Slashdot Mirror


F-Secure: Xiaomi Smartphones Do Secretly Steal Your Data

They may be well reviewed and China's new top selling phone, but reader DavidGilbert99 writes with reason to be cautious about Xiaomi's phones: Finnish security firm F-Secure has seemingly proven that Xiaomi smartphones do in fact upload user data without their permission/knowledge despite the company strongly denying these allegations as late as 30 July. Between commercial malware and government agencies, how do you keep your phone's data relatively private?

28 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "By not having one" comment

  2. well.. by sjwt · · Score: 2

    One could always try one of these...

    Nice little phone

    --
    You have 5 Moderator Points!
    Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
  3. Normal now by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Xiaomi smartphones do in fact upload user data without their permission/knowledge

    Considering that half the apps out there (and I mean benign/legitimate apps!) seem to upload user data without user's knowledge, that is not so shocking. Once you start using your phone, several apps will start siphoning your data.

    Recent "simplification" of Android Google-store permissions means that I don't even know how much of a permission I am giving to a new app.

    1. Re:Normal now by Zumbs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Considering that half the apps out there (and I mean benign/legitimate apps!) seem to upload user data without user's knowledge

      Half? Try 99% of the top 400 apps on both Android and iPhone. I also seem to remember that Apple got into problems because they were uploading user data without permission.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    2. Re:Normal now by Z00L00K · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only way around it is to avoid storing sensitive data on the phone.

      This must also be an important issue for those that uses phones as security tokens, i.e. banks and other important institutions that sends an SMS with credentials to provide verification - it's a very insecure solution since the phone may have an app that forwards the credentials to a third party that can use this to access the system.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Normal now by Zumbs · · Score: 2

      The most commonly uploaded data is location data (followed by identification using IMEI/UDID). In my book that is user data, but you are free to disagree.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    4. Re:Normal now by sribe · · Score: 4, Informative

      I also seem to remember that Apple got into problems because they were uploading user data without permission.

      Nope. They got into trouble because somebody found location data in logs on the phone, and assumed it was being uploaded without actually testing that theory.

    5. Re:Normal now by Shoten · · Score: 2

      The only way around it is to avoid storing sensitive data on the phone.

      This must also be an important issue for those that uses phones as security tokens, i.e. banks and other important institutions that sends an SMS with credentials to provide verification - it's a very insecure solution since the phone may have an app that forwards the credentials to a third party that can use this to access the system.

      Avoid storing sensitive data...like the phone numbers of other people? Like the text messages you send? Just using this phone...to make phone calls, mind you...results in data being uploaded. I don't see how "not having that data" on your phone is really an option. It's a goddamned phone; you're going to have to use it, some day.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  4. Why "relatively" private? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I want it totally private. Has the concept of privacy gotten so totally lost that people seem okay to settle for relative privacy?

    By the way, the best way to keep your data private is to keep it out of your untrusted phone/computer/whatnot, and use bogus data when you need to enter something.

    Exemples: use "Acme inc." as your home phone number's name in your addressbook, and nicknames for your contacts. Don't enter your full address as your home in your satnav's app but someone's address in a street close-by, etc.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Why "relatively" private? by worf_mo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      [...]

      By the way, the best way to keep your data private is to keep it out of your untrusted phone/computer/whatnot, and use bogus data when you need to enter something.

      Exemples: use "Acme inc." as your home phone number's name in your addressbook, and nicknames for your contacts. Don't enter your full address as your home in your satnav's app but someone's address in a street close-by, etc.

      Unfortunately, that won't help. Your phone number(s) and your home address are already on many of your friend's devices under your real name. Apple, Google & Co already have your details, whether you use their service or not. It should be easy for them to filter out bogus data and associate your number with your real name.

  5. Re:Why is /. spreading false rumor ? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh, someone swears it's all a-okay. I'm totally reassured now...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  6. Not actually sending much info, just the IMEI by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So far, all they've found it doing is reporting the IMEI by sending an HTTP GET http://api.account.xiaomi.com/pass/v3/user@id?type=MXPH&externalId=01, The data is transmitted as a cookie of the form deviceId=IMEI . (The API returns a brief reply in JSON.) That tells them the phone has connected to the phone network, and its IP address. That's not particularly interesting information. The carrier knows the IMEI number, too, of course. Perhaps this is to check up on whether carrier-reported sales data matches actual phones coming on the air.

    Carriers, app vendors, Microsoft, Google, and Apple collect far more data than that. There are way too many things phoning home with the user's contact list and other personal info.

    1. Re:Not actually sending much info, just the IMEI by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

      So far, all they've found it doing is reporting the IMEI by sending an HTTP GET http://api.account.xiaomi.com/..., The data is transmitted as a cookie of the form deviceId=IMEI .

      Carriers, app vendors, Microsoft, Google, and Apple collect far more data than that. There are way too many things phoning home with the user's contact list and other personal info.

