Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Google Handhelds Security IT

Researcher To Release Web-Based Android Attack 136

CWmike writes "A computer security researcher says he plans to release code Thursday that could be used to attack some versions of Google's Android phones over the Internet. The attack targets the browser in older, Android 2.1-and-earlier versions of the phones. It is being disclosed Thursday at the HouSecCon conference by M.J. Keith, a security researcher with Alert Logic. Keith says he has written code that allows him to run a simple command line shell in Android (video) when the victim visits a website that contains his attack code. The bug used in Keith's attack lies in the WebKit browser engine used by Android. Google said it knows about the vulnerability. 'We're aware of an issue in WebKit that could potentially impact only old versions of the Android browser,' Google spokesman Jay Nancarrow confirmed in an e-mail. 'The issue does not affect Android 2.2 or later versions.' Version 2.2 runs on 36.2 percent of Android phones, Google says"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Researcher To Release Web-Based Android Attack

Comments Filter:
  • by cheater512 ( 783349 ) <nick@nickstallman.net> on Thursday November 04, 2010 @10:53PM (#34132530) Homepage

    N900 is pretty good. 3 core updates (I think) so far plus a upgrade to Meego when it is finished.
    Also half the price of similar phones.

  • by jhigh ( 657789 ) on Thursday November 04, 2010 @11:25PM (#34132668)

    "A computer security researcher says he plans to release code Thursday that could be used to attack some versions of Google's Android phones over the Internet. The attack targets the browser in older, Android 2.1-and-earlier versions of the phones.

    How can he be permitted to release something, which when used as intended, does harm to others? This is insane...and he does it "in the light of day!"

    Other tools that folks have used to harm others have dual use...but for this code, I do not see any use save for harm. What am I missing?

    He is publishing code that can be used to exploit a vulnerability. This could be used for malicious purposes, or it could be used for security demonstrations, as an example to be taught to infosec students or any of a ton of other academic and/or security-related purposes. He is not actually using the code to do anything malicious. Please tell me exactly what statute he is in violation of? Are you saying that no one should ever publish code for exploits?

  • by bhagwad ( 1426855 ) on Thursday November 04, 2010 @11:41PM (#34132732) Homepage
    Won't it be nice if someone sues a carrier for not providing updates because of which their phone was hacked and valuable data lost? It'll be like a wet dream come true for me :D
  • by the_humeister ( 922869 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @12:49AM (#34133000)

    Even if you do have an AT&T Android phone, which I do, it is still possible to use apk (a tool found in the Android SDK) to transfer programs to the phone. It's pretty simple to use too. Of course, to get rid of the crapware AT&T installs, rooting is still required.

  • by getto man d ( 619850 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @12:58AM (#34133038)
    Google and the hardware manufacturers are both to blame; Google (for the reasons you stated) and the manufacturers for adding in their 'own' elements departing steadily from vanilla android.

    I've seen many comments on /. how Android is amazing, especially since it is fragmented (linux and windows arguments) but this is the worst possible case for the mobile platform, IMHO. Unless of course you don't mind upgrading your phone every 'x' amount of years. Some of us don't have the spare $$ and truly want a device that is current without modding.
  • by Woek ( 161635 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @07:08AM (#34134148)

    One of the selling points of the Google Nexus One phone was direct support from Google, and therefore the quickest updates. The phone is quite a bit more expensive than the HTC desire/incredible, which is practically the same phone.

  • by TimTucker ( 982832 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:42AM (#34134532) Homepage
    This was also a selling point of the ADP1 (basically the developer version of the G1). Some of us did shell out early for an unsubsidized Android phone with the expectation that it would be directly supported by Google.

Serving coffee on aircraft causes turbulence.

Working...