Database Users

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.

Forward-Locked Apps?

I have a question that is purely out of curiosity. I'm not a developer, nor do I have any desire to become one... at this time.
In the process of answering questions for my father about his new Android phone, I came across the Android Developers website. Being the infinity curious person that I am, I started to browse through it and came across something that I was particularly curious about, the "Forward-Locked Application" market filter. It states that an application in the market can be set to not be visible to developer devices and unreleased devices. What I'm curious about is why would a developer not want their app to not be visible to said devices? Wouldn't it be to their advantage to allow their app to be visible, installed, and possibly tested if the owner of the developer phone or new unreleased phone so chose to do, after all, this is potentially new hardware that the app developer may not have support for in their app. Now not being a developer myself, I'm sure there are valid reasons for the filter and I am just curious as to what they may be.

Because you haven't tested your app on a new OS build, and want ensure compatibility before offering it for sale. Other reason is that the new OS build either obsoletes, duplicates, or just plain breaks your app. An example would be the updates to the calendar API's in Android 2.2. Every calendar widget in the market that tied into the built-in calendar app ceased to function because the way it interacted with outside apps had changed.

So the lock is not in reference to developer or unreleased hardware, it pertains to developer or unreleased software or OS?

They would check build/version number in the build.prop or whatever they use... It's just like how FroYo builds couldn't see protected apps while it was in pre-release.

garfnodie said:
So the lock is not in reference to developer or unreleased hardware, it pertains to developer or unreleased software or OS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes this is correct. The developer phones have different software that allow native root access and this would be defined in the build.prop . That would also allow people to rip applications and pirate them.
That switch is mainly a quality assurance/anti-piracy measure.

ATnTdude said:
Because you haven't tested your app on a new OS build, and want ensure compatibility before offering it for sale. Other reason is that the new OS build either obsoletes, duplicates, or just plain breaks your app. An example would be the updates to the calendar API's in Android 2.2. Every calendar widget in the market that tied into the built-in calendar app ceased to function because the way it interacted with outside apps had changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, those apps that broke, broke because they were using private APIs. As explained, if you stick to public APIs your app should not break when updating OS iterations because ALL APIs are frozen as soon as a release is cut.

Here's another question then, are app's allowed to do automatic bug reporting back to a developer with out the user consent, or even with the users consent. It seems to me that say Google is testing Android 3.0, and one of their in house testers decides to install your app, but your app does not support 3.0 for whatever reason, if there is automatic bug reporting, you could be made aware of a potential incompatibility with a new API and have time to fix it long before the new OS is ever released. This all could never happen though if you have the market filter set.

garfnodie said:
Here's another question then, are app's allowed to do automatic bug reporting back to a developer with out the user consent, or even with the users consent. It seems to me that say Google is testing Android 3.0, and one of their in house testers decides to install your app, but your app does not support 3.0 for whatever reason, if there is automatic bug reporting, you could be made aware of a potential incompatibility with a new API and have time to fix it long before the new OS is ever released. This all could never happen though if you have the market filter set.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bug reporting is going to be a new feature of 3.0. I dont think many if any apps have their own built in bug reporting. Also it really is on the developers side if their app doesnt work with new OS revisions. They should program their apps in such a way that they wont have to make drastic changes for updates. Google also give plenty of time for developers to make fixes before the first iterations of the new update goes out (almost 1 month in the case of froyo)
however some developers just dont care (e.g Co-Pilot)

[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.....