      This is about the point where the boiling frog's brain begins to turn to mush.

  7. You want to be safe? by Nyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look, these days if you want to be safe, do not use a smartphone. Get a dumb phone, then you don't have to worry about any apps leaking your data.

    Either an app will leak your data, someone will hack your phone, you leave it somewhere or someone steals it. Either way, you are screwed if you use your phone for all sorts of personal/business stuff.

    I guess it's about convenience over personal/financial/business safety.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  8. So a non-denial denial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The allegations are specific, proven and Hugo Barra denies different allegations. A simple PR trick.

    "We saw that on startup, the phone sent the telco name to the server api.account.xiaomi.com. It also sent IMEI and phone number to the same server," F-Secure said.

    So Barra denies it sends PHOTOS and TEXT MESSAGES to China without permission. He does not deny it sends to PHONE NUMBERS and IMEI details without permission.

    This is a classic PR misdirection strategy. Mi Cloud was not turned on when it sent this information, the phone was straight out of the box. So turning off Mi Cloud does not fix this spyware.

    1. Re:So a non-denial denial by benjymouse · · Score: 5, Informative

      Has the F-Secure tried to, as article mentions, disable the Mi Cloud account? Probably not. Because it wouldn't have been in the news then.

      I know this is slashdot, but if you start making claims about what is *not* in the article, could we at least expect you to look for it yourself?

      F-Secure saw the communication even before they created a Mi cloud account.

      The security company said that it took a brand new smartphone from the box with no prior set-up or cloud connect allowed. It then followed the following steps:

      - Inserted SIM card
      - Connected to WiFi
      - Allowed the GPS location service
      - Added a new contact into the phonebook
      - Send and received an SMS and MMS message
      - Made and received a phone call

      "We saw that on startup, the phone sent the telco name to the server api.account.xiaomi.com. It also sent IMEI and phone number to the same server," F-Secure said.

      I do not often say this on ./ but you're an idiot!

      --
      Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    2. Re:So a non-denial denial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mi Cloud is turned off, you never read their claim, they never turned it on, it was a new handset tested.

      The phone sends your phone number to Xiaomi, it sends your IMEI and your network provider. F-Secure tested it by sending an SMS, and the handset sent the number of that SMS too. They added a contact and that phone number of the added contact was sent too.

      All of this with Mi Cloud turned off on a freshly bought Xiaomi handset.

      Your Android handset certainly does not do this, and not without permission and it is *not* acceptable.

  9. Your phone is not a trusted device by bolt_the_dhampir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's as simple as that. It doesn't matter if you turn on mobile data as long as that is under the control of the phone's operating system, and it doesn't matter if you pay attention to your cell phone bill, as traffic to and from specific government servers is likely exempt from the monthly traffic calculations just as the provider's own servers are likely to be. It doesn't matter if you monitor your wireless network, since questionable transmissions are likely to only go through mobile data, as that's harder to monitor.

    While you may be able to test this with your own base station, the phone might also detect that it's not on an official network and therefore not do anything, but that's probably taking it a bit far.

    While you could switch to a "dumb" phone, those are of course also trackable, and your conversations and messages can still be monitored, so I don't see any real gain there.

    Myself, I carry a phone with me all the time, but I simply do not treat it as a secure device. If you want to take private pictures with your girlfriend, for instance, your phone is not the camera you want to use. End of story.

  10. Re:Blackphone by raburton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Get a Blackphone

    ...because its manufacturer assures you it's secure!

  11. Re:Typical by rebelwarlock · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So in your mind, only American companies should be in the news when they do something like this?

  12. China can have it. by DMJC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Frankly at this point, I'd rather the Chinese have my data to be honest. They won't share it with the Australian/Five eyes governments, and since I live ina Five eyes country, that works better for me. It's not like they'll put me in a prison from China for some BS they find on my phone. My own government on the other hand is much more likely to screw up my life using my own private data.

  13. Obligatory by Meneth · · Score: 2

    The data is copied, not "stolen". Get it right!

  14. Blackberry, Microsoft, Apple and Google by jbolden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Between commercial malware and government agencies, how do you keep your phone's data relatively private?

    There are 4 main smartphone brands:

    Apple is in the hardware business. Their goal is to sell you hardware with a basket of software that enhances the experiences and showcases the hardware.
    Blackberry is in the enterprise software business. Their goal is to sell you hardware that ties you to a management system from which they make their margin.
    Microsoft is in the productivity software business. Their goal is to sell you an endpoint that showcases the features of their productivity suites including their server / cloud based collaboration tools.
    Google is in the advertising business. Their goal is to sell you an endpoint that showcases their web services. Those web services are designed to collect information about you to sell to advertisers.

