requires a victim to first install a malicious app
Let me stop you right there... and leave.
Normally I would agree with this perspective, but in this case the "malicious app" is just a demo. It requires no permissions to do the malicious behavior, which means that the relevant code could be included in any app and wouldn't trigger a user approval, a permissions request or a security alert. This could be hiding in anything that you install.
So it could be hiding in, what would you call them…….malicious apps?
The relevant code isn’t going to be in a non malicious app.
Um, ok, and how would you know the difference?
Because if it’s doing this it’s a malicious app….
Google also said they’ve found zero apps doing this.
Because if it’s doing this it’s a malicious app….
OK, how would you know?
Google also said they’ve found zero apps doing this.
So what? There are millions of apps on the Play store, they aren't all being reviewed with this level of scrutiny. This means basically nothing.
Having cleaned a bunch of old folks phones in the past years this is far more common than we ”advanced” users think. It often starts with clicking an advert or some spam mail or message from (infected) friend, which to them, looks absolutely legit. Then the installed app spams the user with notifications to install more ”PDF readers”, ”phone cleanup apps” and whatnot. In best case these just flood the user with ads but just as easily can do more malicious stuff.
After some schooling (”never click anything that is offered to you” etc.) and putting up defencew like AdGuard (system level) the instances of ”my phone is slow”, ”what does this message mean” etc. have radically decreased. Apple devices have their own issues but this kind of troubles are next to non-existent there.
"Our end-to-end attacks simply measure the rendering time per frame of the graphical operations… to determine whether the pixel was white or non-white.”
This is a prime example of something that is so simple, yet elegant, and brilliant. Fantastically cool and scary.
Reminds me how in the early days the secret keys inside the smartchips in things like bank cards could be extracted by measuring the power consumption when the smartchips were doing things like signing data using those keys.
Would color text on color background foil this? Red text on a green background, etc
Not sure. Google patched it by just limiting the amount of blurs an app could request: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/native/+/20465375a1d0cb71cdb891235a9f8a3fba31dbf6
The new attack, named Pixnapping by the team of academic researchers who devised it, requires a victim to first install a malicious app on an Android phone or tablet. The app, which requires no system permissions, can then effectively read data that any other installed app displays on the screen. Pixnapping has been demonstrated on Google Pixel phones and the Samsung Galaxy S25 phone and likely could be modified to work on other models with additional work. Google released mitigations last month, but the researchers said a modified version of the attack works even when the update is installed.
This is a very big hypothetical.
They'd need to already have access to your account credentials (email, password or at least something that is regarded the same) then have you install this malicious app, then you'd need this app to be open at the same time as your 2FA app
It's possible, yes, it's an awesome find, yes, and this should be patches, yes yes yes, a thousand yes
Having said that, I'm not too worried about the potential impact of this, it'll be fine.
Even if this particular attack is against Android phones, it should be noted that iPhones have their own security issues.
Stay safe out there, regardless of what type of phone you use.
Edit: lol, looks like I ruffled some feathers, with a few people really going the extra mile to take the wrong message from it
As someone already pointed out it's a lost game regardless of platform as long as closed source software is used on any machine anywhere it's fundamentally unsafe. Black market operators like Israel's Pegasus have been selling ios day 0 exploits for years and there are probably hundreds that exist out there for every single platform.
The good part is that these rare exploits will not be used on you because they are too valuable the bad part is that the only way against them is full system transparency which is not happening anytime soon.
Lawl “exploit developed for android phones”
You: UK AKSHULLY IPHONES AREN’T SECURE THOUGH
Alternately: I was mentioning this to pre-empt anyone marching in here and puffing up about iPhone. Or thinking that they don't need to worry about security issues.
Of course you know and understand the intent of my comment. Your bad-faith response fails to impress.
Permissions, when built-in to the operating system from conception, are much more effective than when they’re half-heartedly tacked on decades later, which is why these issues keep coming up on Android but not on iOS
The difference isn't actually in the operating system. iOS is just as vulnerable to such things. The difference is in how the app store is run. Apple locks down there app store so that it's much more difficult to get malicious apps added. Google is extremely less thorough. Which is one of the reason many of us choose Android. When you choose more freedom the price is more vigilance is necessary to secure yourself and your phone.
That’s an insane take. Sure, Google is less thorough on checking the garbage that gets on the Play Store, but if that was a factor, malware that has made it on the Apple app store would have done it too. They have never been able to bypass permissions because they’re built into the OS and security hardware.
Edit: People having such a poor understanding of security and buying Apple’s propaganda, ON LEMMY, is so disappointing
Yes, this is why Androids and iPhone have inherently different security issues.
I was replying to your original comment. Please don’t pretend you haven’t changed it
Duh, they're hackers /s
Dont install random shit and if possible have a phone just for 2fa
It doesn't require any permissions. It could literally be in any app or even a demo
Yes that's why you verify the safety and security of the apps you're installing on your phone and don't just go, "ooo, this looks cool, let's download it and try it out". This is especially true if you are installing FOSS apps.
This is especially true if you are installing apps from the play store.
fixed that small mistake
Never ending side channel attacks. Stallman was right, only 100% FOSS gives you control over your device.
And given that a lot of this stuff is relying on timing the only reliable cure is to make everything slow. But no one wants that. Or maybe getting rid of precise timers in userspace. It would be funny if stopwatch precision was bound to screen refresh rate.
That wouldn't be too bad. There could be a new permission for precise time.
You can implement a counting-thread that's even more precise than the CPU's timer (TSC on x86) platforms. This was shown in attacks on Intel SGX, where the rdtsc instruction to access the time-stamp counter is unavailable.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-60876-1_1
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.08719
If you remove access to the timer, attackers will simply build one.
...and there you go:
https://ccs25files.zoolab.org/main/ccsfb/1REOCPAR/3719027.3765061.pdf
https://misc0110.net/files/exfilstate_ccs25.pdf
From https://www.sigsac.org/ccs/CCS2025/accepted-papers/ (#378)
Literally published less than a day ago:
ExfilState: Automated Discovery of Timer-Free Cache Side Channels on ARM CPUs
At the same conference (CCS) that the paper referred to by the ars technica article was accepted.
Use open source apps and everything to be protected. Gotcha
Gotta wonder why random apps don't need special permissions to run and operate other apps. You can cause plenty of trouble maliciously navigating a browser even if you can't see the screen.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