Security breach found on htc devices

The Vulnerability
In recent updates to some of its devices, HTC introduces a suite of logging tools that collected information. Lots of information. LOTS. Whatever the reason was, whether for better understanding problems on users' devices, easier remote analysis, corporate evilness - it doesn't matter. If you, as a company, plant these information collectors on a device, you better be DAMN sure the information they collect is secured and only available to privileged services or the user, after opting in.
That is not the case. What Trevor found is only the tip of the iceberg - we are all still digging deeper - but currently any app on affected devices that requests a single android.permission.INTERNET (which is normal for any app that connects to the web or shows ads) can get its hands on:
the list of user accounts, including email addresses and sync status for each
last known network and GPS locations and a limited previous history of locations
phone numbers from the phone log
SMS data, including phone numbers and encoded text (not sure yet if it's possible to decode it, but very likely)
system logs (both kernel/dmesg and app/logcat), which includes everything your running apps do and is likely to include email addresses, phone numbers, and other private info
Normally, applications get access to only what is allowed by the permissions they request, so when you install a simple, innocent-looking new game from the Market that only asks for the INTERNET permission (to submit scores online, for example), you don't expect it to read your phone log or list of emails.
But that's not all. After looking at the huge amount of data (the log file was 3.5MB on my EVO 3D) that is vulnerable to apps exploiting this vulnerability all day, I found the following is also exposed (granted, some of which may be already available to any app via the Android APIs):
active notifications in the notification bar, including notification text
build number, bootloader version, radio version, kernel version
network info, including IP addresses
full memory info
CPU info
file system info and free space on each partition
running processes
current snapshot/stacktrace of not only every running process but every running thread
list of installed apps, including permissions used, user ids, versions, and more
system properties/variables
currently active broadcast listeners and history of past broadcasts received
currently active content providers
battery info and status, including charging/wake lock history
and more
Let me put it another way. By using only the INTERNET permission, any app can also gain at least the following:
ACCESS_COARSE_LOCATION Allows an application to access coarse (e.g., Cell-ID, WiFi) location
ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION Allows an application to access fine (e.g., GPS) location
ACCESS_LOCATION_EXTRA_COMMANDS Allows an application to access extra location provider commands
ACCESS_WIFI_STATE Allows applications to access information about Wi-Fi networks
BATTERY_STATS Allows an application to collect battery statistics
DUMP Allows an application to retrieve state dump information from system services.
GET_ACCOUNTS Allows access to the list of accounts in the Accounts Service
GET_PACKAGE_SIZE Allows an application to find out the space used by any package.
GET_TASKS Allows an application to get information about the currently or recently running tasks: a thumbnail representation of the tasks, what activities are running in it, etc.
READ_LOGS Allows an application to read the low-level system log files.
READ_SYNC_SETTINGS Allows applications to read the sync settings
READ_SYNC_STATS Allows applications to read the sync stats
Theoretically, it may be possible to clone a device using only a small subset of the information leaked here.
I'd like to reiterate that the only reason the data is leaking left and right is because HTC set their snooping environment up this way. It's like leaving your keys under the mat and expecting nobody who finds them to unlock the door. For a more technical explanation, see the section below.
Additionally, and the implications of this could end up being insignificant, yet still very suspicious, HTC also decided to add an app called androidvncserver.apk to their Android OS installations. If you're not familiar with the definition of VNC, it is basically a remote access server. On the EVO 3D, it was present from the start and updated in the latest OTA. The app doesn't get started by default, but who knows what and who can trigger it and potentially get access to your phone remotely? I'm sure we'll know soon enough - HTC, care to tell us what it's doing here?
Technical Details
In addition to Carrier IQ (CIQ) that was planted by HTC/Sprint and prompted all kinds of questions a while ago, HTC also included another app called HtcLoggers.apk. This app is capable of collecting all kinds of data, as I mentioned above, and then... provide it to anyone who asks for it by opening a local port. Yup, not just HTC, but anyone who connects to it, which happens to be any app with the INTERNET permission. Ironically, because a given app has the INTERNET permission, it can also send all the data off to a remote server, killing 2 birds with one stone permission.
In fact, HtcLogger has a whole interface which accepts a variety of commands (such as the handy :help: that shows all available commands). Oh yeah - and no login/password are required to access said interface.
Furthermore, it's worth noting that HtcLogger tries to use root to dump even more data, such as WiMax state, and may attempt to run something called htcserviced - at least this code is present in the source:
/system/xbin/su 0 /data/data/com.htc.loggers/bin/htcserviced
HtcLoggers is only one of the services that is collecting data, and we haven't even gotten to the bottom of what else it can do, let alone what the other services are capable of doing. But hey - I think you'll agree that this is already more than enough.
Patching The Vulnerability
... is not possible without either root or an update from HTC. If you do root, we recommend immediate removal of Htcloggers (you can find it at /system/app/HtcLoggers.apk).
Stay safe and don't download suspicious apps. Of course, even quality-looking apps can silently capture and send off this data, but the chance of that is lower.
Affected Phones
Note: Only stock Sense firmware is affected - if you're running an AOSP-based ROM like CyanogenMod, you are safe.
EVO 4G
EVO 3D
Thunderbolt
EVO Shift 4G? (thanks, pm)
MyTouch 4G Slide? (thanks, Michael)
the upcoming Vigor? (thanks, bjn714)
some Sensations? (thanks, Nick)
View 4G? (thanks, Pat)
the upcoming Kingdom? (thanks, Pat)
most likely others - we haven't verified them yet, but you can help us by downloading the proof of concept above and running the APK
HTC's Response
After finding the vulnerability, Trevor contacted HTC on September 24th and received no real response for five business days, after which he released this information to the public (as per RF full disclosure Policy). In my experience, lighting fire under someone's ass in public makes things move a whole lot faster, which is why responsible disclosure is a norm in the security industry. (This is where we come in.)
As far as we know, HTC is now looking into the issue, but no statement has been issued yet.
HTC, you got yourself into this mess, and it's now up to you to climb out of the hole as fast as possible, in your own interest.
The ball is in your court.
Credit
ANDROID POLICE
Huge thank you to Trevor Eckhart who found the vulnerability and Justin Case for working with us today digging deeper.

