Posts Tagged: iPhone


11
Aug 16

Road Warriors: Beware of ‘Video Jacking’

A little-known feature of many modern smartphones is their ability to duplicate video on the device’s screen so that it also shows up on a much larger display — like a TV. However, new research shows that this feature may quietly expose users to a simple and cheap new form of digital eavesdropping.

Dubbed “video jacking” by its masterminds, the attack uses custom electronics hidden inside what appears to be a USB charging station. As soon as you connect a vulnerable phone to the appropriate USB charging cord, the spy machine splits the phone’s video display and records a video of everything you tap, type or view on it as long as it’s plugged in — including PINs, passwords, account numbers, emails, texts, pictures and videos.

The part of the "video jacking" demonstration at the DEF CON security conference last week in Las Vegas.

Some of the equipment used in the “video jacking” demonstration at the DEF CON security conference last week in Las Vegas. Source: Brian Markus.

[Click here if you’re the TL;DR type and just want to know if your phone is at risk from this attack.]

Demonstrations of this simple but effective mobile spying technique were on full display at the DEF CON security conference in Las Vegas last week. I was busy chasing a story at DEF CON unrelated to the conference this year, so I missed many people and talks that I wanted to see. But I’m glad I caught up with the team behind DEF CON’s annual and infamous “Wall of Sheep,” a public shaming exercise aimed at educating people about the dangers of sending email and other plain text online communications over open wireless networks.

Brian Markus, co-founder and chief executive officer for Aries Security, said he and fellow researchers Joseph Mlodzianowski and Robert Rowley came up with the idea for video jacking when they were brainstorming about ways to expand on their “juice jacking” experiments at DEF CON in 2011.

“Juice jacking” refers to the ability to hijack stored data when the user unwittingly plugs his phone into a custom USB charging station filled with computers that are ready to suck down and record said data (both Android and iOS phones now ask users whether they trust the computer before allowing data transfers).

In contrast, video jacking lets the attacker record every key and finger stroke the user makes on the phone, so that the owner of the evil charging station can later replay the videos and see any numbers or keys pressed on the smart phone.

That’s because those numbers or keys will be raised briefly on the victim’s screen with each key press. Here’s an example: While the user may have enabled a special PIN that needs to be entered before the phone unlocks to the home screen, this method captures even that PIN as long as the device is vulnerable and plugged in before the phone is unlocked.

GREAT. IS MY PHONE VULNERABLE?

Most of the phones vulnerable to video jacking are Android or other HDMI-ready smartphones from Asus, Blackberry, HTC, LG, Samsung, and ZTE. This page of HDMI enabled smartphones at phonerated.com should not be considered all-inclusive. Here’s another list. When in doubt, search online for your phone’s make and model to find out if it is HDMI or MHL ready.

Video jacking is a problem for users of HDMI-ready phones mainly because it’s very difficult to tell a USB cord that merely charges the phone versus one that also taps the phone’s video-out capability. Also, there’s generally no warning on the phone to alert the user that the device’s video is being piped to another source, Markus said.

“All of those phones have an HDMI access feature that is turned on by default,” he said. “A few HDMI-ready phones will briefly flash something like ‘HDMI Connected’ whenever they’re plugged into a power connection that is also drawing on the HDMI feature, but most will display no warning at all. This worked on all the phones we tested with no prompting.”

Both Markus and Rowley said they did not test the attack against Apple iPhones prior to DEF CON, but today Markus said he tested it at an Apple store and the video of the iPhone 6’s home screen popped up on the display in the store without any prompt. Getting it to work on the display required a special lightning digital AV adapter from Apple, which could easily be hidden inside an evil charging station and fed an extension adapter and then a regular lightning cable in front of that.

Continue reading →


12
Apr 16

New Threat Can Auto-Brick Apple Devices

If you use an Apple iPhone, iPad or other iDevice, now would be an excellent time to ensure that the machine is running the latest version of Apple’s mobile operating system — version 9.3.1. Failing to do so could expose your devices to automated threats capable of rendering them unresponsive and perhaps forever useless.

Zach Straley demonstrating the fatal Jan. 1, 1970 bug. Don't try this at home!

Zach Straley demonstrating the fatal Jan. 1, 1970 bug. Don’t try this at home!

