There's no fundamental reason why such security features shouldn't be included, and not having them indeed limits the out-of-the-box usefulness of Android for corporate users. It all boils down to resources and priorities, and if you'd like to contribute code toward those features the best place to discuss your contributions is actually the android-platform list.
JBQ On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Chevalier Dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > The general silence around the lack of Android security features is > deafening. The way it is currently going, it will end up with about a > zillion proprietary keystores, protocols and crypto-based applications > with no interoperability in sight. This is really unfortunate as an > open-source OS has many more arguments towards security than a closed > system. > > Maybe I just missed something and Android has always been targetted at > a general audience and not corporate users? > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Alex Danvy <[email protected]> wrote: >> I might have missed something but it looks like Android is not an >> enterprise level phone yet. Security is a major concern for the >> enterprise. >> You have a nice browser, powerfull apps but can't connect to your >> enterprise network to get data. >> This is one of my main complaint about Android : http://bit.ly/Rx2bU. > -- Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google. Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further warning.
