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.

Comments
New Attack Method Can Hit 95% Of iOS Devices
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
SenseCyBlog
SenseCyBlog,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/26/2014 | 3:39:02 AM
An Increasing Tendency Toward Smartphone-Based Attacks
We have recently seen the development and publishing of hack applications for smartphones on underground forums. Most tools are only available for Android smartphones, and many require root permissions. The most popular tool for cookie theft is DroidSheep. For details visit our blog / follow our twitter account.
Marilyn Cohodas
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
11/12/2014 | 8:13:45 AM
Re: Doesn't make much sense
I don't think you are being cynical at all, @aws0513. Vendors who aren't responsive to issues about the security of their products don't deserve to be in business..
aws0513
aws0513,
User Rank: Ninja
11/11/2014 | 10:37:51 AM
Re: Doesn't make much sense
My cynicism, in all cases, is on the vendor side of the equation.
In my opinion, all product vendors must be intentionally responsive to any legitimate claims of security vulnerabilities of any kind that are relevant to their products.
AnonymousMan
AnonymousMan,
User Rank: Moderator
11/11/2014 | 8:49:40 AM
Re: Doesn't make much sense
I guess I'm more cynical than you, or at least in a different way.  I believe the details are left out because they make the attack less practical and relevant to the vast majority of iOS users.  Just like WireLurker.
aws0513
aws0513,
User Rank: Ninja
11/11/2014 | 8:40:50 AM
Re: Doesn't make much sense
I think the details are left out intentionally in order to prevent copy-cat activites.
However, what I find more disturbing is that Apple has yet (as of this posting) to release any official statement specific to the threat.  Part of me wants to believe that Apple is investigating the claim in detail.
AnonymousMan
AnonymousMan,
User Rank: Moderator
11/10/2014 | 6:03:37 PM
Doesn't make much sense
how does one pull down apps from 3rd parties on an iPhone that is not jailbroken?  I'm confused about how this attack would work in reality, and it seems to me the FireEye is leaving out some important details.  
aws0513
aws0513,
User Rank: Ninja
11/10/2014 | 3:26:54 PM
Re: Protection is vital
Other than the three recommendations noted in the last paragraph, not much more can be done.
The first point in the recommendations crucial.  As long as users are not pulling down apps from 3rd party sources, the risk is likely mitigated.  For many organizations, it looks like there should be little "pants on fire" reaction as long as they have a good handle on how their users use the iOS devices that they manage.

To me, the bigger concern would be with end users and organizations that are not aware of this attack.  This concern is especially enhanced for organizations that have embraced BYOD for iOS devices on a broad scale.
SecOpsSpecialist
SecOpsSpecialist,
User Rank: Moderator
11/10/2014 | 2:35:37 PM
Protection is vital
So I'm going to ask the million dollar question that is probably swimming through everyone's mind as they read this: How do we protect against it?

Obviously in a non-commercial environment, it is easier because we as consumers can easily put protection on our phones, laptops etc to prevent this kind of thing. But, for the commercial environment, how would a business go about protecting its end users and so on?


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Incorporating a Prevention Mindset into Threat Detection and Response
Threat detection and response systems, by definition, are reactive because they have to wait for damage to be done before finding the attack. With a prevention-mindset, security teams can proactively anticipate the attacker's next move, rather than reacting to specific threats or trying to detect the latest techniques in real-time. The report covers areas enterprises should focus on: What positive response looks like. Improving security hygiene. Combining preventive actions with red team efforts.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-29237
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-24
Opencast is a free and open source solution for automated video capture and distribution at scale. Prior to Opencast 10.14 and 11.7, users could pass along URLs for files belonging to organizations other than the user's own, which Opencast would then import into the current organization, bypassing o...
CVE-2022-29242
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-24
GOST engine is a reference implementation of the Russian GOST crypto algorithms for OpenSSL. TLS clients using GOST engine when ciphersuite `TLS_GOSTR341112_256_WITH_KUZNYECHIK_CTR_OMAC` is agreed and the server uses 512 bit GOST secret keys are vulnerable to buffer overflow. GOST engine version 3.0...
CVE-2022-29246
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-24
Azure RTOS USBX is a USB host, device, and on-the-go (OTG) embedded stack. Prior to version 6.1.11, he USBX DFU UPLOAD functionality may be utilized to introduce a buffer overflow resulting in overwrite of memory contents. In particular cases this may allow an attacker to bypass security features or...
CVE-2022-29567
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-24
The default configuration of a TreeGrid component uses Object::toString as a key on the client-side and server communication in Vaadin 14.8.5 through 14.8.9, 22.0.6 through 22.0.14, 23.0.0.beta2 through 23.0.8 and 23.1.0.alpha1 through 23.1.0.alpha4, resulting in potential information disclosure of ...
CVE-2022-30457
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-24
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.