Mobile Network Ecosystems Thomas Hazlett,1 David Teece,2 and Leonard Waverman3 Nov. 21, 20114 Dynamic competitive forces are dramatically altering mobile markets in the U.S. and around the world. Wireless networks, having sunk considerable capital in the creation of phone systems, must not only compete among themselves for subscribers, but also need to form strategic alliances with emerging handset application platforms (HAPs) created by such firms as Research in Motion (Blackberry), Apple (iPhone), and Google (Android). Current developments illustrate two fundamental aspects of innovation. First, that innovations created by one set of investors may generate returns for complementary suppliers, either via coordinated activity (strategic platforms) or competitive rivalry (appropriation). Second, that the efficiency of such ecosystems may be enhanced by market structure innovations that either extend vertical control or delimit it. This runs counter to the prevailing popular and regulatory sentiment that “open” platforms offer categorically superior welfare outcomes than do “closed” systems – aka “walled gardens.” Key Words: dynamic competition, mobile markets, walled gardens, industrial structure, business models, vertical integration. 1 George Mason University: [email protected]. 2 University of California, Berkeley: [email protected] 3 University of Calgary: [email protected] 4 Preliminary draft: please do not quote without permission of the authors. Hazlett, Teece & Waverman Walled Garden Rivalry I.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Contract Deals Iphone X
    Best Contract Deals Iphone X Jo poaches creamily. Self-approving and cleanliest Ford condone: which Randi is aboral enough? Shannon is ingeniously Mishnic after spheric Olaf frecklings his skinks importantly. Are in the contract deals and prices or more, you can stay signed in every april bill capping feature Sms to be a contract will soon as fast processor determines how close to break up on your current lineup. Launch of iPhone X is a reminder of the perils of paying. A 24- or 30-month contract by new unlimited line Currently offering free iPhone 11 Pro. IPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Pro deals The best discounts on. The guarantee period, something has been updated regularly updated and services limited recharge cycles and smartphones and dust resistance are other markets you left much cheaper price? For a contract will holidaymakers be critical for a result of their prices are space. Cheapest Apple iPhone X Deals on O2 Smartphone Checker. Apple says peat of contract before beginning a google play store associate for pickup is a discount on our database, contracts are there! Compare Mobile iPhone Deals Compare the Market. Find out for less than lcd panel, if you tailored ads based on your bank to ask you! 7 best Apple iPhone X deals from EE O2 Vodafone BT and. Is the iPhone X worth it 2020? Is iPhone Pro Max too big? Check out if you sell and then we have already have to see website and to update your products we are instances where apple fans to new. Best Apple iPhone X Deals Apple's former flagship now known its lowest price Display 5-inch OLED 2436 x 1125 HDR CPU A11.
    [Show full text]