Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Was that satire?

Security Problems: Android-specific

-- Android 5 was supposed to make encryption mandatory, but it killed performance, so they rolled that back. Android 6 was supposed to do it again, but if your phone isn't fast enough, or you are upgrading, again it isn't mandatory. My Android 6 phone didn't use encryption until I enabled a pin and biometrics.

-- Many of the old versions of Android that will never get patched are still in use, meaning many phones will never be secure. New malware attacks come out regularly because there's such a large market of old Android devices.

-- Only certain things are auto-updated, and holes which require a firmware patch seldom make it to the phone due to forking.

-- Vulnerabilities in chipsets happen every other year and make hundreds of millions of devices vulnerable at once, and require patches to travel the entire supply chain.

.

Security Problems: Both iPhone and Android

-- Every year, more application-specific and privesc vulns are found in core phone software, compromising credentials and providing new opportunities to compound exploits. Browser exploits are notoriously effective.

-- Anyone who wants to use a useful feature of their phone on a carrier-branded device has to become superuser.

-- Ransomware isn't just for desktops anymore! Ransomware exists for both platforms that will lock your device and demand money to unlock it, or it will attempt to destroy data. How does it get in? The app store.

-- Don't want to ransom the user's data? Just silently steal their credentials, take over accounts, then sneak backdoors into the phone.

-- It's been shown that vendors and government organizations have their own service code that can run without user intervention. Also, Cheinah.

-- Call and SMS hijacking using SS7 are carrier-independent, and GSM providers that run vulnerable older encryption protocols allow calls and SMS to be intercepted. The NSA can process A5/1 encrypted GSM connections - thanks for the heads up, Snowden - and in general it's possible to force a weakened or unencrypted network connection. (If you have to use SMS two-factor, you should use a dedicated sim+number that no one knows about, so hopefully your phone is dual-sim to make that easy) And to add to the embarrassment, both iPhone and Android users have suffered DoS attacks just from being sent a single SMS.

-- If you do lose your phone, PINs, swipes, and biometric data can be recovered to unlock the phone. Studies have shown that credentials can be recovered from some phones even after a remote wipe procedure.

.

What moving all your secure tokens to a phone costs you is a genuine sense of security. There's a wild wild west of an app market, phishing's easy, vulns are plentiful, there's tons of varying hardware and software platforms to find holes in, and everyone now thinks they're secure, but nobody actually secures them. If I'm a malware writer I'm definitely going to target phones.

I mean, consider that if they were really bulletproof secure, it wouldn't take years to certify an old, functionally handicapped version of a phone just for POTUS to use it. It's so difficult to make a secured smartphone that Trump was allowed to keep his Samsung Galaxy to tweet with on an unsecured wifi network.




I didn't bother reading the Android list. If you're concerned about Android security, as I am, don't use Android phones.

Your iPhone list has virtually nothing to do with the difference in security between phones and computers. It's just a bunch of things you don't like about phones. What on earth does A5/1 have to do with any of these issues? Cracking A5/1 keys doesn't break your IP sessions.


There are more ways to exploit a phone than a computer, and you can't control how it works. A computer you can pretty much completely control. Moreover, it is easier to surreptitiously own a phone. It's this false sense of security that's dangerous.

If you break the encryption you can intercept 2fa at the least. Any time encryption is broken security assumptions have to be re-evaluated. Your HTTPS session might be secure but that doesn't mean there aren't new holes somewhere else in the stack.


No, this is in fact why everyone says not to use SMS as an authentication factor. When you use TOTP applications like Google Authenticator on your phone, you are no longer relying on the security of the GSM network. I don't think your arguments here are very coherent.


I will try to simplify; it doesn't make any more sense, I give up.

First argument: If your token generator or private keys are on a device connected to a network, they will eventually get compromised, given enough time and resources. The more attack vectors there are, the more likely a compromise is. Phones have more attack vectors than non-phone computers, so they are more likely to get compromised.

Second argument: Of the computing devices available today, phones tend to have at least as bad a security track record as modern non-phone computers. The average user can generally harden a non-phone computer's security* and pick more secure hardware, to improve their security position. But the user cannot generally do the same with a phone.* *

Summary:

Non-phone computers are not only more secure due to having less attack vectors, but their ability to be secured more than a phone makes them even more trustworthy. If you had to pick a place to keep keys, a non-phone device is more secure than a phone.

* by extending existing os security features or using 3rd party software

* * or at least, I'm not aware of comparable methods for phones; there may be some software hardening tools out there for phones, but the hardware is much more limited




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: