[Q] fix for the trojan - Fascinate General

is there a security fix for the recent trojan that is floating around for the fascinate?

This might help:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=977154

Mind you, that fixes one hole that was actively being exploited and got found out. There are many more known vulnerabilities in Android: you need look no further than how you got root in the first place (hint: any program can use the same vulnerability to give itself root!).
Also, don't wrongly assume that any 'antivirus' software on the market will protect you- they won't work any better than traditional desktop antivirus (meaning, very poorly).

As long as your downloading random applications off the market, it'll be fine.

Related

Anyone heard of a android virus/trojan yet?

Sometimes I come across an app thats not on the Android market and you have to install it manually. Has anyone come across a virus/trojan on Android yet? Im curious how easy or hard it is to modify a legit applications and put a virus/trojan in it?
Lol have not seen one yet. Android isn't that big yet so doubt hackers would really spend time putting trojans to get stuff like your email password lol.
Take everything you know about microshaft windoze and forget it. The system architecture of android is almost completely invulnerable to viruses/worms/etc.
In a typical unix system, hacks can take one of very few possible approaches;
1) service bug targeting, i.e., if one were to discover a security vulnerability in the Apache HTTP server, one could theoretically compromise it. That particular service I mean.
2) user account targeting, i.e., one could convince a user to run something dangerous, which would infect that specific user's account, of course, this attack would limit itself to damaging that user's personal data and would not be able to take down the whole system unless it also targeted a kernel or X-server exploit.
Note specifically regarding #1, that in a well configured system, that targeting a particular service would be restricted to a specific user account just as in #2 since each service runs as its own username.
3) Targeting KERNEL defects; this is perhaps the most frightening possibility. It is also the least likely since it would also require #1 or #2. Any particular kernel attack, particularly in Linux is also very unlikely to work for long due to the open sourced nature of Linux. There are a LOT more people involved in monitoring the fundamental securities of the Linux kernel than any other OS because of its open nature. It is also a source of PRIDE for kernel HACKERS that they ALSO be responsible for openly providing the SOLUTION to any exploits that they discover. And they usually do this with their REAL NAME since it basically immortalizes them. The end result is that every time a kernel exploit is discovered, it tends to be patched within hours of its first application.
Now of course you want to know how this affects Android, since by all appearances, there is no user-level security. WRONG. The Android security level is actually on par with service level security on unix servers. EVERY SINGLE application installed is granted is own user account, which means that if any particular application is dangerous, its range of damage is restricted to that particular application's private data, as well as any permissions that the application is explicitly granted (i.e. when you install an application, it gives you the required security list). There is also the very slim possibility of a kernel exploit (though this is extremely unlikely), and it could damage the data on the sdcard (since it is an MS-crap filesystem with no security restrictions).
Of course you will note that older versions of the ADP1 system image came with an unregulated 'su' command (which you could also end up with using a "cat sh > su; chmod 4755 su" root approach) which basically can be used by any application to take over the whole system. Make sure that you don't have any such su command on your droid. Either use a password-protected su command (which will cause problems for trusted apps requesting root privileges), or the gui-supported su command. Subsequent ADP1 images came with an su command that was restricted to the debugging terminal user, which is fine.
In other words... you don't have much to worry about. Just don't do anything really stupid, like installing an untrusted application that wants a boat load of privileges that it shouldn't be asking for.
lbcoder said:
EVERY SINGLE application installed is granted is own user account, which means that if any particular application is dangerous, its range of damage is restricted to that particular application's private data, as well as any permissions that the application is explicitly granted (i.e. when you install an application, it gives you the required security list).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Might be worth pointing out that android apps are for the most part interpreted language apps, meaning the onus of security and stability (just from an apk standpoint) falls largely on the vm. All the lower level subsystems are pretty well protected by the Linux kernel, and these have been significantly tried in fire by decades of Linux server deployment.
lbcoder said:
The system architecture of android is almost completely invulnerable to viruses/worms/etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jashsu said:
Might be worth pointing out that android apps are for the most part interpreted language apps, meaning the onus of security and stability (just from an apk standpoint) falls largely on the vm. All the lower level subsystems are pretty well protected by the Linux kernel, and these have been significantly tried in fire by decades of Linux server deployment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the points about the protection offered from the Linux kernel and the VM are valid. Computer secuity is an ongoing battle between the software originators and the hackers trying to get in. I'm not saying it's remotely likely, particularly due to the market share, but rule one in my book is don't taunt the hackers.
lbcoder said:
Take everything you know about microshaft windoze and forget it. The system architecture of android is almost completely invulnerable to viruses/worms/etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until the Android Dev team screw up again and lets any app run in the system process when requested (which was why cupcake was delayed in the US).
thanks for the post.
I was curious if someone could unpack a .apk file and modify a application easily, say have it send personal info to xyz server instead of the server the app was designed for or send it to both servers so the user doesnt think anything is wrong.
Are the files in the .apk editable, like an .exe is compiled for windows and the .exe cannot be edited (since its machine code).
androidmonkey said:
thanks for the post.
