Slashdot Mirror


Mobile Banking Apps For iOS Woefully Insecure

msm1267 writes "Mobile banking applications fall short on their use of encryption, validation of digital certificates and two-factor authentication, putting financial transactions at risk worldwide. An examination of 40 iOS mobile banking apps from 60 leading banks worldwide revealed a slew of security shortcomings that also included hard-coded development credentials discovered during a static analysis of app binaries. It's a mess, and to date, most of the banks have been informed and none have provided feedback indicating the vulnerabilities were patched."

139 comments

  1. feedback by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How long do you think it'll take them to come back with feedback? They'll need to work out whose fault it was, who they can blame, what they're going to do about it, the impact of blaming the people whose fault it wasn't, and all the time looking good to upper management. Lessons will be learnt, and this will definitely not happen again, just like always.

    1. Re:feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They'll need to work out whose fault it was

      duh! it's apple's fault

    2. Re:feedback by icebike · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Most of these banks are contracting mobile development out.

      I would bet that 80% of these 60 banks are buying the same moderately customized app(s) from the same vendors.
      I would also suspect there will be similar flaw with the android versions.

      Given that most banks don't have any in-house mobile development, they are probably all descending on
      the few vendors that wrote and customized these apps, an they will all get fixed about the same time.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      interesting.

    4. Re:feedback by buddyglass · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm responsible for the Android offering of one such vendor. We currently have about 140 small banks running some version of our app. We try to follow most of the security guidelines outlined in this article, but to give our customers added assurance we pay a security company to analyze the most current version of our app (and our back-end services) every six months or so. Not the one responsible for this article, though I imagine they're a competitor of the one we use. Was a good read. I forwarded it to my boss and the coworkers responsible for our iOS app.

    5. Re:feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On this security issue, I have had several discussions with the financial institutions holding my retirement savings regarding their websites requiring me to enable my pop-ups and javascript.

      I have at numerous times been subject to deliberately crafted malware that often delays its mischief until I leave the site which gave it to me and shows up later. Some of it has been so robust that it survives reboots ( the "S.M.A.R.T. HDD virus was the last one I had that did this ) and required going back to a restore point to eradicate it.

      I am quite aware of DNS poisoning, the ability to overwrite my URL bar with JavaScript, as well as all sorts of ways of presenting me with all sorts of believable pop-ups which demand reply. What does one do when managing large sums of money and this damned popup comes on and demands information and you suspect it may be bogus? Do you lie to it and possibly foul your account? Do you tell it the truth? Or is it easier in the long run to simply find another financial institution that takes online banking security a bit more seriously?

      Problem is I moved my accounts to one who did not require JavaScript at the time I established my accounts, and now they do. I moved the accounts to them precisely because the institution my former employer set up for me insisted I run JavaScript. I have not found another institution that does not insist I run JavaScript. For the time being, being the brokerage has branch offices, I conduct my business personally at the counter instead of through the net, as I have concerns my machine ( albeit Microsoft Security Essentials claims its virus-free ) is infected with something they do not know about, All too many times I have to reboot because something is taking up all my CPU and sure sending/receiving a lot of data onto the net. Closing everything does not recover the system. It often takes a reboot to clear it.

      Wireshark lets me know its happening, but due to all the software secrecy, I have no idea what is really going on... is this some security hole or some flash update? I have no way of knowing. I only see the packets. I do not get logs of which files were accessed. So, I lose trust.

      I am quite aware of the existence of "botnets" and ways scripting languages can be used to make extremely convincing mimics of a business websites. I always end up having to talk to some highly paid suit-wearing handshake guy who seems to see me as Dale Gribble ( "King of the Hill animated TV series ). These people work themselves high enough up that they seem immune to things like malware, and have grown quite comfortable in simply having people sign away any liabilities with hold harmless talk.

      I am of the impression that foreign entities ( not hackers per se, but governmental interests ) are collecting massive databases on botnets and people doing business with financial institutions via internet so that at any given time they can unleash a fury of buy/sell orders using infected machines operating under credentials of their users. Just to create havoc in the markets and a strong distrust of the banking system. This little showdown is going to be quite a surprise for a lot of people counting on retirement accounts.

      The problem I face is just how to get a high level banking executive to take me seriously... they seem to think everything can be handled with a phone call to their legal department. As a "little guy", I do not have a lot of other peoples resources at my disposal and I end up taking a lot of personal responsibility for what I do, but who is going to stand up to a multi-millionaire business executive and demand personal accountability?

      They get all this one-sided law passed which gives them the right to go after others, while also holding themselves harmless for their own transgressions. The most egregious in my mind being all this software copyright law which makes it illegal to reverse assemble/decompile software, yet holds the same entity harmless should his product have s

    6. Re:feedback by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      I've banked online for a while now and have never had any sort of JS based attack. Ran XP for a long time and OS X for the past couple years. Firefox on both platforms.

    7. Re:feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have not had a JavaScript attack while banking - yet.

      I am just afraid of one.

      Same reason I try to steer clear of the "bad area" of town. I may have not been mugged yet, but I see that kind of stuff going on and feel its in my best interest to stay clear of it.

      My machine doing stuff that is unknown to me does little to bolster my trust, same with previous experiences with hostile code that I picked up from God-knows-where.

      Its not the bank I don't trust. Its my own machine I do not trust.

      ( same AC you replied to )

    8. Re:feedback by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      The question that you should be asking is what happens if the browser is compromised. It doesn't matter if JavaScript is enabled, if some malware controlling your browser lets the attacker make arbitrary payments then your bank is doing it wrong. To pay anyone I've not paid before (and saved the credentials for) via Internet backing, my bank requires me to enter a code that they provide and the recipients account number and the amount in either a mobile phone app or a separate device, which then generates a code that I have to enter into the browser. If an attacker can compromise both my computer and my mobile device, then they can make arbitrary payments, but if they just compromise the browser they can't.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:feedback by nobodie · · Score: 1

      You do run on a bit, but the point(s) are well taken. When I was in China I had a chance to hook up with one of the largest banks through their "internet banking."

