Slashdot Mirror
Massive Android Mobile Botnet Hijacking SMS Data
wiredmikey writes "A mobile botnet called MisoSMS is wreaking havoc on the Android platform, stealing personal SMS messages and exfiltrating them to attackers in China. Researchers at FireEye lifted the curtain off the threat on Monday, describing MisoSMS as 'one of the largest advanced mobile botnets to date' and warning that it is being used in more than 60 spyware campaigns. FireEye tracked the infections to Android devices in Korea and noted that the attackers are logging into command-and-controls in from Korea and mainland China, among other locations, to periodically read the stolen SMS messages. FireEye's research team discovered a total of 64 mobile botnet campaigns in the MisoSMS malware family and a command-and-control that comprises more than 450 unique malicious e-mail accounts."
Put it on some dodgy mobile cracked app site and have it perform some trivial functionsfunctions, post about it in a conspiratorial tone in some forums and watch the cheap bastards come rolling in. There are a million cheapskates for every real customer of android apps.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
The bigger problem is the really poor security options available on Android apps with somewhat ridiculously broad security rights. Most apps will ask to read phone identity simply because the need to be able to identify the device on which the app is installed, but the security grant for phone identity gives a whole crapload more than that. Manage accounts is another good one where in order for an app to actually store its own accounts it needs access to all the accounts.
Add to that the fact that Google themselves have been constantly trying to take over your SMS with bloody Hangouts and it's not really that surprising that folks don't really understand the permissions they are granting.
A million times this. Android's permission model is deeply flawed. You have to either accept or deny *all* that an app requests in its manifest, or you can't install.
So as a developer, sure you could add a setting to your app's config pages to, say, turn of location services -- but the app still has that privilege. nothing for it but uninstalling.
Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
Well, First there's Linux. Which is fine, except it's out of date, and thus can be compromised trivially. Then there's the device drivers which frequently have exploits due to the rapid progression of mobile platforms, being built by the lowest bidder, and the lack of consumer desire to pay a premium for security.
At this point we interact with the other small separate OS for the cellular radio -- It doesn't really validate inputs well and can be compromised trivially.
Moving on, we have an excellent application of user / group privileges which constrict application. Really would love actually a bit more than the level of control this has on desktops; Eg: Firefox runs as its own user on my desktop system and the Firefox user has access to its settings folder and is in the "Internet" group, so it can access the web. "sudo" is nice, but we need such a thing for granting user-level access to user-agents such as Firefox; It's one reason I'm developing an Agent Oriented OS and programming language... Anyhow, since the granularity is utterly shite it's basically pointless on mobile systems.
Then we have the Application. Note, this is not plural. We have the Davlik VM aka Java, but register based (faster, more memory use) instead of stack based (slower, less RAM use). There's some great stuff in the install process here whereby linkage occurs and the byte orders of values in the images are translated to machine order. Prior to running on Android the complied Java bytecode is translated into Davlik bytecode -- Unfortunately, there is no copy of this bytecode kept around in case you want to copy it to another device. I'm a firm believer of link on install, but they've done it horribly wrong: My OS links programs on install into MACHINE CODE... ugh. This is mobile so, yeah, let's use what little CPU we got to run a VM -- er, a just in time compiler for a VM.
Now, on desktop systems such as 80486, you'll have up to 4 different execution permission rings to leverage, but on the ARM and other systems you get 2: Kernel or Not. This really messes up the fact that you are running a VM atop a kernel. Well, Linux moronically doesn't reserve a ring level for applications to use against their plugins the same way the kernel isolates itself from user-land applications, so the hardware makers have adopted the monolithic kernel approach. Hey, guess what? We're running a monolithic VM atop a monolithic kernel! Yay! It's like Exploit HEAVEN! Remember how in 16 bit DOSs your program could access any other "TSR" program's memory, or even the OS / BIOS itself and wreak havok? Oh, man. It was great! Mobile has brought this back!
Then we have the app ecosystem, which is actually the strong point IMO. It at least gives you a chance to let other suckers become victims of an exploit and hope it gets pulled / blacklisted from the markets before you try it out. Also, 64GB micro SD's exist now... but a lot of new devices don't have SD card slots, so fuck 'em.
Finally we have the Carriers. They dig down deep into the nether regions of shit that shain't be shat around with, and do just that to create the UI's and app launchers high atop the software stack. Noticeably, desktop OSs have less overhead for doing things than the mobile methodology, but that's the sacrifice you make to have idiots develop you tech on the cheap.
No. Not a million times this. To get this stupid app on your device you have to deliberately go out of your way to enable sideloading, download the app when promted from some dodgy website, install it, grant it admin.
This has nothing to do with the Android permissions system and everything to do with dumb people. Actually REALLY dumb becaus they chose to enable sideloading, they are going out of their way to be hacked... the "Google Vx" settings app isn't pinging up in the Top 10's in the app store, it's side loaded by the user!
Even if you could individually select the permissions an app requests, this level of dumb user would STILL just "accept all".
They deserve to have all of their "I'll b hm in 20 mins" messages lifted!