Hi there, I need help, someone is consistently hacking into my phone, htc evo 4g, they are penetration testers and pc savvy, currently I cant login to the phn for trying to do a factory reset. They kept intercepting me and now my password does not work. Who knows maybe they changed it on their side. I wrote down everything I saw. I was seeing all these process running for the same app. in my applications. My phone was getting hot, freezes but its people that live in my apt complex and at work. can you help?

zzm5 said:
Hi there, I need help, someone is consistently hacking into my phone, htc evo 4g, they are penetration testers and pc savvy, currently I cant login to the phn for trying to do a factory reset. They kept intercepting me and now my password does not work. Who knows maybe they changed it on their side. I wrote down everything I saw. I was seeing all these process running for the same app. in my applications. My phone was getting hot, freezes but its people that live in my apt complex and at work. can you help?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is your device rooted?

I used root explorer and removed the HtcLoggers.apk and other than the forced close loop that removing it caused (requiring me to remove the battery), after rebooting all seems to be working fine.
EDIT: Actually I didn't just delete HtcLoggers.apk but moved it to a safe location on the SD Card in case there was a problem and it needed to be restored. I highly suggest you do this instead of just deleting it, or better yet, a nandroid backup.

there are a few good ROMS out there that have the ICQ loggers removed already.

Do we really need three threads on the front page about the same thing?

Epic 4G not enforcing app permissions?

Just came across this on Engadget Mobile, anyone know a way to fix it?
Eight Android phones, including the Motorola Droid X and Samsung Epic 4G, were found to house major permission flaws according to a research team at North Carolina State University. Their study revealed untrusted applications could send SMS messages, record conversations and execute other potentially malicious actions without user consent. Eleven of the thirteen areas analyzed (includes geo-location and access to address books) showed privileges were exposed by pre-loaded applications. Interestingly, Nexus devices were less vulnerable, suggesting that the other phone manufacturers may have failed to properly implement Android's security permissions model. Google and Motorola confirm the present flaws while HTC and Samsung remain silent. Exerting caution when installing applications should keep users on their toes until fixes arrive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/02/some-android-phones-fail-to-enforce-permissions-exposed-to-unau/

I was just about to post this. I havent had any problems like that tho, i wonder wat apps are the ones taking advantage.