    Of those 4 companies which do you think you are going to have the toughest time with privacy? If you care about privacy and don't have a strong reason to pick Android, don't use Android, it is quite obviously going to have to be the worst of the 4. You are going to have to cut against the grain to be secure and be on a platform designed advertisers. The other 3 while they may have problems are all much much better on privacy. Blackberry's balance feature allows you to create a container which divides your data a secure side and an insecure side. They offer things like secure browsing by default. You want security choose an operating system designed to enhance not reduce security. Apple and Microsoft are sort of midpoints. Apple is very good about now allowing applications to upload data you don't know about sharing between apps is off by default. Microsoft emulated the Apple sandboxing, certification and limited interaction approach we'll see if overtime they maintain it. If you want to use these devices and have secure data something like Good's containers (which do work on Android) provide a pretty excellent way to keep specific data associated with specific applications secure.

    1. Re:Blackberry, Microsoft, Apple and Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google does _not_ sell user information.

      They sell _the use_ of user information.

      It is not the same thing.

      Selling "Joe Blow works at Acme Corp and shops for sex dolls" is selling user information.

      Selling "I will advertize your sex dolls to people who shop for them" is selling the _use_ of the information. Only Google knows you are Joe Blow at Acme with an interest in sex dolls. The advertiser does not; they just get a service that makes use of Google's knowledge.

      Yes, Google knows your stuff. But they don't have to sell your info in order to profit from it.

    2. Re:Blackberry, Microsoft, Apple and Google by m00sh · · Score: 2

      Between commercial malware and government agencies, how do you keep your phone's data relatively private?

      There are 4 main smartphone brands:

      Apple is in the hardware business. Their goal is to sell you hardware with a basket of software that enhances the experiences and showcases the hardware. Blackberry is in the enterprise software business. Their goal is to sell you hardware that ties you to a management system from which they make their margin. Microsoft is in the productivity software business. Their goal is to sell you an endpoint that showcases the features of their productivity suites including their server / cloud based collaboration tools. Google is in the advertising business. Their goal is to sell you an endpoint that showcases their web services. Those web services are designed to collect information about you to sell to advertisers.

      Of those 4 companies which do you think you are going to have the toughest time with privacy? If you care about privacy and don't have a strong reason to pick Android, don't use Android, it is quite obviously going to have to be the worst of the 4. You are going to have to cut against the grain to be secure and be on a platform designed advertisers. The other 3 while they may have problems are all much much better on privacy. Blackberry's balance feature allows you to create a container which divides your data a secure side and an insecure side. They offer things like secure browsing by default. You want security choose an operating system designed to enhance not reduce security. Apple and Microsoft are sort of midpoints. Apple is very good about now allowing applications to upload data you don't know about sharing between apps is off by default. Microsoft emulated the Apple sandboxing, certification and limited interaction approach we'll see if overtime they maintain it. If you want to use these devices and have secure data something like Good's containers (which do work on Android) provide a pretty excellent way to keep specific data associated with specific applications secure.

      Here's another heuristic.

      Apple, Microsoft and Blackberry uses closed software. Google uses open source.

      So, Android is the best choice because you (meaning a team of concerned citizens) can essentially take all the privacy leaking parts out and create a private and secure system. In the others, you are at the mercy of others who likely are to care about your privacy as much as your cat cares about your rants.

  15. Re:Won't help my ass by jareth-0205 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Unfortunately, that won't help. Your phone number(s) and your home address are already on many of your friend's devices under your real name. Apple, Google & Co already have your details [...]

    While it's important to keep that in mind, the "this won't help" mindset is a classical fallacy: someone gotta start, and if (and when) it's widespread enough, it'l help all of us. Like higiene.

    You don't spit on the roads, do you? Or do you shit out your window?

    So if you implement that -- have a talk with your friends about it too.

    Well not really, because *everybody* has to do it or it's useless, and since your phone number could easily be in 100 phonebooks that's alot of poisoning to do. And As soon as people start doing it in numbers you can imagine a malicious Google (or whatever) would implement anti-poisoning analysis.

    I believe the only real solution, which is unpopular on this largely libertarian site, is to have stronger protections in law, making data about you your property and controlled as such, and penalties for misuse the same seriousness as theft. That's a long way from where we are now though.

  16. Location data has legit uses by tepples · · Score: 2

    So should "find restaurants near me" apps instead require users to download the complete list of worldwide restaurants? Because even clicking on a map or entering a postal code is "location data". Another is to satisfy movie studios that refuse to license works for streaming unless the provider can positively match viewers to a country whitelist.

  17. Re:Off-topic rant... by Immerman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In fairness there's not a lot of US or European articles that don't include slants against those governments/corporations as well. The governments and corporations of the world seem to be rapidly sliding toward an invasive authoritarian dystopia. Great for big business and other power-mongers, but not so much for the rest of us. Are you really so surprised we give extra grief to those countries such as Russia and China who wear their fascism openly? We're not ranting against the *citizens* of those countries, we're ranting against their governments and corporations, just as we rant against our own. If you don't like it, go home and fix your country. And while you're at it share your techniques so we can do the same.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.