Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Application Security

How iOS App Permissions Open Holes for Hackers

The permissions iOS apps request from users can turn the devices into spy tools and provide a toehold into the enterprise network, according to new research.

In many ways, the era of the smartphone is defined by apps, which do everything from sending messages to tracking our exercise. New research shows how Apple iOS apps come with substantial costs to privacy and security via the data-gathering permissions users grant them.

The new research, conducted by Wandera, reviewed permissions requested by 30,000 iOS apps most commonly seen on their network of corporate devices, most of which were free apps. Wandera found there are permissions to three sources of data requested by more than half the apps: Location when the app is in use (51%); camera (55%); and the user's photo library (62%).

Not suprisingly, social networking apps request permission for the most data, with an average of 4.96 data sources. The second "grabbiest" category though, is weather apps, asking for access to 4.73 data sources.

Why do the apps need so much user data? "[App publishers are] trying to build profiles on individual users that could yield more value to them as a development team or as a firm that made an investment in that application," says Wandera vice president Michael Covington.

Some 95% of the apps studied by Wandera were free apps. "There's not a ton of money in the applications themselves," Covington says. And it's notable that, according to the research, paid apps tend to request no device permissions far more often (more than 25% of the time) than free apps (15%). 

While users explicitly grant permission for the apps to gather this data, Covington says that there can be a dramatic difference between the access required to initially set up the app and the access required for the ongoing functioning of the app.

"Many of these apps ask for permissions that ultimately should be used once," he says. "If you think about adding a new credit card to Apple Pay, you take a picture of the credit card and you really don't use the camera again."

Those ongoing permissions represent a security risk for more than just the consumer, according to Mike Fong, CEO and founder of Privoro. For enterprises and government agencies, giving apps access to smartphone sensors is risky.

Fong points out that most government offices dealing with sensitive data have long banned on-premise possession of smartphones. And beyond those specific instances, he says, "If you look at things like location trackers, think about revealing military bases and other types of facilities which shouldn't become known. It has to become a really big part of your thinking on strategic intelligence."

The danger from access to sensors extends beyond free apps. "It's probably one of the least-known things, that certain browsers or Web pages that gives you access to some data, capture measurement from sensors like the location, accelerometer, or magnetometer."

Wakeup Call

Enterprises are becoming more sensitive to the data being gathered from consumers in their roles as employees, Covington says.

"There is actually a movement towards app vetting within the enterprise," he says. That's where the security team vets not just the developer and where the app was downloaded, but also the information the app can collect - and how the publisher treats that information in transit and in back-end storage.

Meantime, some organizations are beginning to change their approach to apps on the devices employees bring. "Once they get this [app-vetting] workflow into place, I think you'll find much tighter controls on the applications that enterprises are allowing to be installed," says Covington.

Fong says the basic smartphone app hygiene that most companies require - don't click on unknown links or attachments, and only download apps from enterprise-approved app stores - is important, but not sufficient.

Defense-in-depth is a network security model that works for devices and their apps, because, as Fong says, total security requires process and awareness as well as security systems dedicated to protecting the enterprise from users' mobile devices.

Related Content:

 

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Attackers' Costs Increasing as Businesses Focus on Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/15/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
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
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-1817
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
MediaWiki before 1.19.4 and 1.20.x before 1.20.3 contains an error in the api.php script which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information.
CVE-2013-2091
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
SQL injection vulnerability in Dolibarr ERP/CRM 3.3.1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the 'pays' parameter in fiche.php.
CVE-2012-1257
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
Pidgin 2.10.0 uses DBUS for certain cleartext communication, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information via a dbus session monitor.
CVE-2013-1816
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
MediaWiki before 1.19.4 and 1.20.x before 1.20.3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) by sending a specially crafted request.
CVE-2011-4455
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
Multiple cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in Tiki 7.2 and earlier allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the path info to (1) tiki-admin_system.php, (2) tiki-pagehistory.php, (3) tiki-removepage.php, or (4) tiki-rename_page.php.