Endpoint
1/13/2017
03:45 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

WhatsApp Denies It Has Backdoor For Decrypting Messages

'Backdoor' is really a feature for ensuring messages are not lost in certain situations, company claims.

WhatsApp’s much touted end-to-end encryption capability has become the subject of considerable scrutiny following a report by The Guardian Friday of a ‘backdoor’ in the messaging service that apparently allows for encrypted messages to be intercepted and read.

The Guardian’s report is based on a vulnerability disclosure that Tobias Boelter, a PhD student and computer scientist at the University of California made last April. 

Boelter claimed that he had found a serious weakness in the manner in which the latest version of WhatsApp handles messages that are sent to a recipient who might have swapped or reset their phone, or might simply have been offline when the message was sent.

In such situations Boleter said, WhatsApp holds the message and retransmits it when the recipient comes back online but using a different encryption key than the one that was originally used to encrypt the message.

This approach gives attackers an opportunity to spoof the recipient’s phone on the WhatsApps server, use their own public key, and intercept messages that were intended for the recipient.

The Guardian described Boelter’s discovery as a security backdoor that governments could use to snoop in on the communications of targeted and unsuspecting WhatsApp users.

WhatsApp’s practice of creating new encryption keys for offline users without the knowledge of the sender and then rebroadcasting the message, effectively allows Facebook to intercept and read the messages of users communicating with each other under the assumption that their messages are impenetrable, the paper warned.

In an updated blog post, Boelter Friday expressed uncertainty over whether the issue he discovered is a bug or a backdoor. “In other words: Is this flaw put deliberately into the WhatsApp messenger to allow them or the government to look at targeted messages?” he wrote. “Or is the flaw introduced through a simple programmer error? Or is it even a useful feature?”

According to Boelter, Facebook showed little interest when he first reported his discovery to them last April, but recently claimed that it was not a bug but a feature for ensuring messages got through as intended to offline users.

In an emailed statement to Dark Reading, a Facebook spokesperson described The Guardian’s claims as patently false. “The design decision referenced in the Guardian story prevents millions of messages from being lost,” the spokesperson said. “In many parts of the world, people frequently change devices and SIM cards. In these situations, we want to make sure people's messages are delivered, not lost in transit.”

In addition, WhatsApp has a security notifications option that people can use if they want to be notified when a contact’s security code or public encryption key has changed, the WhatsApp spokesman said.

Jon Geater, chief technology officer of Thales e-Security said the concerns raised by Boelter are not as serious as they might appear.

“Indeed, there is almost no hack here. One might argue that WhatsApp has elected to provide an insecure default configuration,” Geater said in a statement. “Users who care about the authorities intercepting their messages are quite likely to turn on security notifications, and then the problem is almost entirely diminished,” he said.

Dissidents and those using WhatsApp in repressive countries might need to take additional precautions like using an out of band method to ensure that a user has really changed devices, he said.

Chris Perry, COO of Secured Communications says the most troubling aspect about the whole controversy is the lack of full disclosure by Facebook WhatsApp.

“When a company builds into its system a failsafe, such as this feature, there should be full disclosure to their customer base that it exists and how and why it would be activated,” Perry says in comments to Dark Reading.

As it is, only the sender is informed of the encryption key change and that too only if the sender has opted-in to the notification warning, he says. “There should be a warning notification for both sender and recipient that is default activated advising when they are no longer in a secure encrypted environment.”

Related Content:

 

 

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Dark Reading Live EVENTS
INsecurity - For the Defenders of Enterprise Security
A Dark Reading Conference
While red team conferences focus primarily on new vulnerabilities and security researchers, INsecurity puts security execution, protection, and operations center stage. The primary speakers will be CISOs and leaders in security defense; the blue team will be the focus.
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Security Vulnerabilities: The Next Wave
Just when you thought it was safe, researchers have unveiled a new round of IT security flaws. Is your enterprise ready?
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] Assessing Cybersecurity Risk
[Strategic Security Report] Assessing Cybersecurity Risk
As cyber attackers become more sophisticated and enterprise defenses become more complex, many enterprises are faced with a complicated question: what is the risk of an IT security breach? This report delivers insight on how today's enterprises evaluate the risks they face. This report also offers a look at security professionals' concerns about a wide variety of threats, including cloud security, mobile security, and the Internet of Things.
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.