Slashdot Mirror
The iPhone SMS Hack Explained
GhostX9 writes "Tom's Hardware just interviewed Charlie Miller, the man behind the iPhone remote exploit hack and winner of Pwn2Own 2009. He explains the (now patched) bug in the iPhone which allowed him to remotely exploit the iPhone in detail, explaining how the string concatenation code was flawed. The most surprising thing was that the bug could be traced back to several previous generations of the iPhone OS (he stopped testing at version 2.2). He also talks about the failures of other devices, such as crashing HTC's Touch by sending a SMS with '%n' in the text."
Though it hasn't been so directly argued for a while, there is still the belief that OSS is somehow unique and better than closed source software because it engages the lone hacker sitting in his basement writing code in his spare time. What I found interesting was Charlie Miller's take on unpaid effort.
Financial incentive is, despite the feeble arguments to the contrary, still the thing that gets code written (and bugs found). Without paying the developers, Linux never would have gotten to the stage it is now. Yes, the source code is open, but it is primarily because there is a team of developers getting paid to write the OS source code that we have such a great system today.
The hobbyist is still just a user. The real developers do it as their job.
Makes you wonder how many iPhone owners who have jailbreaked (-broken?) their devices are still vulnerable to this hack. It isn't exactly fun to have to jailbreak every time an update gets released.
-FB
Take that, HTC-fanboys!
DoS or gain root to a celltower?:
"Just as the software in the iPhone should be able to handle any type of input it receives, the cell towers should too."
except Charlie just proved this to be false
"I think if I fuzzed the phone using the carrier network, I probably would have crashed something. Even though it would be unintended, I could see them throwing me in jail for that, and that's one place I don't want to visit!"
The carrier should be paying you six figures for revealing the hack to them benignly, rather than with malintention
look, carriers: if there is a hack out there, someone will exploit it one day. your choices are:
1. have no idea who is doing what until something awful happens to your network and your customers and you need to pay big bucks to fix it, not to mention the financial hit from the hit to your reputation
2. offer up front a cash reward to anyone who discovers a bug (scaled to severity), and you will paying great rewards and still be paying 1/10th or 1/100th of what you would pay if you found the hack out the hard way
and instead, people like Charlie are under threat of jail for doing what they do in good faith, to your benefit
talk about shortsighted
you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Almost as never ending as the flow of programmers that don't bother to learn the intricacies of their language.
``OK, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?''
The HTC bug, however, looks like it's caused by improper use of string formatting. That sort of problem can occur with any language, as seen with the host of sites (most of them written in high-level languages) that have had SQL injection vulnerabilities in the past.
It's true that some languages and constructs are more dangerous than others, but at some level, programmers just have to bear in mind what they're doing and how they're using their data.
He didn't prove anything, he was just guessing that sending 500 malformed SMS messages *could* affect the towers negatively and the carriers probably wouldn't like that.