On Feb. 11, 2016, researcher Zach Straley posted a Youtube video exposing his startling and bizarrely simple discovery: Manually setting the date of your iPhone or iPad all the back to January. 1, 1970 will permanently brick the device (don’t try this at home, or against frenemies!).

Now that Apple has patched the flaw that Straley exploited with his fingers, researchers say they’ve proven how easy it would be to automate the attack over a network, so that potential victims would need only to wander within range of a hostile wireless network to have their pricey Apple devices turned into useless bricks.

Not long after Straley’s video began pulling in millions of views, security researchers Patrick Kelley and Matt Harrigan wondered: Could they automate the exploitation of this oddly severe and destructive date bug? The researchers discovered that indeed they could, armed with only $120 of electronics (not counting the cost of the bricked iDevices), a basic understanding of networking, and a familiarity with the way Apple devices connect to wireless networks.

Apple products like the iPad (and virtually all mass-market wireless devices) are designed to automatically connect to wireless networks they have seen before. They do this with a relatively weak level of authentication: If you connect to a network named “Hotspot” once, going forward your device may automatically connect to any open network that also happens to be called “Hotspot.”

For example, to use Starbuck’s free Wi-Fi service, you’ll have to connect to a network called “attwifi”. But once you’ve done that, you won’t ever have to manually connect to a network called “attwifi” ever again. The next time you visit a Starbucks, just pull out your iPad and the device automagically connects.

From an attacker’s perspective, this is a golden opportunity. Why? He only needs to advertise a fake open network called “attwifi” at a spot where large numbers of computer users are known to congregate. Using specialized hardware to amplify his Wi-Fi signal, he can force many users to connect to his (evil) “attwifi” hotspot. From there, he can attempt to inspect, modify or redirect any network traffic for any iPads or other devices that unwittingly connect to his evil network.

TIME TO DIE

And this is exactly what Kelley and Harrigan say they have done in real-life tests. They realized that iPads and other iDevices constantly check various “network time protocol” (NTP) servers around the globe to sync their internal date and time clocks.

The researchers said they discovered they could build a hostile Wi-Fi network that would force Apple devices to download time and date updates from their own (evil) NTP time server: And to set their internal clocks to one infernal date and time in particular: January 1, 1970.

Harrigan and Kelley named their destructive Wi-Fi network "Phonebreaker."

Harrigan and Kelley named their destructive Wi-Fi test network “Phonebreaker.”

The result? The iPads that were brought within range of the test (evil) network rebooted, and began to slowly self-destruct. It’s not clear why they do this, but here’s one possible explanation: Most applications on an iPad are configured to use security certificates that encrypt data transmitted to and from the user’s device. Those encryption certificates stop working correctly if the system time and date on the user’s mobile is set to a year that predates the certificate’s issuance.

Harrigan and Kelley said this apparently creates havoc with most of the applications built into the iPad and iPhone, and that the ensuing bedlam as applications on the device compete for resources quickly overwhelms the iPad’s computer processing power. So much so that within minutes, they found their test iPad had reached 130 degrees Fahrenheit (54 Celsius), as the date and clock settings on the affected devices inexplicably and eerily began counting backwards.

 

Continue reading →


5
Jun 12

Attackers Hit Weak Spots in 2-Factor Authentication

An attack late last week that compromised the personal and business Gmail accounts of Matthew Prince, chief executive of Web content delivery system CloudFlare, revealed a subtle but dangerous security flaw in the 2-factor authentication process used in Google Apps for business customers. Google has since fixed the glitch, but the incident offers a timely reminder that two-factor authentication schemes are only as secure as their weakest component.

In a blog post on Friday, Prince wrote about a complicated attack in which miscreants were able to access a customer’s account on CloudFlare and change the customer’s DNS records. The attack succeeded, Prince said, in part because the perpetrators exploited a weakness in Google’s account recovery process to hijack his CloudFlare.com email address, which runs on Google Apps.

A Google spokesperson confirmed that the company “fixed a flaw that, under very specific conditions, existed in the account recovery process for Google Apps for Business customers.”

