3 ms·
In the context of automation (and click farms) if you are not testing the touch screen obviously, I think better approach can be by man in the middle attack wit
by bluesign 9y ago
In the context of automation (and click farms) if you are not testing the touch screen obviously, I think better approach can be by man in the middle attack with touchscreen and board. Or even emulate screen interface totally. I dont know if has anyone tried that before
- mschuster91 9y agoThe point is, sometimes you do want to test the full environment including the touch screen. For example, you may want to check if the touchscreen locks up after a number of taps, if your OS/input parsing layer can cope with the jitter (a finger, in contrast to MITM-injected events, will almost never hit the same x/y coordinates in a row), or you want to check against real production hardware/software and not against something that's been modified for testing in any way.
- msgilligan 9y agoActually, Samsung and Trustonic have a hardware-protected Trusted User Interface (TUI) that protects against man-in-the-middle attacks [1]. I work at Rivetz and we have developed software that displays in the TUI. Tapster looks like a great solution for automated testing for our environment. [1] https://www.trustonic.com/news/blog/benefits-trusted-user-interface/ https://www.trustonic.com/news/blog/benefits-trusted-user-in...