I was curious if someone could unpack a .apk file and modify a application easily, say have it send personal info to xyz server instead of the server the app was designed for or send it to both servers so the user doesnt think anything is wrong.
Are the files in the .apk editable, like an .exe is compiled for windows and the .exe cannot be edited (since its machine code).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, apks are basically just zip files with cryptographic signatures. If you get your apks from Market then there is little to no risk of apks being tampered with. If you install your apks from any source other than Market, then you just have to trust the source that the apk hasn't been modified. Obviously if the apk itself doesn't ask for many permissions then it shouldn't be a problem. For example if you download a game apk from a developer's personal webpage and it asks for just permission to keep the screen alive, there's little risk to your data. However if you download an app that has read/write access to your contacts, or has root access, then you better be sure that the site you get it from is trustworthy.
jashsu said:
Yes, apks are basically just zip files with cryptographic signatures. If you get your apks from Market then there is little to no risk of apks being tampered with. If you install your apks from any source other than Market, then you just have to trust the source that the apk hasn't been modified. Obviously if the apk itself doesn't ask for many permissions then it shouldn't be a problem. For example if you download a game apk from a developer's personal webpage and it asks for just permission to keep the screen alive, there's little risk to your data. However if you download an app that has read/write access to your contacts, or has root access, then you better be sure that the site you get it from is trustworthy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So the files in the .apk not executables, rather interpreted with the VM? Im curious if those files can be read and changed. For instance, can someone open the file in a Java SDK and change the code? Or are those files protected so they cant be modified? For instance, could you download soundboard app from the Market, "unzip" the .apk, and put your own sounds in it?
androidmonkey said:
So the files in the .apk not executables, rather interpreted with the VM? Im curious if those files can be read and changed. For instance, can someone open the file in a Java SDK and change the code? Or are those files protected so they cant be modified? For instance, could you download soundboard app from the Market, "unzip" the .apk, and put your own sounds in it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless the classes are specifically performing security/sanity checks, there's nothing keeping you from replacing asset files (pngs, wavs, etc) and then resigning the apk with any key of your choosing. However, altering xmls and classes is more difficult as they are obfuscated/optimized by default.
For apps distributed officially through the Android market, the only way Google can provide assurance for the app producer against tampering is app-protected folder. Of course that assumes that root access is not provided, which is most likely a prerequsite for any phone to be branded "with Google" and have Market access. From the viewpoint of the consumer, apps are guaranteed by Google against tampering only if retrieved through Market. Once the app is on the device, it is protected via Android's use of Linux user access permission model (each app is its own user). The consumer may of course alter the file him/herself, unless it is a protected app, in which case root is required.
sounds buggy. i hope not. this reminds me of when Mozilla firefox became popular i slowly starte dto see code become available to make pop ups n my belloved browser
Virus found on Android phone...
Article 1:
NEWS
An employee at Spanish antivirus firm Panda Security received a new Android-based Vodafone HTC Magic with malware on it, according to researchers at Panda Labs.
"Today one of our colleagues received a brand new Vodafone HTC Magic with Google's Android OS," researcher Pedro Bustamante wrote on the Panda Research Blog on Monday.
"The interesting thing is that when she plugged the phone to her PC via USB, her Panda Cloud Antivirus went off, detecting both an autorun.inf and autorun.exe as malicious," he wrote. "A quick look into the phone quickly revealed it was infected and spreading the infection to any and all PCs that the phone would be plugged into."
Article 2:
Mariposa virus back on Vodafone Android smartphones
HTC Magic According to a Spanish blogger, around 3,000 memory cards supplied by Vodafone Spain were infected with the Mariposa bot client. The mobile network operator has now reportedly confirmed that these included HTC Magic Android-based smartphone models, as well as other devices. A spokesperson for the company has told CNET that it is a "local incident". Vodafone says it has identified customers that could potentially be affected and it will be sending them new memory cards. It has also offered to supply them with tools to restore the integrity of their devices.
Reports of an HTC Magic smartphone carrying the virus were first published less than two weeks ago, however the malware is not able to harm the Android smartphone itself. The bot only attempts to contact a command & control server when connected to a Windows PC. The virus should be detected by most up-to-date anti-virus solutions.
Personal take:
Interesting to note that the virus being carried on an Android phone and was used to infect PC's NOT other Android phones. It came straight from manufacturing with the virus on, so as of yet I still haven't heard of a virus that can infect an android phone.
Further more, I have seen Anti-virus software on the market place AND being offered by Norton. What do they protect against if there are no known virus threats? Do they just draw a nice pretty anti-virus logo on the screen to make you feel comfy? hehehe.
Trojans in the hacked up ROMs people are distributing
androidmonkey said:
Sometimes I come across an app thats not on the Android market and you have to install it manually. Has anyone come across a virus/trojan on Android yet? Im curious how easy or hard it is to modify a legit applications and put a virus/trojan in it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've found a trojan in at least one of the ROMs being distributed on here. Even reported directly from the developer's own file sharing site.
"Stock" ROM http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2066023
Attached is a photo of the file scanned from the linked file sharing site for the KERNEL he wants you to INSTALL!!
Click the link to JB_KERNEL_3.17.841.2_EVITA_Init.d_Support_Installer.zip - 8.54 MB in that thread and see for yourself.
Be careful what you install on your device. ANDR.Trojan.GingerBreak takes full administrative control of your device and downloads more trojans to siphon out your private personal data.