“If an administrator account that was configured to send password reset instructions to a registered secondary email address was successfully recovered, 2-step verification would have been disabled in the process,” the company said. “This could have led to abuse if their secondary email account was compromised through some other means. We resolved the issue last week to prevent further abuse.”

Prince acknowledged that the attackers also leveraged the fact that his recovery email address — his personal Gmail account — was not taking advantage of Google’s free 2-factor authentication offering. Prince claims that the final stage of the attack succeeded because the miscreants were able to trick his mobile phone provider — AT&T — into forwarding his voicemail to another account.

In a phone interview Monday, Prince said he received a phone call at 11:39 a.m. on Friday from a phone number in Chico, Calif. Not knowing anyone from that area, he let the call go to voicemail. Two minutes later, he received a voicemail that was a recorded message from Google saying that his personal Gmail account password had been changed. Prince said he then initiated the account recovery process himself and changed his password back, and that the hacker(s) and he continued to ping pong for control over the Gmail account, exchanging control 10 times in 15 minutes.

“The calls were being forwarded, because phone calls still came to me,” Prince said. “I didn’t realize my voicemail had been compromised until that evening when someone called me and soon after got a text message saying, ‘Hey, something is weird with your voicemail.'”

Gmail constantly nags users to tie a mobile phone number to their account, ostensibly so that those who forget their passwords or get locked out can have an automated, out-of-band way to receive a password reset code (Google also gets another way to link real-life identities connected to cell phone records with Gmail accounts that may not be so obviously tied to a specific identity). The default method of sending a reset code is via text message, but users can also select to receive the prompt via a phone call from Google.

The trouble is, Gmail users who haven’t availed themselves of Google’s 2-factor authentication offering (Google calls it “2-step verification”) are most likely at the mercy of the security of their mobile provider. For example, AT&T users who have not assigned a PIN to their voicemail accounts are vulnerable to outsiders listening to their voice messages, simply by spoofing the caller ID so that it matches the target’s own phone number. Prince said his AT&T PIN was a completely random 24-digit combination (and here I thought I was paranoid with a 12-digit PIN).

“Working with Google we believe we have discovered the vulnerability that allowed the hacker to access my personal Gmail account, which was what began the chain of events,” Prince wrote in an update to the blog post about the attack. “It appears to have involved a breach of AT&T’s systems that compromised the out-of-band verification. The upshot is that if an attacker knows your phone number and your phone number is listed as a possible recovery method for your Google account then, at best, your Google account may only be as secure as your voicemail PIN.”

AT&T officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Continue reading →


18
Jul 11

Apple’s i-Patches Fix Critical iOS Flaws

Apple has issued a software update that fixes at least three serious security holes in supported versions of its iPhone, iPad, iPod and iPod Touch devices.

The patch targets security weaknesses in the way iOS devices render PDF files. Experts have been warning that attackers could leverage the flaws to install software without warning or permission if users were to merely browse to a malicious site. The update fixes the same vulnerabilities that jailbreakme.com has been using to help people jailbreak Apple’s i-devices.

The Apple update — iOS 4.2.9 or iOS 4.3.4, depending on your device — can be downloaded only from within iTunes. If you are planning to jailbreak your device, visit jailbreakme.com, and then apply the unofficial patch that the Dev-Team released to help jailbreakers protect their phones from further abuse of the vulnerabilities.


18
Jul 11

Is Your Voicemail Wide Open?

The “phone-hacking” scandal that has gripped the U.K. is now making waves on this side of the pond. It stems from an alleged series of intrusions into the wireless voicemail boxes of high profile celebrities and 9/11 victims. The news stories about this scandal make it sound as if the attacks were sophisticated — an investigation into exactly what happened is still pending — but many people would be surprised to learn just how easy it is to “hack” into someone’s voicemail.

For years, it has been a poorly-kept secret that some of the world’s largest wireless providers rely on caller ID information to verify that a call to check voicemail is made from the account holder’s mobile phone. Unfortunately, this means that if you haven’t set up your voicemail account to require a PIN for access, your messages may be vulnerable to snooping by anyone who has access to caller ID “spoofing” technology. Several companies offer caller ID spoofing services, and the tools needed to start your own spoofing operation are freely available online.

