159

cross-posted from: https://lemmyf.uk/post/5813538

First ever iOS trojan discovered — and it’s stealing Face ID data to break into bank accounts

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 6 points 8 months ago

MFA or not, you can always social engineer people into getting access into their bank account. There's even SS7 attack for SMS based MFA. So, let's just abolish passwords and MFA all together and everyone hold hands to sing Kumbaya and be hippies together.... right? No, of course not. You do not weaken an established system because there's ways for bad actors to act maliciously. Vast majority of Apple users doesn't care for side loading and would benefit from the security that comes with the walled garden, very few Apple users (and the Lemmy user base does not a represent a statistically significantly broad representation of the user base) knows enough to care for otherwise, but are now getting dragged along for the ride.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Thats like blaming a knife for the users inability to understand you have to grip it by the handle.

That vast majority can continue using their phones as if nothing ever happened. Nobody is forcing them and more choice is good.

Even if they are not using the feature they will benefit from competition in the space. That's the only sane way within capitalism. This far outweights the very small perceived risk a very small minority of users may or may not be subjected to the very same social engineering attack thats already being exposed by the article.

Its not us Lemmy or Android users pushing for this and dragging you along, we already have that feature, its fine. Its regulators wanting to mitigate the effects of a monopoly and this is benefical for the industry as a whole.

Again, you even said it yourself, most users can (and will) always keep the feature off anyway. Nobody is forced to use it and Apple will sure make it difficult anyway.

[-] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 5 points 8 months ago

There are plenty of apps people are forced to install; apps used for international airport entries, apps that’s used by everyone professionally, or worse yet, that one state-owned chat app grandma uses back home because everyone else uses it around her. All it take is one of them deciding they don’t want to be part of the strict review process and that their ability to further spy on their users are worth the core technology fee, and now people would be forced to use third party app stores with questionable review process. The “scare screen” before they add the third party App Store? That’s just going to be another thing users blindly click through due to notification fatigue.

At least for the time being, the current proposal put forth, Apple should still theoretically be able to revoke apps from third party app stores, and they still retain entitlement (sandbox/low level hardware access) signing rights. Once those checks and balances are taken away… then all hell breaks loose and those not super tech savvy (read: 99%+) will be hurt the most. At least I am comfortable enough to look out for myself 🤷

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

android can sideload apps since its inception and this was never an issue. i doubt it will be with ios.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 3 points 8 months ago

Because Google already lets apps do anything they want no matter how malicious. There's no reason to leave the Play Store.

Apple has people sneak past their rules on occasion because screening is hard, but they have and enforce rules that protect your privacy that malware companies like Facebook don't want to follow.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Android has a permission system (with flaws) not too dissimilar to iOS.

Both systems had apps sneak past it in clever but very similar ways to bypass them. Both were curbed by screening after being found.

I really doubt Facebook will force anyone to install their app from outside the store. You are talking about something that normies will barely be able to do.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

I'm not talking about permissions.

I'm talking about their store policies. Google is far more permissive about malicious behavior than Apple is. Companies that have no reason to bypass the play store because it already allows them to spy to an obscene degree will bypass the App Store when given the opportunity, because it does not.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I dont think Google is as permissive as you say, but regardless, they won't. Try and get a normie to enable and install a sideloaded app on Android and you will see what I mean.

The amount of social engineering required just makes this point moot. Might as well get them to do the same MDM attack illustrated in this article. Its not any less secure.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

Facebook can and will.

The entire reason they don't on Android is because there's literally no benefit to it.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

They won't because most users won't be able to.

The permission system on both OSes is baked into the OS itself not the store. Theres literally no benefit to it on either platform unless Meta starts distributing actual OS exploits.

This is very unrealistic.

[-] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 1 points 8 months ago

It absolutely has happened on Android. The Russian government has launched their own app store, as an example of a state-owned-and-operated third party app store.

Additionally, once both iOS and Android are opened up, the capability to control the end-to-end distribution on both platforms simultaneously becomes a much larger incentive for major corporations; gone are the days where some users receives some features earlier because the other app store have not pushed the update yet -- they control it end-to-end.