For all the exaggerated scary words used like "one of the largest", "more than 60 campaigns" etc, there was not a single solid data point about the actual devices infected. Not even a ball park number - like whether it is tens, thousands or millions of devices.
Makes me suspect the claims.
I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
No kidding. I had to look through dozens of "flashlight" apps to find one that didn't want my calendar, SMS, internet access, and GPS.
Sorry, but the post I replied to was about Android's poor permission model. You're right that this particular nasty would still bite a lot of people in the ass -- due to their own carelessness -- even with a less crappy permission system. That much is not disputed, there is no easy fix for stupid.
The argument of GGP, as I read it at least, is basically saying that even bona fide devs and clever users are stuck with this all-or-nothing approach to granting privileges.
Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
Download your apps from a reputable store and exercise some common sense. I wouldn't be surprised if this infection was because idiots were downloading warez from some dubious app store.
SMSes seem to be fairly commonly abused as the cheapskate's "Two-factor authentication" (a convenient excuse to rake in customer phone numbers, and a device that probably isn't infected with the same malware as the users' PCs, plus it's cheaper than dedicate hardware security tokens!)
No, the problem is commercial "appstores" that try to mimick the original open source model for application repositories, also known as package management systems, badly.
The reason software packages on Free OSes work well is because the software is free and open, so that anybody can inspect what it does, and anybody can patch the problems if they find any. Thus you get distro volunteers who look over a software package, verify that it actually does what it says it does, and package it according to distro guidelines. The result, in the case of large distros like Debian, is a high quality software repo that people can and do trust. And if one person doesn't see the problems in the source, someone else will.
The reason sofware packages on commercial "appstores" cannot ever work well or be safe to use is because the greedy OS vendors allow anyone who pays enough to put their closed software in the store, without ever checking what the software actually does. It's trivial to hide malicious code in a closed source binary. It might work fine all year, except on December 24 when it steals your credit details.
The truth is that this isn't a dumb user issue (although dumb users do exist), it's really a greedy appstore owner issue.
> No kidding. I had to look through dozens of "flashlight" apps
> to find one that didn't want my calendar, SMS, internet access,
> and GPS.
F-Droid is your friend.
As always, FOSS means you don't have to put up with the bullshit.
F-Droid build all apps they ship from source, including some sort
of grep filter on permissions to catch (and then remove) any code
which is not in the user's best interest, or at minimum flag and
explain the issue in detail to let you decide for yourself.
Otherwise-good apps with flagrant ad-ware or cripple-ware in it
simply gets patched.
~.~
I'm a peripheral visionary.
The Android permission system blows goats. It's not just the "all or nothing" approach to app acceptance. It runs deeper. It's also the app store itself, where I can't restrict (or prioritize) search results based on permissions demanded.
Using aSpotCat, under android.permission-group.PERSONAL_INFO I've got AdService, Chrome, Firefox, Gmail, Google Play, Pebble, and RunKeeper. I've had to bail on the installation of close to fifty apps to keep this list this short.
Basically the Android security model deters me from actually installing software, to the point where I no longer regard it as a platform.
This xmas between an Android tablet and an eReader, I'm likely to get an eReader (Kobo here in Canada), which is not a platform either, and doesn't play one on TV.
I was reading reviews that commented that a Kobo Aura is about the price of a servicable, entry level tablet from Walmart. Several of the reviewers commented "you might as well get the full Android platform for the price". What platform? Android is mainly a platform for sharing far more about myself than I wish to divulge with strangers I don't even know. Whatever information is gleaned will never be under my control ever again: it will almost certainly be amalgamated from one low-life to another ad nausium.
I'd be quite happy if not a single vendor knew my location ever, who wasn't providing me with a map for my own purposes (such as RunKeeper). If they need to know, I'll tell them. Yet 90% of Android applications demand to hoover this up and the Google play store provides no mechanism to put these applications on a personal shit list, so that better-behaved applications float to the top of the candidate list.
Android: Death by a thousand peeping toms. Where's well-behaved Waldo? Crushed by the throng. Eventually Diogenes tires of visiting the Turkish baazar and begins to subsist on juniper berries.
Seriously, what is the "trickery" that gets one to download and install this "Google Vx" application, and how many Chinese people does it take to read our LOLs? Is someone out there texting their social security number or bank PIN?
The fact that almost nobody in China can get to Google Play without trickery?
Don't get me wrong. I love android, but even Google Play has crappy asian malware. I wish they would clean that shat up.
Search for a game or something and you get...
LOVE BLOND KITCHEN See girl beautiful aprons...
And 12 other similar apps from the same creepy ass developer...No way would someone with half a brain download that. Even worse, it wastes space in the search results, the results aren't relevant to what was searched, and it also wastes the end user's bandwidth in having do download the metadata for that nonsense. WTF GOOGLE?
You can't download other app stores from Google Play because of the "non-compete" provision of the developer agreement. If you don't trust the F-Droid app, you can always download Eclipse and recompile it yourself. But a problem with F-Droid is an inherent limit in funding development of Free games. Even if a game's engine is free, it'll get blocked with "anti-features" if it recommends installing non-free mission packs.
Had you gotten that, um, other popular smartphone, the flashlight function would be built in, right on the popup control panel.