      First, it required IE6. Yes, required, nothing else would work
      Second, it required pop-ups because your user name and password had to be input in a pop-up
      Third, if you tried to use something like Firefox you would get a notification that the certificate was invalid and had been revoked

      So, I went to talk to them about it. Shocked, they were. Incapable of caring they were. Useles they were. So I tried the USB dongle which they said was a more secure option.

      The USB dongle had a little script in it that would trigger IE6 to open to the pop-up mentioned above.

      I gave up.

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
  2. You Must Be Crazy ... by jasnw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... to bank from your cellphone. Call me paranoid and old-fashioned (I admit to being both), but if I do on-line banking at all I do it from my own home computer on a wired LAN. OK, so I can't do all the wild-and-crazy things these mobile banking apps allow, but I also am likely to have my money in my bank in my account at the end of the day and not in a bank account in Siberia somewhere.

    1. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd argue that on a non-jailbroken iOS device you might be more secure than on your home computer and wired LAN. Your home computer is far more likely to be infected with keylogging malware or similar.

    2. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Who's writing keylogging malware for CentOS?

    3. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Nutria · · Score: 1

      My kingdom for some mod points!

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    4. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by burne · · Score: 3, Informative

      No need to, it's built into the OS. It even has a nice cli to handle starting, stopping and logging. ttysnoop.

      However, getting sufficient permissions is the hard bit, especially for a remote attacker.

    5. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My kingdom for some mod points!

      I accept your offer. What moderation would you like applied to the above post?

    6. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's writing keylogging malware for CentOS?

      Home computer. Not server.

    7. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..or you know, you could just not keep much money on that account and have the bank remove any overdraft facility in place...

    8. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call you crazy for having a bank that doesn't guarantee to it's customers the safety of their money through the fault of the bank.

      My bank's online and mobile banking agreements put the customer first, if my account is compromised as a result of neglegance on their part - i'm reimbursed for the total damages of my loss.

      My creditcard (mastercard), similar features - if my credit card is used by an unauthorised source, and they're notified within 30 days - I can claim up to $1000 in damages to be returned. Mind you, this incurs a fixed surchage (on top of the mastercard surchages) in our country, but lucky me - this is passed onto the business running the transaction, not the customer.

      Perhaps I'm just in a country that's tough on banks, and they're forced into this without them 'wanting' to...

    9. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's part of the OS, all you need is a bad browser and a bad kernel version and you're into dangerous territory quite quickly.

    10. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is my home computer, you insensitive clod!

      And my laptop...and the gf's laptop...and my sister's PC...and my Mommy's PC (hi Mom!)...and so on and so on. CentOS is a nice distro that doesn't wang out into left field every six months. Plus I get familiar with "big iron Linux" distro and so I'm better at work.

    11. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by S.O.B. · · Score: 2

      Who's writing keylogging malware for CentOS?

      That's just what the NSA wants you to think.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    12. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by icebike · · Score: 1

      I'd argue that on a non-jailbroken iOS device you might be more secure than on your home computer and wired LAN. Your home computer is far more likely to be infected with keylogging malware or similar.

      You's argue that, but according to this article you's be dead wrong.

      Really, how many people do you have running through your house that you need to worry about a key-logger?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    13. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The government already has access to my bank account. They don't need to break into my computer to get it.
      .

      (Not discounting they might have broken into my computer for some other reasons).

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    14. Re: You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know his kingdom consists of that 1 /. post right?

    15. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keyloggers are usually remotely installed via the use of exploits in the browser and/or plugins. You don't need anyone coming into your house.

      Let's compare apples to apples; if you access your bank using a non-jailbroken iOS device using Safari, that's going to be a lot more secure than any desktop browser.

      Yes, the article does a good job uncovering bad decisions in app development. But that doesn't change the fact that the attack surface on a PC is a LOT larger.

    16. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Let's compare apples to apples; if you access your bank using a non-jailbroken iOS device using Safari, that's going to be a lot more secure than any desktop browser.

      Perhaps if by "desktop browser" you mean old versions of windows, you might be right.
      My browsers run in a sandbox, and I also only access my bank from Linux.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    17. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by mikehilly · · Score: 1

      I only do my online banking from a PC that is disconnected from all Internet access! No chance for any key-logger to send back data :)

    18. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      That is exactly what I do. If there is no money to steal, the bad guys cannot get it. Only twice in 2013 was there more than $100 in the account that I use online. Most of the time, there is only about $10 in that account. I put money in when I intend to spend it, I spend it, and the account is nearly empty again. No hacker anywhere has had an opportunity to steal $5,000 from that account.

      If Mom keeps a cookie jar on the counter, and only ever puts two cookies at a time in it, then you can't steal more than two cookies at a time.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    19. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not how it works. You need to make informative or interesting posts to get mod points.

    20. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by ediron2 · · Score: 0

      You say 'disconnected from all internet' but as Inigo said, I don't think it means what you think it means. How about 'all other internet'?

    21. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Let's compare apples to apples; if you access your bank using a non-jailbroken iOS device using Safari, that's going to be a lot more secure than any desktop browser.

      Only if you're literally comparing (mobile) Apples(tm) to (desktop) Apples(tm).

      Unlike OSX, iOS, and Safari, recent versions of Windows (when used with recent versions of IE to access web sites with recent SSL3/TLS implementations) successfully mitigate BEAST attacks, and can safely use CBC cipher suites. Apple hasn't bothered, so Safari is stuck with RC4.

    22. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      The government already has access to my bank account. They don't need to break into my computer to get it.

      They'd be interested in your password though.
      Either in case you re-use it elsewhere or to help them guess the type of passwords you'd use for other accounts.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    23. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      The idea that jailbreaking makes a device less secure seems rather silly. The vulnerabilities are there, either way. It comes down to what you, the user, do with the device - and that's true regardless of its jailbroken status.

      Also, the argument from the article that not detecting jailbroken devices is bad is also silly - it's not like that's particularly hard to circumvent. All it would accomplish is to inconvenience legitimate customers.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    24. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      If I handed you my phone w/ the app loaded and me logged in there's still not much damage you could do. You could transfer money between my accounts. You could deposit checks into my accounts. You could potentially pay my bills if I had payees already configured. (Typically you can't configure new payees via the app.) So you could inconvenience me, but you couldn't take any of my money for yourself or even get my full account number(s) since those are masked prior to being sent to mobile clients. Certainly your poring over my transaction history would be an invasion of privacy, but that's not quite the same as having one's money sent to a bank account in Siberia.