[Q] Security (Trojan/Virus) Android devices

Hello,
Recently is heard that "The Mother Of All Android Malware Has Arrived" (march 1st). Although I love to install all kinds of new roms, i'm aware my knowledge in the smartphone-world is limited to installing roms and following step by step instructions to the letter. Is someone willing to explain, or give some heads-up, if you want to avoid your phone being infected with something like the kind of malware described in the articles you can find recently on the web?
Reading the article you stumble upon things like: root the user’s device via rageagainstthecage or exploid, yank IMEI and IMSI, another APK hidden inside the code, steals nearly everything it can like product ID, model, language, country, and userID, and that it has the ability to download more code.
Yes i understand: don't install apps from suspicious websites or the usenet and read before install. But obviously nowadays you can get infected from downloading a (on first glance) legit app from the market. Maybe there are things you can do to decrease the chance you get infected with something you don't want?
I also read that the firewalls and/or anti-virus programms u can find on the Market, don't anticipate on these kind of threads the way firewalls and anti-virus programms do on my desktop. Is this true?
Simple and obvious as these heads-up may be, someone like me might not be aware of it.
Thanks.

[Virus warning]Don't install Android Market Security app.

Just a quick word of advice for those of you who are feeling a bit icky due to recent viruses and malware in the Android market – don’t download the Android Market Security Tool. The version in the Android market is clean and straight from Google, but you do not need to install this on your own. Google will use this tool automatically whenever they do a security sweep.
There’s another version on alternate app stores with the same name and icon, but these are injected with viruses. Do not download these either, for obvious reasons. Your best bet is to let Google do what they do and if you’re still feeling a bit vulnerable, check out official offerings from Lookout, AVG and more. (Or just do extensive research and check permissions on the applications you do download.) [PC World]
(source Phandroid)
I wonder if this will be highjacked and re-posted by someone again.....

Anyone know the mechanics of the Honeycomb exploit used on the Transformer?