I wanted to check whether this is possible with my AT&T account — so I chose my wife’s new iPhone as the target; I was reasonably sure she hadn’t set a PIN on her voicemail. I surfed over to spooftel.com and found that I still had $10 in credits in my account. I instructed Spooftel to call her number, and to use that same number as the caller ID information that gets transmitted to my wife’s phone. Her phone rang 4 times before going to voicemail; I pressed the # sign on my iPhone and was immediately presented with her saved messages. Continue reading →


18
Aug 10

Apple Patch Catchup

I’ve fallen a bit behind on blog posts about notable security updates (I was counting on August to be the slowest month this year work-wise, but so far it’s actually been the busiest!). Recently, Apple released a series of important patches that I haven’t covered here, so it’s probably easiest to mention them all in one fell swoop.

Continue reading →


8
Aug 10

Foxit Fix for “Jailbreak” PDF Flaw

One of the more interesting developments over the past week has been the debut of jailbreakme.com, a Web site that allows Apple customers to jailbreak their devices merely by visiting the site with their iPhone, iPad or iTouch. Researchers soon learned that the page leverages two previously unknown security vulnerabilities in the PDF reader functionality built into Apple’s iOS4.

Adobe was quick to issue a statement saying that the flaws were in Apple’s software and did not exist in its products. Interestingly, though, this same attack does appear to affect Foxit Reader, a free PDF reader that I often recommend as an alternative to Adobe.

According to an advisory Foxit issued last week, Foxit Reader version 4.1.1.0805 “fixes the crash issue caused by the new iPhone/iPad jailbreak program which can be exploited to inject arbitrary code into a system and execute it there.” If you use Foxit, you grab the update from within the application (“Help,” then “Check for Updates Now”) or from this link.

Obviously, from a security perspective the intriguing aspect of a drive-by type jailbreak is that such an attack could easily be used for more nefarious purposes, such as seeding your iPhone with unwanted software. To be clear, nobody has yet seen any attacks like this, but it’s certainly an area to watch closely. F-Secure has a nice Q&A about the pair of PDF reader flaws that allow this attack, and what they might mean going forward. Apple says it plans to release an update to quash the bugs.

I’m left wondering what to call these sorts of vulnerabilities that quite obviously give users the freedom that jailbreaking their device(s) allows (the ability to run applications that are not approved and vetted by Apple) but that necessarily direct the attention of attackers to very potent vulnerabilities that can be used to target jailbreakers and regular users alike. It’s not quite a “featureability,” which describes an intentional software component that opens up customers to attack even as the vendor insists the feature is a useful, by-design ability rather than a liability.

I came up with a few ideas.

– “Apptack”

– “Jailbait” (I know, I know, but it’s catchy)

– “Freedoom”

Maybe KrebsOnSecurity readers can devise a better term? Sound off in the comments below if you come up with any good ones.

Finally, I should note that while Adobe’s products may not be affected by the above-mentioned flaws, the company said last week that it expects to ship an emergency update on Tuesday to fix at least one critical security hole present in the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows, Mac and Linux systems.

Adobe said the update will fix a flaw that researcher Charlie Miller revealed (PDF!) at last month’s Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, but it hinted that the update may also include fixes for other flaws. I’ll have more on those updates when they’re released, which should coincide with one of the largest Microsoft Patch Tuesdays ever: Redmond said last week that it expects to issue at least 14 updates on Tuesday. Update, Aug. 10, 5:06 p.m. ET:Adobe won’t be releasing the Reader update until the week of Aug. 16.


1
Jun 10

Wi-Fi Street Smarts, iPhone Edition

If you use your iPhone to connect to open or public wireless networks, it’s a good idea to tell the device to forget the network’s name after you’re done using it, as failing to do so could make it easier for snoops to eavesdrop on your iPhone data usage.

For example, if you use your iPhone to connect to an open wireless network called “linksys,” — which happens to be the default, out-of-the-box name assigned to all Linksys home Wi-Fi routers — your iPhone will in the future automatically connect to any Wi-Fi network by that same name.

The potential security and privacy threat here is that an attacker could abuse this behavior to sniff the network for passwords and other sensitive information transmitted from nearby iPhones even when the owners of those phones have no intention of connecting to a wireless network, simply by giving his rogue access point a common name.

Continue reading →