    25. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would be hard pressed to say the bank would be negligent, By and large, they seem pretty secure.

      I would venture to say that my greatest fear is a botnet client, whose existence to me is unknown, is quietly lurking in my machine, waiting for the day to be woken up by its master, and instructed to wreck mayhem for me at the bequest of its master, using my credentials.

    26. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government already has access to my bank account. They don't need to break into my computer to get it. .

      (Not discounting they might have broken into my computer for some other reasons).

      They also already have access to your income info. Yet we cannot opt out of reporting taxes to let them calculate basic stuff year after year...the world^Wusa would be better without #taxday disruptions

    27. Re: You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...joke does not compute...

    28. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're not safe. Linux servers get hacked all the time, and your home computer is probably not nearly as battle hardened as a professionally maintained server. So sit down and shut the fuck up.

    29. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 2

      The government already has access to my bank account. They don't need to break into my computer to get it.

      They'd be interested in your password though.
      Either in case you re-use it elsewhere or to help them guess the type of passwords you'd use for other accounts.

      Why would they need a password? Judging from what we have learned about NSA standard practice all they have to do is show up at your bank, twist some arms, drop the words "We're post 911 here, are you telling us you are refusing to contribute to national security?" and your bank will set up a dedicated back-door that allows them to access any data they want.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    30. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous+Cowled · · Score: 1

      The government already has access to my bank account. They don't need to break into my computer to get it.

      They'd be interested in your password though. Either in case you re-use it elsewhere or to help them guess the type of passwords you'd use for other accounts.

      I don't know if this should be +1 paranoid, or +1 insightful.

    31. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by tsa · · Score: 2

      Woosh...

      --

      -- Cheers!

    32. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Not necessarily. Most USB keyboards have firmware stored on a flash chip that has some spare capacity, and a lot have built-in USB hubs. There was at least one proof of concept for a keylogger that would record things to the on-board flash and then dump them to a specific USB device when it was inserted, then erase the on-board flash (rewriting the bit that contained some of the firmware) ready to start again.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    33. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd argue that on a non-jailbroken iOS device you might be more secure than on your home computer and wired LAN. Your home computer is far more likely to be infected with keylogging malware or similar.

      Mod parent down. Sorry, you speculate about key loggers and obfuscate the fact that wireless communications are laughably secure. I can see all your wireless packets, btw. Muhahahaha

    34. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by multimediavt · · Score: 2

      Who's writing keylogging malware for CentOS?

      Oh, I know this one! What is the NSA, Alex?

    35. Re:You Must Be Crazy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My rooted, customized Android device is more secure than any of that. Important packets do not get sent unless I verify the recipient and the contents of the packet. I haven't had many issues where my traffic was being hijacked, and it was mostly shady websites, not any of the apps I use, but it makes me feel a little bit more comfortable at least.

  3. Relying on internal 'talent' by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    Banks are normally quite process oriented, so in this case I imagine the problem is that the technology is too new for the banks to have a good enough process to cope with the changes and the banks are very rigid about their process where it comes to allowing in new specialist vendors. I am dealing with this on daily basis, for a small company dealing with banks is extremely difficult. I am not even blaming anybody, it's the management necks that are on the line and more often than not, management is not in the position to make sound judgement calls about the technology side of the business, so going with the known quantities is always easier than taking a risk to go with someone new.

    OTOH given the nature of the business, if I were in charge of a bank, in case where dealing with new technologies, I would hire at least two different companies to work out their solutions (pay them, by the way) and then hire an auditor company to check the solution and then based on the better solution keep the better vendor.

    1. Re:Relying on internal 'talent' by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What surprises me is that TFA mentioned multiple cases of things like failure to validate SSL certs, use of unencrypted assets rendered by the app in ways that could be spoofed dangerously, and similar stuff that wouldn't have gotten past their web people; but apparently are A-OK because it isn't a web browser, it's an 'app' wrapped around the UIWebView class!

      The other things they mention, assorted attacks or failures to mitigate against an attacker with priviledged access to the system, aren't good; but they are both less dangerous (at least to people running stock iOS) and more novel and platform-specific. The first class of bugs, though, should have been solved a decade or more ago when they started dabbling in this 'web' stuff.

    2. Re:Relying on internal 'talent' by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      It is surprising if you don't look at the way banks implement processes, what this tells me is that to the banks this technology is so cutting edge, they have no idea how to deal with it at all, so they are just throwing a bunch of stuff together without a second though really, until there is a disaster.

      It IS surprising that nobody in a team raises these questions though, what exactly does it mean? It may mean that the vendors that the banks do have, are mobile app vendors and are not at all qualified to work for banks, they have no experience in banking. It also may mean that the phone apps are a very very cheap afterthought, but it may prove disastrous to treat them that way, because really, there is no difference between using a banking web interface (which are normally fairly well protected) and phone apps.

      It's a case of lack of process, lack of experience on the part of the developers who are charged with these phone apps, lack of understanding on the part of the banks what is happening, maybe lack of real interest for these apps.

  4. Seriously, guys? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, are these banks' websites just as bad, or did they actually manage to re-implement something worse than just wrapping their site in a suitable stylesheet and calling that 'an app'? If the latter, how do they look themselves in the mirror every morning?

    1. Re:Seriously, guys? by thoth · · Score: 0

      These banks probably just did the thing all corporations do when they want results but offload all risk in getting those results: contract the work out.

      Now they can just feign ignorance, disclaim liability, and move on because they have a contract when another entity that says everything is fine! It's like magic.

    2. Re:Seriously, guys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now they can just feign ignorance, disclaim liability, and move on because they have a contract when another entity that says everything is fine! It's like magic.

      Not magic. Those who understand security has switched banks already. Those who will get their accounts cleaned out in the months to come, won't trust that bank anymore. The fact that the app was written by a third party may hold up in court - but it won't matter to customers. Damage to reputation does not follow legal blame. They were customer of that bank, they lost money. They loose trust in that bank, and some other bank says "we do things differently".

    3. Re:Seriously, guys? by multimediavt · · Score: 0

      So, are these banks' websites just as bad, or did they actually manage to re-implement something worse than just wrapping their site in a suitable stylesheet and calling that 'an app'? If the latter, how do they look themselves in the mirror every morning?