Does anyone know the mechanics of the exploits used on the Transformer? They tend to come as .exe files without source code. If we can figure out what they used to break HC on another device, it'd be our first step for the same on the TPT.
I ask this because the prior exploits not working on HC seems to indicate that many of the normal vectors were patched out of HC.
I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that it uses Asus' backup app.
But it seems like that Lenovo's Mobility Manager has root-privileges to set up the device remotely. I think there could be an exploit for our tablets.
Or somebody finds an exploit inside the Honeycomb source code and provides an universal root mechanism.
Sadly I'm no dev, so chances are high that the text above is just bullsh*t
Hmmm, that's an interesting idea...I haven't paid much attention to the mobility manager. Also, there are a lot of Lenovo tools that would need root(their configuration manager when you activate it)....I wonder if it has any exposed undocumented interfaces...
won't have time for the next few days(holiday hectic period), but I'll do some decompiling on the lenovo apps to see what I can find expose in those goodies. Hopefully, I'll get the accursed Windows OS to recognize debug mode properly(or give up an VM linux).
Yes they use the backup tool.
All the preinstalled apk's reside in /mnt/pia, which itself is on an own partition: /dev/block/mmcblk0p6
realyst2k said:
Hmmm, that's an interesting idea...I haven't paid much attention to the mobility manager. Also, there are a lot of Lenovo tools that would need root(their configuration manager when you activate it)....I wonder if it has any exposed undocumented interfaces...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think the mobility manager has any privileges beyond standard android permissions like android.permission.CHANGE_NETWORK_STATE or android.permission.CHANGE_WIFI_STATE.
There is also the McAfee Enterprise Mobility Management; I don't know exactly what it does but it seems like not much. You can shell over what is presumably a lot of $$$ so McAffee's app gives you a button to show the apps that you have to install yourself
Of course Lenovo saved itself the trouble of providing a backup solution, so there is no backup. In the strange Lenovo parallel universe, this is apparently acceptable for a business device.
Moved to general
I did not move this straight away because i thought it might become a development thread. Its not gone that way.
So because it is a question, i will move it to general.
Take it easy
O_G
Honeycomb exploit u
Yes I know the the Honeycomb exploit used on the Transformer . you contact me from the contact information or visit our website mobiloitte.com.

[Q] is there a patch for this bug 13678484 (fake id)

can anyone make a patch for all variants of hd2 roms from gb up i used the bluebox app to check if my phone was vunerable for this bug 13678484 (fake id) and my daily driver barebone cm7 v2b was, and id say all roms developed for hd2 are vunerable have searched the net for how to patch this vunerability but cant find the info abywhere this is something i think all xda devs for this device will have to sort out as we cannot get help from carriers on this as this is what advice is given "contact your carrier or phone vendor for patch. if anyone has advice on how to sort this out would be very thankful i think xda should run a piece about this vunerability and what steps are being taken by all devs on xda to patch this vunerabilitu for older handsets likemy hd2.
Bluebox Security revealed a significant security flaw that affects all Android devices since version 2.1. Our hyperbolic title mocks the fact that he had little to ignite the Internet powders. If the fault is real, it should take a step back and put the case in context instead of screaming panic for nothing.
A serious flaw that affects a large number of terminals
Very schematically, the fault Fake ID allows malware to authenticate using the signature of a known application to hide its true origin. The firm provides an example of a virus masquerading as an Adobe Systems and Google software which would be able to become a Trojan horse or steal data used by Google Wallet acquiring the necessary permissions without using the user.
The flaw is serious. However, Google has already been made ​​aware, he has already released a patch he sent to his partners, he corrected the flaw in Android 4.4 KitKat, he scanned the Google Play and can say that no application in its store uses this vulnerability. Finally, Verify Apps, which monitors the behavior of applications on an Android device, is also fixed and can detect an application attempting to exploit Fake ID.
A patch already in place and a flaw in a very limited scope that still show that Google still has work to do in terms of security
In short, it is true that it is possible to be a victim of this fault, but it requires a terminal that has not been updated, download an application containing malware does not come from Google and Play Verify Apps have disabled or have an Android version of which is free. Suffice to say that the cases in question are very limited.
This flaw shows that Google still has work to do in terms of its security strategy. Last month, we décriions lax features the Play Store. Today, we are dealing with a flaw of a limited scope, but was discovered by analyzing the shortcomings of the source code of the operating system.
This flaw shows that Google still has work to do in terms of its security strategy. Last month, we décriions lax features the Play Store. Today, we are dealing with a flaw of a limited scope, but was discovered by analyzing the shortcomings of the source code of the operating system.[/QUOTE]
while the info you have given is fine and i thank you for it, but there are other app stores people use beside google play store and reading up on this bug it is still possible their phones could become compromised downloading apps from them?
A Big Big Thank You
Just an update: opssemnik backported the fake id xposed module and it works perfectly with gb roms a big big thank you to him. he also supplied a link in the comments on http://www.xda-developers.com/android/fight-fake-id-vulnerability-xposed/ So once again a big thank you to opssemnik

Categories

Resources