Mobile Malware: A New
Look at Old Threats
Mobile smart devices have fundamentally changed how we work,
live and play, yet the deceits used by cyber criminals to install malware or
applications with unwanted behaviour are the same ones that have been used for
years against PC workstations. For
criminals it seems to hold true that if it isn't broken, don’t fix it.
Despite the exponential rise in the number of mobile smart devices
in use, mobile threats are still defined by the types of socially engineered
attacks that trick the consumer into accepting what the cyber criminal is
selling. According to a report by Blue Coat Systems we
have yet to see the types of malware that fundamentally break the security
model of the phone (leaving aside the NSA).
The most prolific mobile threats are spam, poisoned links on social
networking sites and rogue apps. The social engineering nature of these threats
means that user behaviour is key in both identifying where attacks might occur
(social networking sites, for example) and understanding how attacks may
evolve.
Likewise, the various mobile malware Trojans which are capable
of data theft are able to operate over either the mobile phone network or any
connected Wi-Fi network. When these Trojan applications transmit their
information over mobile phone networks, they present a large security gap that
is difficult to overcome in a corporate environment. The rise of the trend in BYOD widened the security
gap considerably.
User Behaviour is
Driving Mobile Threats
Understanding how users behave on their mobile device has
become critical for understanding where they might be at risk.
When we look at consumer behaviour on PCs versus behaviour
on mobile devices, a few key distinctions quickly become clear. First and
foremost, social networking continues to decrease as an activity that
consumer’s engage in on their desktop or laptop computers. Instead, that
activity has shifted to mobile devices.
Application
Overshare: Potentially Unwanted Applications and the Threat to Privacy
The malware threats targeting mobile devices are still pretty
basic and largely confined to potentially unwanted applications and premium SMS
scams. Potentially unwanted
applications, or PUAs, are simply apps, usually disguised as something
interesting like the hottest mobile game, that engage in tracking user behaviour
or otherwise sharing personal information.
Among the type of data that is tracked are User-Agent strings, which
identify the mobile operating system, its version, the type of installed
browser and version, and (depending on the app) additional information about
the mobile app the user is running. In addition, HTTP traffic generated by the
mobile device’s browser or by mobile advertising services may reveal the mobile
device user’s habits, interests, or searches.
Many apps also include embedded analytic tools used to
identify bugs or simply report on app usage. These tools can disclose the mobile
device’s telephone number, the SIM card’s unique IMEI code, and may reveal the
relationships between the device’s owner and frequent contacts in the address
book.
Analytic tools embedded in apps are also capable, depending
on how the developer has configured them, of revealing virtually all aspects of
the user’s behaviour within the app, from key stroke, to “shared” high scores
with friends over social media or on on-line leader-boards.
The majority of this activity is not transparent to the user
and potentially exposes their data to interception. The lack of clear
requirements for developers to explicit identify what data their apps access,
log, store and share, makes it difficult for users to make risk-based decisions
about how they use their device. Android remains a prime target for malicious
attacks. 98.05% of all malware detected in 2013 targeted this platform,
confirming both the popularity of this mobile OS and the vulnerability of its
architecture.
Malware by OS: Data according to Kaspersky labs |
BYOD and COPE
It is clear from the Blue Coat Systems Malware report that
Corporations have a duty to address these security gaps. It is also clear that to make a BYOD system
compliant with the basics of data security a user’s device should only have
installed certified and tested apps and the corporation should also have
control of the device OS version as well as control over what websites are visited.
A system of wiping a lost device is
also required. It is to be expected that if these steps are
taken then the attraction of BYOD becomes much less.
There has been talk of COPE (corporate owned personally
enabled) as a better alternative to BYOD. In cope systems the corporation buys the
device and “loans” it to the employee who uses it for business as well as
social activity. In theory this is fine but
the problem of security is still not addressed unless the devices are locked
down so tightly that they become ineffective as a social device.
The other issue of course is the problem of Built In Obsolescence
in consumer goods. Even if the BYOD or
COPE devices are still functioning effectively in the corporate world they may
be seen as anachronistic after they are just a year old. There are thousands of corporations still issuing
4 year old BlackBerry’s as company devices because they are still serviceable
and do exactly what they were designed to do.
In some western corporations these devices are considered outdated and a
source of jocularity even though they are far more secure than the latest
consumer devices.
It seems clear that the commoditisation of smart devices has
opened a vast new horizon for criminal activity and the risk this means for
corporate data security needs to be properly risk assessed and appropriately
addressed. If this means a retreat from
BYOD/COPE back to the mundane corporate
locked down smart device then that is the price that corporate users must pay
for security.
The hard facts of mobile security
Mobile phone users are at 3 times more likely to become
victims of phishing attacks
than desktop/laptop users.
15% of users store sensitive financial data on a smartphone
40% of smartphone users enter passwords for websites or
financial apps unto their smartphone once a day
35% of US adults have had a mobile device lost or stolen
66% of users do not
have any mobile security applications to help them protect their data if
someone has access to their device.
69% of users do not back up their device
64% of users do not use a device password
73% of users say they are aware of the security risks of
public wifi but will connect up anyway
In 2012 42% of smart phones were used for banking increasing
to 48% in 2012
1 in 5 times a user is directed to mobile malware it is
through web advertisements
The number of mobile banking Trojans in Kaspersky labs collection |
Sources
No comments:
Post a Comment