      Web group is probably internal while the iOS dev was probably shopped out to Rent-a-Coder, so the web app is probably safe. I should say that RaC was used as a generic example. Folks have gotten good work out of them. But do notice the number of times I used "probably".

    4. Re:Seriously, guys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, are these banks' websites just as bad, or did they actually manage to re-implement something worse than just wrapping their site in a suitable stylesheet and calling that 'an app'? If the latter, how do they look themselves in the mirror every morning?

      Well, the websites may use Java, ActiveX, Flash or other not so mobile friendly techniques...

      That's certainly the case here in Denmark where all banks require Java for authentication, sigh

  5. these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by RichMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    The banking people made the glory of the 4 digit decimal PIN authentication a universal standard.
    I am sure they know all about very secure systems and the public domain.

    1. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have had a 6-digit pin since 2001.

    2. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm really glad that your pin is more secure, but there are only a full 1 million possible combinations for your pin. Not exactly much harder to brute force in an offline attack.

    3. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by jxander · · Score: 1

      I thought the 4-digit pin was designed strictly for use with a physical key, i.e. my bank card

      Sure, it's easy to have a computer brute force the 10000 possible 4 digit strings ... but doing so while standing in front of an ATM might be a little more difficult, and look a bit suspicious, not to mention getting a copy of the physical key and using it before it's owner realized it's missing

      --
      This signature is false.
    4. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your physical key has a magnetic strip that can be copied.

      Suddenly the physical key is a lot more virtual...

    5. Re: these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by baker_tony · · Score: 2

      That's why my pin is 9999!

    6. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      As AC pointed out, the magnetic strip can be copied... Very easily. I know someone who this happened to. Once they have that, they as good as have your pin, which is why your card should never ever leave your line of sight. Copying the key is as fast as swiping the card.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    7. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      Hey, my bank's mobile app has state of the art security - they require a five digit PIN to use their mobile app!

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    8. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The banking people made the glory of the 4 digit decimal PIN authentication a universal standard.
      I am sure they know all about very secure systems and the public domain.

      I've had several discussions with these people about the 4 digit decimal PIN where I point out that it takes minutes to hack a 4 digit decimal PIN in a web interface and the magnetic strip can be copied. The response is usually not that they think that the 4 digit PIN is so terribly secure, it's usually more to do with the fact that a longer more secure pin would inconvenient for the customer. Plus, while the 4 digit pin is justifiably much maligned it does work very well to protect against the vast majority of casual offenders. People who, for instance, find a credit card and would otherwise use it at the nearest cash point and then toss the card, but they can't because nobody writes the pin on their credit card (at least I don't know anybody who does). I suppose some of those cards end up being sold to more hardcore thieves who will hack the pins but apparently the banks are willing to take those losses in the name of customer convenience. It's not terribly difficult increase security, you could use biometrics, one time key generators, a combination of those two or some other modern technology and get much better security but so far the 4 digit PIN reigns supreme.

    9. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Here in the UK its practically impossible to use the magnetic strip anymore, ever since we switched over to chip and pin several years ago.

    10. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      I also have a chip and pin, but it is interesting to note that most places here in South Africa will fall back to the magnetic strip if the chip doesn't read properly. The magnetic strip should go altogether. It is a horrible technology.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    11. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So sand the strip off. That way, you either do safe chip-based banking - or you don't do the transaction. Carry a small amount of cash for those broken shops . . .

    12. Re:these guys pushed the 4 digit pin by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      The other part of the shift to chip-and-pin was the liability. If a merchant accepts a transaction with the magnetic strip, and the customer disputes it, then the merchant is liable, not the bank.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  6. Mobile Banking Apps Woefully Insecure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fixed that for you.

  7. My bank's app... by grub · · Score: 2


    TD Canada Trust appears to not use case sensitive passwords or allow special characters. Try it with your password using UPPER, lower and MiXEd case.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:My bank's app... by grub · · Score: 1

      Err, sorry, not specifically the app, their actual site. Case insensitive everywhere.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:My bank's app... by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Err, sorry, not specifically the app, their actual site. Case insensitive everywhere.

      Authentication is either being done on a mainframe where things tend to be case insensitive or the system has to interface with a mainframe and the lowest common denominator prevails.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    3. Re:My bank's app... by iONiUM · · Score: 1

      Well I'll be damned.. you're right! Fuck TD. I've always hated them. I tried CIBC but it is indeed case sensitive. Good find.

    4. Re:My bank's app... by iONiUM · · Score: 1

      As an additional note, the fact that it auths with non case sensitive pw means that they aren't hashing the passwords either......... it's either plain text or encrypted.... god forbid someone runs a brute force attack, because it's going to be pretty damn easy.

    5. Re:My bank's app... by grub · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know, but it is 2014. Surely even a conservative business like a bank could use case sensitivity. They don't even allow special characters and have a limited size (8 chars iirc)

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    6. Re:My bank's app... by grub · · Score: 1

      Holy smokes, I never thought of that. Good catch!
      We should start a company and get a few million on Kickstarter next week... ;)

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    7. Re:My bank's app... by jxander · · Score: 1

      This right here is a bank that would instantly lose the privilege of holding my money for me.

      --
      This signature is false.
    8. Re:My bank's app... by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Or they normalize your password to lowercase/uppercase before testing against the hash, which they created the same way.

    9. Re:My bank's app... by rueger · · Score: 1

      Whew! I'm glad I'm with Scotiabank, who just this month is forcing everyone to answer a bunch of "Mother's Maiden Name" type "security" questions.....

      Oh shit - hold on - Scotiabank too - case insensitive!

    10. Re:My bank's app... by number17 · · Score: 1

      WTF you are right. And now i'm reading about it everywhere

      Except their help website says the opposite.

    11. Re:My bank's app... by rueger · · Score: 1

      Passwords are not case sensitive and can't include special characters (e.g., #, %, etc.). Passwords must be 8-16 characters long and contain at least one number and letter. - be 8 to 16 characters long - use at least one number and one letter - not include spaces or special characters (e.g., #, %, etc.)

