December 28th, 2011 by lhaas                              

Test Results for Mobile Device Acquisition Tool: AFLogical 1.4

The NIJ has published the test results for viaForensics’ AFLogical 1.4. Mobile Device Acquisition Tool. The report shows the results from testing the tool against the Smart Phone Tool Test Assertions and Test Plans.

Read the report here.

December 27th, 2011 by lhaas                              

Mobile Banking: Rewards and Risk

The FDIC included a pretty good article on mobile banking risks in their monthly report (and cited viaForensics’ Mobile App Security Study). The article identifies possible risks involved in mobile banking and suggests strategies for mitigating such risks.

A recent study looked at the security of four types of mobile applications – financial services, social networking, productivity, and retail. The study focused on the types of sensitive data that mobile applications store on the device and whether these data were stored securely. Each application was rated “Pass,” “Warn,” or “Fail.” A “Pass” rating means sensitive data are not stored on the device or are encrypted. A “Warning” rating means certain data are stored on the device, but this does not put the user at significant risk of fraud. A “Fail” rating indicates sensitive data, such as account numbers and passwords, are stored on the device in clear text, placing the user at an increased risk of identity theft or other financial fraud.

Although the results show a significant share of all four types of applications failed the test, the financial services industry had the largest percentage of apps that passed the test (see table below). These results suggest that even though the financial services industry has more work to do to ensure mobile applications do not store sensitive information unnecessarily or unencrypted, at least for purposes of this study, this sector outperformed the others.

via Mobile Banking: Rewards and Risk

December 26th, 2011 by lhaas                              

AFoD Blog With Andrew Hoog on Mobile Device Security and Forensics

viaForensics’ CIO Andrew Hoog was honored to be the first vendor interviewed for Eric Huber’s “A Fistful of Dongles” blog covering information security, cyber investigations and digital forensics. The interview covers not only viaForensics’ work in these areas, but also how viaForensics got started and some good advice for those looking to get started in mobile forensics.

Here’s an excerpt from the interview:

AFoD: One of the reasons I wanted to do this interview with you is that you are doing more than just talking about the forensic examination aspect of the mobile device security. For example, the team at viaForensics has spent a considerable amount of time addressing the overall security implications with these devices through avenues such as your appWatchdog work. What do you tell a chief information security officer who asks you about the impact these devices will have on a corporation’s risk profile and how that organization should be addressing those risks?

HOOG: Mobile devices are quickly changing the risk profile for corporations and CIOs/CISOs are justly concerned.  It’s interesting to look at how these changes happened so quickly.  When Apple released the iPhone, they were not targeting corporate enterprises directly; they were focused on the consumer.  And while there is now some attention to needs of the enterprise, Apple (as well as Google) is still largely focused on the consumer.  But this lead to an interesting development: employees — many of them senior executives — began using mobile devices, both personally and for corporate systems, and they were able to do this without getting the approval of IT.  So, the tables have turned and IT departments must accept the reality that these devices are here to stay.

Early on, corporate IT was not aware of the risk to their organizations but this has changed over time.  A growing part of our business is performing testing and analysis for corporations who are trying to mitigate the risks introduced by mobile devices.  And the risks are considerable.  On the obvious side, an enormous amount of corporate data is cached on mobile devices and is outside the control of the IT department.  The data can easily end up on personal computers or even eBay/Craigslist.  Beyond data caching, devices can be used to compromise a company, whether from an insider or an attacker gaining control of a device.

We are often asked what a corporate (or individual) can do to protect themselves from mobile risks and jotted a few suggestions down just after the Epsilon breach.  We’ve posted a number of free (and one paid) resource to answer these questions and I’ve been interviewed extensively on this topic (so perhaps just Google my name). Here are a few examples:

· Tips for both consumers and corporate IT for securing mobile devices (free)

· A series of 10 questions on mobile security (I chose one but you can access all from the free article):

· Our Mobile Security Risk Study, a very detailed report (80+ pages) covering mobile security risks affecting corporations. The report includes detailed analysis of the efficacy of security controls such as passcode protection, and focuses on the security of iOS (iPhone) and Android (paid)

Rather quickly after starting viaForensics, we realized that digital forensics can play a far larger role by expanding beyond a reactive model (investigations and incident response) and into a proactive model.  The proactive implementation of digital forensics is now a primary focus for viaForensics and has led to initiatives such as appWatchdog (free mobile app security testing), appSecure (paid, sophisticated mobile app security testing and certification) and liveForensics (proactive forensic monitoring for key assets).  This is the really exciting stuff.  We have made tremendous strides and impacts in the larger security space by applying the forensic discipline to the many problems the industry is facing.

