Vulnerabilities / Threats
11/18/2011
12:40 PM
Grant Moerschel
Grant Moerschel
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

App Freedom Vs. Corporate Security

IT has to walk a fine line when securing user-owned mobile devices.

You can't prevent employees from snapping up iPads and Droid phones, even if you wanted to. Sixty-five percent of respondents to our InformationWeek 2011 Mobile Device Management and Security Survey predict that the number of employee-owned devices accessing company data will increase. What you can do is use your leverage when they want to connect to business systems by asking them to run mobile device management (MDM) software, which can enforce corporate policies and provide features such as device tracking and remote wiping.

Even though it's a fair trade, IT must still tread carefully, because the enterprise is permitting access by a device it doesn't own. A key challenge is to craft policies that provide adequate security assurance while at the same time respecting the owner's personal application and usage choices. After all, users who shell out hundreds of dollars for slick new tablets are going to install whatever applications they want.

The tension between ownership and protection often boils over when IT tries to push policies that whitelist or blacklist apps in response to attackers unleashing malicious software that targets mobile platforms.

Dangerous Markets

This problem is particularly acute for Android, which has an enormous user base and a flexible app market. Tim Wyatt, principal security engineer at Lookout Mobile Security, says Android's open application distribution model allows apps to be pulled from multiple markets--including repackaged versions of legitimate apps. Malware is also on the Android Market itself. For example, according to Lookout's research, when DroidDreamLight emerged as a threat, it was found to be repackaged in 20 utility, nine porn, and five game apps in the Android Market. To make matters worse, the Android model relies on a user's ability to evaluate the permissions an app is requesting at install time.

Apple imposes stricter control over its own app market, but it's not a foolproof system. For instance, security researcher Charlie Miller developed a proof-of-concept malware app, called InstaStock, that made it into Apple's App Store--at least for a limited time.

So what's an IT policymaker to do? Risk-averse organizations will likely insist on tight policies that include app whitelisting and accept that they'll get pushback from users. Those with more liberal policies or that offer personal-device access to only nonsensitive data may elect to sidestep the issue, for now. Our advice: No matter your policy, use an app malware detection system, available from vendors such as McAfee, Symantec, and smaller players such as Lookout, that can be pushed as a mandatory installation via an MDM platform.

As with conventional antivirus packages for PCs, vendors for mobile platform AV must be able to demonstrate accurate detection and fast updates. If something is discovered, anti-malware systems should warn IT. Most MDM systems will allow you to quarantine an infected device until it's remediated.

Grant Moerschel is co-founder of WaveGard, a consulting firm. Write to us at iwletters@techweb.com.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading Must Reads - September 25, 2014
Dark Reading's new Must Reads is a compendium of our best recent coverage of identity and access management. Learn about access control in the age of HTML5, how to improve authentication, why Active Directory is dead, and more.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-6278
Published: 2014-09-30
GNU Bash through 4.3 bash43-026 does not properly parse function definitions in the values of environment variables, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted environment, as demonstrated by vectors involving the ForceCommand feature in OpenSSH sshd, the mod_cgi and m...

CVE-2014-6805
Published: 2014-09-30
The weibo (aka magic.weibo) application 1.2 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

CVE-2014-6806
Published: 2014-09-30
The Thanodi - Setswana Translator (aka com.thanodi.thanodi) application 1.0.0 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

CVE-2014-6807
Published: 2014-09-30
The OLA School (aka com.conduit.app_00f9890a4f0145f2aae9d714e20b273a.app) application 1.2.7.132 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

CVE-2014-6808
Published: 2014-09-30
The Active 24 (aka com.zentity.app.active24) application 1.0.1 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In our next Dark Reading Radio broadcast, we’ll take a close look at some of the latest research and practices in application security.