    12. Re:My bank's app... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Every time I see a website that won't allow special characters in passwords, I immediately assume that it's because they're using JavaScript to cover up lack of proper encoding on the way to a SQL database, and I treat the website accordingly, with the appropriate level of distrust. Just saying.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  8. Fiserv is to blame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suggest that everyone look in to a terrible company called Fiserv. Their terrible products have brought the financial institution for which I work to its knees a number of times. Like the time when their mobile app update was so poorly tested that it hosed a relatively new, Enterprise Class System z mainframe with piles of unnecessary host calls.

    1. Re:Fiserv is to blame by raind · · Score: 1

      Not surprising, though my "bank" uses them for their online portal, it's somewhat robust, multiple factor authentication and such, though I haven't poked to hard, which is to say; at all.

      --
      Get up!
  9. That is shit. by zacherynuk · · Score: 1

    But not surprising. Sadly.

    20 years ago I got a C rather than an A in an assignment during my computing systems degree because I failed to fully validate a security in a 'secure' chat program (i did successfully encrypt and purge memory data, including not having page file info readable during unforeseen system power off - but certificate wise I only ensured compliance rather than check integrity iirc) . That was 20 years ago and I'm not a programmer.

    Is this a case of young people being shit, management being shit, HR being shit or the industry as a whole now being shit ?

    1. Re:That is shit. by spatley · · Score: 2

      E: (all of the above)

  10. You would be a fool by Billly+Gates · · Score: 0

    Mobile platforms do not have the AV protection that a full PC has not to mention the spyware installed by the OEMs disable many settings and shares all your data easily able to get your keystrokes.

    I am too paranoid to do so on a phone not to mention Android has weak file system security and processes. It is not a full blown linux kernel you are used too on the desktop

    1. Re:You would be a fool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? AV protection is your trump card for using the PC? Rather than preventing system compromise, I'd say your system is compromised by the AV software.

      If you think AV protection is of any use whatsoever, you are the fool.

    2. Re:You would be a fool by Billly+Gates · · Score: 0

      Really? AV protection is your trump card for using the PC? Rather than preventing system compromise, I'd say your system is compromised by the AV software.

      If you think AV protection is of any use whatsoever, you are the fool.

      Ahh the lie that gets repeated here so often therefore it must be true.

      According to the professionals who certify AV software I would say a good AV suite protects a PC 98% of all exploits! That does not sound useless to me.

      Avast does not degrade performance at all and I would say you are the fool if you run without updates without and do banking. Not me.

    3. Re:You would be a fool by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Security is layers. For all our firewalls, ids sensors, seim correlation, and other efforts it was the lowly endpoint security package and it's alerts in it's console that got our attention the last time we had an unannounced pen test.

      A/v might not be the sexiest thing in computer security today, it might not even be very effective overall but it's one more shot at detecting and stopping the bad guys and it can be a shout worth taking.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    4. Re:You would be a fool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know the professional group you refer to, so the following should not be taken as a direct criticism against them or as any indication that I have any specific knowledge about them. This is just my opinion.

      It seems to me that a group of people whose income and existence depends on the survival of an industry they analyze may be less than partial when analyzing that industry.

      Allow me to use a banking analogy - credit rating agencies. These agencies certify financial institutions by analyzing them and providing recommendations. They might make the claim that a AAA rated institution or instrument is immune from 98% of all market downturns!

      Yet we know how this works in reality. The fallout from the GFC proved that these rating agencies were on the take, being offered incentives for bumping up the ratings that were issued, and even using higher ratings as a bargaining chip once financial institutions realized they could shop around for a better rating. The issued ratings thus did not reflect the real underlying risk of the instruments. Trusting the issued ratings was a mistake because they were not made in good faith. This, by the way, practically destroyed the world economy, in case you'd forgotten.

      I would hope the GFC taught us all to be a little more circumspect when trusting the results of an analysis conducted by the very industry being analyzed. Do you know this group personally? (No.) What reason do you have to trust them? (None.)

      Since I don't know them, I can only go by my instincts as to what I feel about the AV industry as a whole. The AV industry is built on fear mongering and borderline extortion. Download our software, pay us $50 a month, or YOUR COMPUTER IS AT SERIOUS RISK OF HARMFUL INFECTION AND EXPLOSION! And now, THE BANKS WILL STEAL ALL YOUR MONIES!

      If that's your cup of tea, go for it. I am more than comfortable with my choice.

    5. Re:You would be a fool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AV discovers that something bad has already happened - and nobody cares because there is false positives often enough.

      Better to use a system that is not vulnerable to viruses. There are systems so safe that AV does not exist for the platform. The sw is free too...

  11. Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They authenticate by sending an access code via text message to the phone.

    Wait...

  12. List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by IonOtter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which banks, please? Can we please have a list of which banks fail basic programming???

    --
    [End Of Line]
    1. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Agreed. This reporting is shotty and not in the best interest of the public.

    2. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I agree a list would be nice, please don't spread lies that this is "basic" programming. If it were, there wouldn't be so many issues.

      Hardening and securing an application against sophisticated attacks (yes, I know not all of the attacks are 'sophisticated') is a non-trivial piece of work requiring expert knowledge and experience in security programming. I doubt you could do it. I doubt most people here could do it. I consider myself an expert software developer and I doubt I could do it.

      More to the point, spreading the myth that this is "basic" is exactly the sort of attitude that allows these practices to continue. When Joe Graduate hears how "basic" and "easy" this securing software stuff is, from people like you that have no clue, they go off and do it themselves. It's easy, right? Rather than respecting this field for what it is - highly specialized and difficult work - the exact problem that needs solving is perpetuated by your snarky and uninformed attitude.

      So for everybody's sake, just cut the condescending attitude. Thanks.

    3. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying that I have checked because I haven't. However this information disclosure may be the best the study authors can do for now. They have to give the banks some reasonable period of time to correct the issues.

      Now given "...most of the banks have been informed and none [have] provided feedback...", it seems that that the first timeline has been breached. The reviewers are probably wrestling with what to do next.

      This subject is a subset of disclosing bugs in any software, what the responsibilities are, who needs to be informed, what timelines are appropriate, and so forth. It's not as easy as some seem to think. There are moral and ethical issues at work. Nor is it easy, as an outsider, to know what internal issues the banks are dealing with.

      I'm glad that someone, presumably with a white hat, is looking. However they have opened Pandora's box and now have to deal with it. Good luck!

    4. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but 30% of the apps they tested HARDCODED credentials, in some cases BANK ADMINISTRATIVE CREDENTIALS - into the app.

      That's the most basic fail of all.

    5. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by pspahn · · Score: 1

      They're just little HTML apps with a web wrapper, so of course they need to have a small `config.xml` file or the like stored somewhere that provides MySQL creds.

      This isn't Nam, there are rules!

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    6. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

      When Joe Graduate hears how "basic" and "easy" this securing software stuff is, from people like you that have no clue, they go off and do it themselves

      No that is not even close to a major problem. The big problem with software security is that it is usually an afterthought. Poor security does not impeded the normal operation of software, so it is extremely common for management to de-emphasize or even ignore it completely. And then once the software is up and running, retrofitting security into a system is super-expensive so the mindset becomes something like, "why fix a leaky roof if it isn't raining."

      So no, the problem is rarely a case of security being deceptively easy, it is a case of bean-counters not assigning enough beans to the effort.

    7. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      Yet... For some reason I'll bet the app from my cable company has much better security protecting their content than all of these bank apps put together.

    8. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but 30% of the apps they tested HARDCODED credentials, in some cases BANK ADMINISTRATIVE CREDENTIALS - into the app.

      Sure, it's sloppy, but if, as the summary implies, those development credentials are for a sandbox server (presumably without any real financial or personal info on it), then it isn't nearly as bad as it sounds.

      On the other hand, if there are administrative credentials for the production server....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    9. Re:List of Vulnerable Banks / Bank Apps, Please? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Which banks, please? Can we please have a list of which banks fail basic programming???

      While I agree a list would be nice, please don't spread lies that this is "basic" programming. If it were, there wouldn't be so many issues.

      Hardening and securing an application against sophisticated attacks (yes, I know not all of the attacks are 'sophisticated') is a non-trivial piece of work requiring expert knowledge and experience in security programming. I doubt you could do it. I doubt most people here could do it. I consider myself an expert software developer and I doubt I could do it.

      More to the point, spreading the myth that this is "basic" is exactly the sort of attitude that allows these practices to continue. When Joe Graduate hears how "basic" and "easy" this securing software stuff is, from people like you that have no clue, they go off and do it themselves. It's easy, right? Rather than respecting this field for what it is - highly specialized and difficult work - the exact problem that needs solving is perpetuated by your snarky and uninformed attitude.

      So for everybody's sake, just cut the condescending attitude. Thanks.

      Plus let's not make life any easier for thieves than it already is by providing them with a list of targets. The banks who have such crappy apps may deserve being taught a lesson but the customers whose bank accounts end up being raided don't since they can't be expected to have every bank they do business with vetted by a team of security and cryptographic experts.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
  13. I'm shocked. by binaryhermit · · Score: 2, Funny

    Banks doing something insecure? What's next? The government capturing all internet traffic in the name of stopping terrorism?

  14. It's in the repo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Try "yum install logkeys"

  15. So, which ones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's just me, but the article seems a little light on who they are referring to, aside from a vague reference to the countries of origin. While there's all sorts of legitimate ass-covering reasons not to mention any bank specifically, it makes it useless as a starting point for how we would do anything about it, such as demand improvements of these institutions.

    At the least, I hope some private communication to the banks has taken place, though I'd understand if that hasn't happened. Some organizations tend to shoot the messenger.

  16. The recommendations in TFA by aviators99 · · Score: 1

    I agree with all of them, except:

    - Improve additional checks to detect jailbroken devices
    - Obfuscate the assembly code and use anti-debugging tricks to slow the progress of attackers when they try to reverse engineer the binary

    These two will be useless, and easily defeated. "Slowing the progress of attackers" is a meaningless statement in this context. Jailbreak detection is easily tricked, or removed from the code by a jailbroken phone.

    Aside from that, if you do all of the other things they suggest correctly (as should have been suggested to the programmers in CS 101), you shouldn't need these two.

    1. Re:The recommendations in TFA by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      If you and your buddy are being chased by a bear you don't have to outrun the bear; you just have to outrun your buddy. Which is to say sometimes it's helpful to make it a sufficiently big PITA for a malicious party to hack your app relative to the effort required to hack someone else's. Someone who really wants to rob me will get past my locked door, but I still lock the doors to my house.

    2. Re:The recommendations in TFA by lxs · · Score: 1

      Remind me to never to go camping with you.

    3. Re:The recommendations in TFA by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      But I make great smores!

    4. Re:The recommendations in TFA by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      It's still better to avoid the bear, and not think about your friend getting killed.

      That's exactly the GP compaint. They are recommending that a bank outrun the others (by procedures that'll reduce the overall security of the app users, be assured of that), instead of avoiding the bear.

    5. Re:The recommendations in TFA by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      I'm not arguing that obfuscation and anti-debug techniques are sufficient; I'm arguing that they aren't completely useless. Take whatever other security measures make sense and then turn on obfuscation and anti-debug on top of that just to dissuade "casual" (read: lazy) attackers.

    6. Re:The recommendations in TFA by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      And part of my argument is that they are worse than doing nothing.

      Real people that can't make the application realy secure also can't do those harder techniques in a way that does not create more security flaws. Also if you are able to use proper security techniques, there's still no evidence that you'll be able to use those techniques correctly (because they are harder). And in the end of the day, those techniques can not add any real security.

  17. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is all of the above.

    Technology may be created by geniuses, but implemented by fools.

  18. Yes, but by Coditor · · Score: 1

    As an iOS programmer (not at a financial company but we do ecommerce) I would be surprised that the banks did not use Veracode to analyze their binaries. Veracode isn't perfect but even for us it finds a number of these issues. But statically analyzed security issues found by a researcher are not always exploitable in real life. It's very likely that the bank could have security on the API side that would validate anything the client did that would not be visible on a client only analysis. As with Veracode where we get a lot of red herrings, what looks wrong statically might not actual be an issue. Then again I worked at a banking company once before the mobile era and their software truly sucked.

    1. Re:Yes, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Veracode is mostly useless for a certain family of cross-platform banking apps used by some very, very large banks that are written in Lua and carry their own interpreter with them. It's equally useless for anything written using Phonegap, and most other cross-platform development frameworks. As it turns out, this means Veracode is mostly useless for the majority of banking apps out there. Banks are VERY big on cross-platform frameworks, because it allows them to use the same logic for all the security-handling and validation code.

  19. Fe Fi Fo Fum by wjcofkc · · Score: 1

    I smell the packets of a mobile banking app!

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
  20. What's Their Purpose? by organgtool · · Score: 2

    Can someone please explain to me why someone needs a separate app to do their banking? As a matter of fact, can anyone explain why we need most of the apps that are just poor rewrites of web sites? Why not make a good mobile version of the web site that users can bookmark as icons on their home screen and call it a day?

    1. Re:What's Their Purpose? by Riddler+Sensei · · Score: 1

      There are some extra features such as depositing a check which involves plugging into the camera to take a picture of the front and back of said check.

    2. Re:What's Their Purpose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahah... I'm always amused to be reminded that there are countries still using cheques. The 1970s called, they want their primitive banking back

    3. Re:What's Their Purpose? by hankwang · · Score: 1

      "why someone needs a separate app to do their banking? "

      My bank (in Netherlands) requires a chip card and card reader for logging in and transactions (challenge/response system). That would be a pain to use with mobile banking; instead, they store the credentials in the phone, locked with a separate PIN and tied to the phone.

      There are various security measures to reduce the chance of fraud, such as autologout upon switching to a different app (royal PITA if you need to copy/paste the account number, by the way); credentials are stored in a private storage for the app (only root would have access).

      Those measures would be harder to do safely on a browser, especially from a desktop where malware could have access to the credentials.

  21. That's terrible by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

    That's terrible: mobile banking apps for iOS are woefully insecure, yet you folks are making fun of them. Poor little things, you're gonna make 'em cry. Is that really what you want? Can't you just leave 'em alone, you big bullies...?

  22. Cost benefit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If may be hard to believe but banks actually estimate losses due to poorly designed software versus say internal frauds and allocate development funds accordingly. Theft, inventory shrinkage, old fashioned embezzlement are commonplace occurrences so it is a mistake to imagine insecure software is the center of banking crimes. While programmers imagine software is the center of the universe, in finance it is the employees who rob the banks blind

  23. Considering banks are shedding employees by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Considering that banks are shedding employees like mad and only hiring temps, why is this surprising?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  24. My favorite is the insecure passwords... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My bank allows alpha numerics only. No special characters.

    And I discovered that it disregards case. I can type it with any of the letters capital or lowercase however I want, it accepts it all the same.

    Then there was my previous bank. If you wanted to log in to your credit card account from a computer that didn't have the authentication cookie already you were sent to a single page that asked for: Full account number, verification code from the back of the card, expiration date, full social security number, and a few other things I'm forgetting now. I thought for sure I had been forwarded to a hacked page and called them to verify. The person sighed and went "yeah, that's our real page..."

  25. Will someone please stop the anti-jailbreaking BS? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    The shit some alleged jour^h^h^h^h resear^h^h^h^h^h^h overpriced snake-oil salesmen and consultants keep spreading about the "risks" of allowing banking apps to run on jailbroken devices is getting old.

    It's wrong, it's a lie, AND it's actively-harmful to the ultimate goal of banking security (fraud-prevention and losses).

    There are exactly two things that would happen almost immediately if any major bank in the US with millions of customers tried to prevent customers from running its consumer banking app on jailbroken/rooted hardware:

    1. It'll be treated like copy protection, cracked within days, and released online almost immediately... and 15 minutes later, copies with injected malware will be getting aggressively posted online in ways that will make Google rank them high in the search results.

    2. Depending on the size of the bank, there will be one or more open-source reverse-engineered banking apps (probably spoofing a desktop browser and doing screen-scraping if necessary) on Github, Sourceforge, and other sites... until the bank tries to get them taken them down at lawyerpoint, they go underground (or get modularized in ways that make them impossible for lawyers to attack directly), and someone manages to slip a subtle trojan into it somehow, or malware authors start distributing precompiled copies with their own special payloads.

    Just wait until some major American bank decides to try blocking their app from jailbroken/rooted devices. When it happens, grab a big bowl 'o popcorn, and watch the fun at XDA & Github.

    A banking app running on a jailbroken/rooted device is NO LESS SECURE than the same bank's webapp would be if the same user went to it with the same phone (possibly setting it to spoof a desktop browser).

    Any app that genuinely depends upon not being able to install from iTunes/Google Play on jailbroken/rooted hardware for security DESERVES to get pwn3d in the worst and most publicly-humiliating way possible.

    Pin the certificates? Sure. The only people who'll notice or care are attackers, and they're going to decompile the program and rip it apart anyway. Obfuscate the code? Sure, have fun. Once again, nobody besides attackers will notice or care.

    The moment you try to exclude users with jailbroken/rooted phones, you've instantly broken the app for a small, but very loud & opinion-influencing group of users who aren't the least bit shy about taking matters into their own hands AND have the technical skills to pull it off. If you're a major American bank with tens of millions of customers, the LAST thing you want to do unless you're completely insane is motivate a few thousand of them to become casual weekend hackers so they can check their bank account balance on their phone.

  26. wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TFA was interesting; the shit-blog that was also linked can eat a dick. Yes, Michael Mimoso sucks cock.

  27. Re:Will someone please stop the anti-jailbreaking by radish · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. I'm going to talk about iOS jailbreak because that's what's interesting, Android devices are inherently less secure than iOS out of the gate so the conversation there is different.

    The jailbreak defeats two primary security measures - the barriers protecting one app from another and the signature checking on the binary to confirm it hasn't been tampered with. If you are running on a jailbroken device it's trivially easy to hook the binary and essentially make it do whatever you want, and it's doing so with the credentials of the legitimate user. So as a simple example for a banking app, I could modify the binary to wait for you to login successfully, then email me your credentials and transfer a couple thousand $ to my account. If I can get physical access to your device I can install it in seconds, if not maybe I can persuade you to download it from Cydia. The server side would not know this wasn't legit, and you wouldn't know it was happening and the device wouldn't have any way to prevent it. That entire class of attack is made basically impossible on a stock device - the app is signed by the publisher and if you start tinkering it'll fail to execute.