Read the full interview at A Fistful of Dongles

December 21st, 2011 by teull                              

What is a strong enough passcode?

This article is part of a series where we publish "Common Questions" from our comprehensive Mobile Security Risk Report. The report features over 80 pages of expert risk assessment based on technical research and case experience. It includes both a high-level summary of key issues and in-depth technical analysis citing specific examples of risk areas.

The answers to 10 important questions, from Chapter 4 of the report, will be released as articles on the viaForensics Web site to provide useful intelligence to our clients and interested readers. For the complete report, visitors can purchase the report here, or view the table of contents.

Today’s Question: What is a strong enough passcode?

For security purposes a 6 character alphanumeric passcode using both numbers and letters/special characters has a much greater security benefit compared to a simple numeric passcode.

Specifically, on iOS the use of a longer, complex passcode protects against brute-force breaking of the passcode, recovery of Exchange data, and dumping the keychain. On Android, the use of a complex passcode can prevent any recovery of device data, with the exception of the SD Card, on some devices.

Similar questions:
How long should iPhone passcode be?
Does passcode length affect iPhone security?
What type of passcode to use for Android?
Does a longer passcode provide more security?
PIN vs. passcode for smart phone.


For more questions use the links on the right, or view the report table of contents.

December 20th, 2011 by tcannon                               1 comment

No-permission Android App Gives Remote Shell

I have been working at viaForensics as the Director of R&D for about 5 months now, and in that time I’ve been involved in some exciting research projects. I haven’t had the opportunity to blog on our company site yet so I thought I’d take a little time out and record a video to demonstrate an Android issue that is of interest to many of our clients.

When talking with people and reading posts on the web I’ve often heard people say that the Android permission system protects their device such that apps without certain permissions are therefore safe to install. The permissions system on Android is a fantastic idea and generally well implemented, it gives apps just enough permissions or capabilities to perform the required functions without exposing capabilities that could be used in a dangerous way. It is a step up in protection when compared with a typical desktop system but this increased protection can give rise to a false sense of security.

Putting aside the issue of users ignoring the permissions when installing apps, can we rely solely on permissions to decide if an app is safe? There are multiple controls in Android and its ecosystem that protect a user and their device, but one should not automatically assume that installing an app, even if it requires no permissions, is safe.

To demonstrate this we’ve built an app which requires no permissions and yet is able to give an attacker a remote shell and allow them to execute commands on the device remotely from anywhere in the world. The functionality we are exploiting to do this is not new, it has been quietly pointed out for a number of years, and was explained in depth at Defcon 18 [1]. It is not a zero-day exploit or a root exploit. We are using Android the way it was designed to work, but in a clever way in order to establish a 2-way communication channel. This has been tested on Android versions ranging from 1.5 up to 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich, and it works in a similar way on all platforms.

Please see the video below with accompanying audio for further explanation.

Link to video: Android No-permissions Reverse Shell

I should also mention here a recent paper by Michael Grace, Yajin Zhou, Zhi Wang, and Xuxian Jiang from NCSU who have developed a tool to detect capability leaks in Android devices. Using their tool they found a number of capability leaks, such as being able to send an SMS, in various Android applications usually added by OEMs. Malicious applications can call the vulnerable apps and exploit the lack of protection around permission/capability use and therefore do not need to request permissions themselves. In a similar way we’ve exploited the Android Web Browser, although we are not exploiting a vulnerability due to bad coding, but rather using the functionality it legitimately offers to other applications.

In this demonstration Android’s power and flexibility were perhaps also its downfall. Other smartphone platforms may not offer the controls we are bypassing at all, and the multi-tasking capabilities in Android allowed us to run the attack almost transparently to the user. This power combined with the open nature of Android also facilitates the customisation of the system to meet bespoke security requirements. This is something we have even been involved in ourselves by implementing a proof of concept Loadable Kernel Module to pro-actively monitor and defend a client’s intellectual property as it passed through their devices. It is no surprise that we have seen adoption of Android research projects in the military and government as it can be enhanced and adapted for specific security requirements, perhaps like no other mobile platform before it.

I hope this demo was of interest and that it generates some discussion around the best ways to select and use apps which offer the least risk to your device and data.

Update 20-Dec-2011: As mentioned these issues are not new and have been discussed before. Updated to include a link to one such talk which does a good job of explaining some of the issues (thanks Tim):
[1] Defcon 18 Presentation “These Aren’t The Permissions You’re Looking For” by Tim Wyatt, David Luke Richardson and Anthony Lineberry. PDF Link.

December 19th, 2011 by lhaas                              

Nexus S Ice Cream Sandwich Review

Good news for Nexus S users: Google is rolling out OTA upgrade to Ice Cream Sandwich. Early reviews are favorable.

Installing Ice Cream Sandwich on the Nexus S is like getting a completely new phone. The device is smoother and most responsive, which you notice from the moment you start using it. The old assumption that even a dual core Android phone is not as smooth as a single core iPhone doesn’t apply any more. Apple users will probably still notice some missed frames in animations or small amounts of lag when things are being loaded in the background, but this is no longer a serious usability issue, more a cosmetic one. List and grid scrolling is smooth as are app switching, moving to the home screen, and scrolling across home screens. There is little to complain about in terms of performance. Using the new task switching view, I was surprised to find the number of apps I had running with no performance hit.

via Nexus S Ice Cream Sandwich Review « Colour Me Amused.

December 16th, 2011 by teull                              

If we are planning to deploy or already using iPhones, do we need an MDM system?

This article is part of a series where we publish "Common Questions" from our comprehensive Mobile Security Risk Report. The report features over 80 pages of expert risk assessment based on technical research and case experience. It includes both a high-level summary of key issues and in-depth technical analysis citing specific examples of risk areas.

The answers to 10 important questions, from Chapter 4 of the report, will be released as articles on the viaForensics Web site to provide useful intelligence to our clients and interested readers. For the complete report, visitors can purchase the report here, or view the table of contents.

Today’s Question: If we are planning to deploy or already using iPhones, do we need an MDM system?

The features of MDM systems are currently limited by APIs provided in each platform, and do not yet offer extensive security beyond what can be achieved with Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync controls. The security and reliability of the MDM apps and device controls requires further investigation, as analysis to date has found potential vulnerabilities and relatively simple evasion of controls.

MDMs do offer streamlined over-the-air (OTA) device provisioning and monitoring capabilities, as well as features such as corporate app stores and app deployment. Corporations should evaluate the specific features provided and consider that many may be available without MDM. If deployed, auditing any MDM solution for functionality and security after implementation is recommended.

It is also important to distinguish MDM from secure messaging, which adds an additional layer of security especially on the endpoint. When properly developed and configured, secure messaging can significantly improve the protection of corporate data on the consumer device.


For more questions use the links on the right, or view the report table of contents.

December 15th, 2011 by ahoog                              

New Secure Mobile App Developer Credential Planned by CompTIA and viaForensics

For Immediate Release

New Secure Mobile App Developer Credential Planned by CompTIA and viaForensics
Specialty certification due in first half of 2012, along with suite of mobile app testing services

Chicago and Downers Grove, Ill., December 15, 2011 – A new credential intended for mobile applications developers is being created by CompTIA, the non-profit association for the information technology (IT) industry, and viaForensics, a leading digital forensics and security firm, the two organizations announced today.

“The mobile app development world is a vast arena for innovation, but too often security has been a secondary concern in the rush to bring new apps to the market,” said Todd Thibodeaux, president and chief executive office, CompTIA.

“Because mobile devices typically combine both personal and corporate data, they’re a rich target for cybercriminals and hackers. CompTIA and viaForensics intend to elevate the level of security awareness among mobile app developers.”

The secure mobile application developer credential and corresponding testing services – scheduled for availability in the first half of 2012 – are intended to meet the growing needs of software application vendors in their pursuit of qualified professionals to work in the fast-growing mobile apps market.

Research firm IDC estimates that the number of annual mobile app downloads will grow from 10.7 billion in 2010 to nearly 183 billion by 2015. Other industry observers predict similarly epic numbers of users of these handy, but potentially risky applications.

“Over 45 million smartphones are in use, not only by U.S. consumers, but at companies and government agencies across the nation,” said Andrew Hoog, chief investigative officer, viaForensics. “Vulnerabilities found in these mobile devices place their owners, companies and our country at risk.”

viaForensics and CompTIA intend to offer secure mobile application developer credentials and testing services for both the iOS and Android operating environments. This collaborative effort combines CompTIA’s standing as the leading provider of vendor-neutral skills certifications for IT professionals with ViaForensics’ industry leading appSecure service, appWatchdog and a wealth of mobile security intelligence.

“CompTIA’s global distribution and partnering programs will provide scale and access for the programs, while the depth of viaForensics secured applications expertise will afford user access to industry best services,” said Terry Erdle, executive vice president, skills certification, CompTIA.

Today’s announcement is part of CompTIA’s broader initiative to address issues impacting companies doing business in the mobility marketplace. CompTIA is developing a new mobility curriculum, consisting of educational programs, workshops, how-to guides and other resources, to meet the specific needs of IT channel companies.

In early 2012, CompTIA is scheduled to publish new research on mobility, telecommuting and remote workforce trends.

 

About CompTIA

CompTIA is the voice of the world’s information technology (IT) industry. Its members are the companies at the forefront of innovation; and the professionals responsible for maximizing the benefits organizations receive from their investments in technology. CompTIA is dedicated to advancing industry growth through its educational programs, market research, networking events, professional certifications, and public policy advocacy. For more information, visit www.comptia.org or follow CompTIA on Twitter at http://twitter.com/comptia.

About viaForensics

viaForensics is a leading digital forensics and security firm whose clients include Fortune 500 companies, large financial institutions, law firms, the U.S. Government and domestic and foreign law enforcement agencies. Areas of focus include mobile app security, computer and mobile forensics, enterprise security, and forensics training. viaForensics is the leading expert on Android and iPhone forensics and has developed a suite of unique services to meet today’s mobile and enterprise security needs. For more information, visit http://viaforensics.com/.

 

Contacts:

Steven Ostrowski
Director, Corporate Communications
CompTIA
630-678-8468
smostrowski@comptia.org
Andrew Hoog
Chief Investigative Officer
viaForensics
+1 312-878-1100
pr@viaforensics.com
December 15th, 2011 by teull                              

Is it advisable to use iOS or Android for sensitive data?

This article is part of a series where we publish "Common Questions" from our comprehensive Mobile Security Risk Report. The report features over 80 pages of expert risk assessment based on technical research and case experience. It includes both a high-level summary of key issues and in-depth technical analysis citing specific examples of risk areas.

The answers to 10 important questions, from Chapter 4 of the report, will be released as articles on the viaForensics Web site to provide useful intelligence to our clients and interested readers. For the complete report, visitors can purchase the report here, or view the table of contents.

Today’s Question: Is it advisable to use iOS or Android for sensitive data?

The data sensitivity classification and risk of exposure/loss will vary from corporation to corporation. Due to the techniques available to evade the passcode and recover data on both Android and iOS, we do not recommend storing highly sensitive data on consumer mobile devices.


For more questions use the links on the right, or view the report table of contents.

December 14th, 2011 by teull                              

Which is more secure, iOS or Android?

This article is part of a series where we publish "Common Questions" from our comprehensive Mobile Security Risk Report. The report features over 80 pages of expert risk assessment based on technical research and case experience. It includes both a high-level summary of key issues and in-depth technical analysis citing specific examples of risk areas.

The answers to 10 important questions, from Chapter 4 of the report, will be released as articles on the viaForensics Web site to provide useful intelligence to our clients and interested readers. For the complete report, visitors can purchase the report here, or view the table of contents.

Today’s Question: Which is more secure, iOS or Android?

While the answer to this question just six months ago (summer 2011) would clearly find that iOS is more secure, advancements in Android have removed most of this distinctions. These advancements are only realized on the newer versions of Android and on certain devices. However the same situation exists with iOS devices.

Since the passcode can be circumvented on all current iOS devices but only some Android devices, this may place a slight advantaged to Android. Furthermore, nearly all files encrypted on iOS are recoverable thus bringing further challenges to iOS.

In the next three to six months, we expect a clear answer to this question. While iOS initially provided more focus and features for enterprise security, the gap has been quick closed by Android and at this time, Android is positioned to provide higher security in the near future. If iOS can address the passcode and encryption issues, then the platforms will both likely provide sufficient security.

Similar questions:
iOS vs. Android security
Comparing iOS and Android security
Is iOS more secure than Android?


For more questions use the links on the right, or view the report table of contents.