Google needs to start tiering their store. One tier is stuff actively moderated with strict, Draconian guidelines and perhaps additional fees to support this degree of moderation. This tier would be similar to Amazon's, Microsoft's, or Amazon's store and if an app doesn't toe the line perfectly, it gets pulled without mercy (since it can easily be offered on the "free for all" tier.) The second tier would be what their store is now -- pay a fee for an account, upload, and go from there.
The next step is by default, have Android devices download only from the restricted tier of the Google Play Store, and a checkbox, similar to the one that allows sideloading, for using the open tier of their market. This way, the average Joe who doesn't know or doesn't care about permissions is kept safe from potentially malicious software by only being in the actively moderated tier, but someone who has some sort of a clue can turn that protection off and go for whatever utility they want.
Of course, there is worse in the way of markets. AFIAK, China has no access to the Google Play store, and Chinese app stores may have absolutely zero curation or moderation in place whatsoever, so there may be numerous copies of a perfectly legit app, except only one doesn't bring with it an added payload. To boot, number of downloads isn't a good statistic if bogus store accounts are easily created.
Google needs to start tiering their store. One tier is stuff actively moderated with strict, Draconian guidelines and perhaps additional fees to support this degree of moderation. This tier would be similar to Amazon's, Microsoft's, or Amazon's store and if an app doesn't toe the line perfectly, it gets pulled without mercy (since it can easily be offered on the "free for all" tier.) The second tier would be what their store is now -- pay a fee for an account, upload, and go from there.
The next step is by default, have Android devices download only from the restricted tier of the Google Play Store, and a checkbox, similar to the one that allows sideloading, for using the open tier of their market. This way, the average Joe who doesn't know or doesn't care about permissions is kept safe from potentially malicious software by only being in the actively moderated tier, but someone who has some sort of a clue can turn that protection off and go for whatever utility they want.
Of course, there is worse in the way of markets. AFIAK, China has no access to the Google Play store, and Chinese app stores may have absolutely zero curation or moderation in place whatsoever, so there may be numerous copies of a perfectly legit app, except only one doesn't bring with it an added payload. To boot, number of downloads isn't a good statistic if bogus store accounts are easily created.
The Play store is wiped of malware on a pretty regular basis, but there are still a lot of pointless/crappy apps in there. Any true malware capable apps are swiftly removed from the store and from users devices. Your second point is exactly right though; China and other non-western areas don't get the Play store like NA/EUR does. Specifically Google cant collect/disseminate charges from the Play store there, so no developers are interested in making anything but free crApps for it. This means that even if China wern't a hotbed of "loose copyright morals" the people who do pay for software would still not be able to spend their money on the "good" apps from the store. This means they might as well just get a third-party market or better yet just pirate/sideload the apps they want.
So aside from the FUD in this headline, the real story here is that poor sales practices (or a lack of) can push users to do things they might not otherwise, and a huge market is being downright abused. Have there been any malware infection groups coming from NA/EUR where there are a ton of phones and a ton of uneducated users, but full access to the Play store? Nope didnt think so.
I think you are missing the more important information here, malware like this and Linux servers being targeted for attack finally drive a stake through the lie that just because you have source that magically makes it more secure. As we see its just as many of us have been saying for years that once Linux reached a level of popularity it too would fall, no different than windows and OSX.
All having the source does is make it so that 1.- if you have the money, or 2.- if you have the coding talent, that you can continue to have that older piece of hardware or software supported...that's it, that's all it does, it keeps you from ending up with software or hardware being unsupported because everybody moved on because you can pay to keep it going or fix it yourself. I mean if anybody even thought about it for more than 30 seconds it would be plain as the nose on your face why "many eyes" is a myth, how many tens of millions of loc is in your average distro? How many programs and/or components are updated/upgraded on that distro per quarter? This is why every bug tracker has bugs going back several years, for the vast majority of any distro I seriously doubt anybody other than the guys that actually work on the project look at it with any regularity and you can be damned sure the majority of it isn't getting a security audit, it simply changes too fast.
But of course I'll be modded off the page for daring to point out what TFA clearly shows, but IRL Linux is just as complex as any other modern OS and where there is complexity there is flaws, simple as that.
Linux vulnerabilities have nothing to do with this, since users are willingly installing the apps and granting them permission to do these things (whether there is a better way of doing the aforementioned things in Android is moot since you decided to attack Linux). The one thing you missed is that when the source is open, the discovery of a vulnerability doesn't have to wait for the corporate "is it worth it to fix it" cycle. Anyone with a smidgen of coding talent can dig in and take a swing at it, which doesnt decrease 0-days but does decrease 180-days or 360-days that we have seen in many closed platforms. You might also want to investigate the fact that it's not a "distro" that needs to be secure at all, it's the individual, visible things (network stack, plus firewalling applications and finally the internet-facing applications) that consist of a much smaller and better reviewed set of code. But have fun getting modded.
If we allow the stupid to die off in massive amounts by removing warning labels from hair dryers, airbags and cleaning supplies before they breed we could have a very positive effect on the average IQ of future Average Joe s.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?