    Now as you mention I could obfuscate the code, that'll slow down someone trying to hook it but it won't stop a determined attacker. I could pin certs, but again if the device is jailbroken I can just replace the certs with my own. For the same reason it's impossible to really secure a general purpose computer that doesn't use something like secure boot it's impossible to guard against attackers if you're app is running on a jailbroken device - you can't trust the underlying OS and you can't even trust your own binary - you're screwed.

    The very first thing anyone writing an app which has security concerns needs to do is figure out an effective jailbreak detect. It's not an exact science, and no detection routine will be perfect, but it's the number one most significant defense.

    --

    ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  28. Re:Will someone please stop the anti-jailbreaking by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    My employer is considering offering our customers (banks) the option of turning on code in our apps that attempts to detect a jail broken devices and causes the app not to run. Our customers are all small, regional outfits, though; probably not big enough to merit much outrage.

  29. Re:Will someone please stop the anti-jailbreaking by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    If you're capable of inserting code to intercept credentials and email them somewhere then why can't you just excise the jail break detection code? Seems like this probably isn't the sort of attack jailbreak detection is designed to prevent. I'm instead imagining a scenario where a user's OS has been modified w/o his or her knowledge in such a way that it snoops on legitimate unmodified apps. Maybe the user bought the device used from "some guy at the car wash". He then proceeds to install his banking app. If the app doesn't detect the jail break and happily runs as normal then the user gets snooped on by the modified OS code. If the app instead detects the jail break and exits immediately then the snoop code never gets the chance to do its thing.

  30. Dedicated computer only for banking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't use your normal PC for banking. Get a second machine, or re-use an old machine. Wipe it, reinstall the OS, patch it, and use it **only** for your banking, never anything else. Or get a cheap chromebook and use as just described.

    1. Re: Dedicated computer only for banking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use a live cd within VM. Do your banking and close the machine.

      nothing survives that.

  31. Have a dedicated computer for banking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is why you use a second computer for banking and never do anything else on this machine. Take an old machine and wipe, reinstall OS, patch, ...

    1. Re:Have a dedicated computer for banking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly what I do. (Not exactly a "second" computer though -- I have a separate computers for each usage profile and trust level.)

      The banking computer runs plain old Windows Vista, with tight firewall and web filter settings and no apps installed. Non-privileged banking user only ever loads bookmarks to the banks' websites, and only using HTTPS (no plain HTTP ever). The only other user is Admin, which never browses or runs anything but Windows Update and other local configuration stuff.

      The banking computer has its own private wired LAN to the router which has very tight firewall settings for that interface.

      I also manually inspect the SSL certificates at the start of every session.

      Good luck getting a key logger installed on that machine. Not gonna happen.

  32. Been there, done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked for some time at a subcontractor for a couple of banks, developing software for them. During this time it became obvious that not all banks are as strict with information security as they try to present. For example all our developers had access to "demo data" that was a copy from production with only names and ssns mangled. Software that the subcontractors did were utter crap and banks didn't make any code audits or testing for security. At least I found out what banks not to use, only if the others were any better.

  33. Re:Will someone please stop the anti-jailbreaking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The original poster was basically correct.

    Jailbreak detection in any public App can be subverted - pretty much every MDM who offers an SDK that does jailbreak detection, and pretty much every container vendor, has had their jailbreak detection bypassed in widely available patches.

    The same is the case for rooting of Android devices.

    Mobile Iron, Air-watch, Good, Blackberry, etc and most of the banks who do jailbreak detection & do something pro-active etc have all had their rooting/jailbreak detection repeatedly bypassed in multiple versions.

    The difference is real this :

    jailbreaking on iOS is enabled by bugs/logic errors etc. Apple hasn't had a hostile (no knowledge of the device passcode) jailbreak since the iPhone 4S, and usually patches the other stuff that comes up stuff pretty quickly.
    rooting on Android is almost always by design (very few Android vendors ship locked boot loaders, and even of those that do, many screw it up - e.g. Samsung, to the extend that rooting most Android devices even when locked, often isn't very hard)

    Once you've subverted the underlying OS, Apps don't stand much of a chance. They best you can likely do is identify instances of jailbreaking after it comes out. I'd argue, that your best approach here is merely to log that the device is rooted/jailbroken, and not disable functionality. If you do the former, you at least gather data on the scope of the problem. If you do the latter, people have incentive to patch it, and you are blind to the scale/scope of the issue.

    The only viable defence thats been demonstrated is to have a hardware root of trust and a locked bootloader, and prevent jailbreaking/rooting. Whilst that isn't perfect, its far more reliable than jailbreak detection code in public Apps.

    (internally developed/distributed Apps, on locked down devices - such as Enterprise Apps and supervised mode in iOS, or General Dynamics SE Android CAN and should reasonably do jailbreak/rooting detection as part of a defence in depth strategy, because building the jailbreak/root kit for these devices is much much harder )

  34. Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Bitcoin wallets submitted to Apple for inclusion in the App store make very good use of real security features. These apps are routinely blocked by Apple in the interests of protecting the consumer.

  35. Not just the apps, other apps by forrie · · Score: 1

    I learned this lesson the hard way, back a couple revisions with the iPhone. I downloaded Paypal and logged in once, logged out. The very next day, someone stole a couple hundred $$. Clearly, one of the apps I had on the phone had a clever keylogger or other monitoring scheme that was running. Apple did everything to divest themselves of any liability or interest. So we have to be concerned about other apps' behavior and have "failth" (in the case of Apple) in the ability of organizations to properly audit code before allowed in the App Store. It's an imperfect process. Android's platform being more open, having more malware on record, as I have read.

    I hesitate to use mobile devices for financial operations. Not worth it, not yet, IMHO.

  36. No Shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's writing keylogging malware for CentOS?

    I've been looking for some usable Linux keylogger. I've never been able to find one so I just use a USB keyboard interceptor.

  37. iOS "export restrictions" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps this is related to the fact that Apple force developers submitting apps to go through "export compliance" procedures on behalf of the US government, which apparently doesn't like people to use encryption.
    I'm not aware that this North Korea style insanity is necessary when submitting Android apps in the Play Store - if not, perhaps apps tend to have better encryption support on Android?