I mean, I should be abundantly clear: simply operating a third party store does not equate to malicious intent. Some would argue the corporation case above could be considered beneficial for users. However, having third party stores with varying degree of security capabilities increases attack vectors for bad actors, and thereby making it more difficult for everyday users to manage -- an additional layer of complexity iOS users have not had to deal with for many years and very very few has signed up for.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Are all russians forced to use it? If so did that come because of sanctions? If thats the case you just highlighted a great reason to open up. If not I don't really see an issue because thats the whole reason behind this change.

Big corpos will never choose to force users to do things the hard way unless they absolutely must. Most normies wouldn't be able to use their product. And most privacy protections are built into the OS, not the store.

And if some gvmnt wants to spy and control its users they will regardless of how restricted the walled garden is, the NSA and similar exemplifies this perfectly.

[-] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 1 points 8 months ago

Let's park the specific geopolitical powers for a moment, because I cannot speak on behalf of countries and their intentions.

People are inherently different, and have different mindsets and believes. You and I clearly don't fully agree on whether or not iOS App Store should be opened up for example; and while our lack of alignments are fairly benign, there will always be entities on different ends of our own individual biased points of views. Some of these are relatively minor (like the App Store), others are far more significant (like privacy concerns). There are plenty of world powers that would prefer to have access to more private information, and they are, as of today, without third party App Stores, having a much harder time doing such on the Apple iOS ecosystem. This is because in order to run anything, you'd have to get through Apple's stringent review process, and while there are plenty of terrible things we'd like to see gone from the App Store, they've got years of experience in heuristic detection, are generally fairly good about detecting malicious apps, and can revoke notarization when something does slip through.

Now, a hypothetical world power with drastic different view than you or I (and we don't even have to agree with each other here) could start their own third party App Store, and bypass a lot of the checks and balances currently in place. "Don't install that app store, and don't install apps from it" is not an answer if they are in a position of power over you for whatever reason. I've called out a couple; maybe you need to pass through their country and their travel authorization at their airport is done via an app distributed only through their own app store; maybe you have family residing in such an area, and their only way to communicate with you is through a chat app through such an app store; etc. etc.

That is the problem this opens up. And while government entities have a lot of surveillance capability, they're not having a lot of success with modern day end-to-end encryption, which is why there's continuous legislative attempts against encryption while hiding behind the guise of child protection / anti-terrorism / national security / etc. etc., and the demand is often to have government known backdoors in the encryption -- I trust you're savvy enough to know how absurd that sounds that we don't need to go into detail here.

Everything that's came to light so far seems to create a net negative experience for vast majority of iOS users -- third party stores that peels away layers of security and losing ability to use PWA are just two casualties we've became aware of so far. The gong show will likely continue and we'll just have to wait to see what else comes to light as it further plays out.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

My point this whole time is that this hypothetical world power doesn't need an open store to make things easier. If they did, they would be doing this to Android already. And no, its not unnecessary because the relevant checks and balances are mostly baked into the OS, not the store. This simply ain't a thing.

Getting users to install spyware by their own volition is much harder than simply cooking up an exploit to spy on users, or spying directly through the ISPs. Or by triangulating your location through cell towers. Or by legislating backdoors.

I specifically mentioned the NSA not to be political but because they are verifiably already doing the things you said can hypotetically be done, but to both OSes, right now, despite the security measures in place, and for many many years now. Police can effortlessly hack any phone through 4g using equipment called stingrays, right from your pocket, look that one up. There was never a need to make iphones more open and fair to the users to make it happen. Beause its already happening regardless.

Apple is probably peddling this security narrative, but its a fallacious argument at best. And it happens every single time we force them to be good against their will.

I clearly hit a brick wall here so imma just head out, have a good day, and relax about it, its gonna be good for everyone if it comes to pass.

this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
159 points (93.9% liked)

Apple

17436 readers
124 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS