6 ms·

serious question: all of the reporting around the FBI and its intentions focuses on iPhones. There is not much reporting about android phones, though. Is this b

serious question: all of the reporting around the FBI and its intentions focuses on iPhones. There is not much reporting about android phones, though. Is this because they are generally not as airtight in design as iphones are? Is it because iPhones are more likely to be up-to-date in terms of patches and security updates, and hence android is easier to crack? Is it because Samsung, Google, etc, have been more willing to play ball, so the FBI has not had to wage a public battle? the article mentions it but not much detail: > Android devices, on the other hand, end up having large variations in the security of devices from different manufacturers, which may have their own vulnerabilities or may have difficulty distributing security and Android operating system updates to phones quickly.

filoleg 7y ago
>Is this because they are generally not as airtight in design as iphones are? >Is it because iPhones are more likely to be up-to-date in terms of patches and security updates, and hence android is easier to crack? I don't want to make premature judgements without factual supporting evidence, but my personal anecdotal evidence suggests that these two guesses might be the correct ones. Me and some of my friends got S8+ a few years ago, back when it was Samsung's flagship smartphone. Among other things, we were all appalled by the update cadence. We were getting security updates, not even talking about major OS updates, about 3-6 months after Pixel phones were getting theirs. I cannot even imagine the horror show that non-flagship Android device owners have to go through in terms of updates.
- DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
  the problem with Android fragmentation is as old as Android. If you're a journalist, activist or anyone who needs critical security on a phone you're better off not having one. The options for anyone else is usually a) always use the latest iOS device or b) use a hardened Android, or c) use a dumb phone for all non-critical comms. I should repeat that: if you're worried about security consider using f2f interaction because the number of places you're likely to trip up are endless no matter what device.
  - panpanna 7y ago
    Counterpoint: a bunch of bored teenagers hacked every single iPhone in Hollywood just to get some celebrity nudes. I don't believe in "hardened Android" either, unless it's developed and maintained by nsa or gchq.
    - pertymcpert 7y ago
      That was iCloud.
      - panpanna 7y ago
        Does it matter? The data is out, and while the attack surface was not the iphone itself it was a service closely connected to it.
        lutoma 7y ago
        Right, but the exact same thing could have happened with Google Photos or whatever it's called these days if you don't have 2fa enabled.
        MyelinatedT 7y ago
        Not really. Google has invested heavily in making its login process as secure as possible. Unless you had a very easily guessed password and were unlucky enough to live in the same region as your attacker, it'd be very unlikely for this to happen to a Google Photos user. That said, nudes don't belong in any cloud.
        panpanna 7y ago
        The vulnerabilities that opened iCloud to these attacks were due to its iPhone integration (restoring device from backup to be more specific). It also allowed the attacker to bypass 2FA (probably in the name of user experience).
    - inapis 7y ago
DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
historically iphones have been better in terms of security. but the landscape has shifted since recent releases. Android security has come a long way. The problem is still that Android can't be compared with iphones due to fragmentation. The fragmentation has an unintended positive side-effect to offsec which is your Android exploits don't scale as well as for iphones due to monoculture. this is a very good thread by thegrugq on ios vs android: https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/1168981940462149644 https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/1168981940462149644 edit: another thing that rubs me the wrong way about Apple recently is their stubborn stance against any outsider who might offer iOS introspection capabilities. this raises the bar for security researchers but is counterproductive to iOS security.
kipchak 7y ago
My understanding is iPhones enable full disk encryption when a pass-code is created, even if it's fairly weak (1112), you can't have a passcode or password and not have full disk encryption. Android Devices past 9 do not support full disk encryption and instead use file based encryption, and as far as I know just having a password doesn't necessarily mean FBE is turned on.
- tialaramex 7y ago
  If you have a modern Google branded device (say, a Pixel) encryption is mandatory out of the box. Something older (and so insecure by default because it isn't receiving security updates) like the Nexus 10 tablet has an actual user interaction step to enable encryption.
- h4waii 7y ago
  iOS has essentially always used FBE and not FDE, you can see more about this in the iOS Security Guide [0], while yes, versions of Android up to 7.0 only allowed FDE. Google has since done away with FDE and it's no longer supported by AOSP in version 10 and above, where FBE is enforced. Whether or not this is more or less secure really depends on your threat level. IMHO, turned on, the data is more secure if apps are configured properly with FBE. Turned off, data is more secure with FDE (assuming both scenarios the same key). 0. https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf
- WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
  So that's kinda weird now, because iPhones under APFS do File-Based encryption (each file gets it's own key) but the Full Disk is encrypted while Androids are now using Full Disk Encryption.
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  It never works like this because then it would take hours to set your pincode. What actually happens is the disk or each file is encrypted and the key is protected or unprotected, depending on passcodes. On iOS the files are encrypted so that some of them become available at boot, some the first time you unlock the device and some only while the device is locked. On modern devices the key protection is managed by the security chip/Secure Enclave zo it can both attempt to limit attempts to a number of times and prevent people from brute forcing the key because only the chip can run attempts which are purposely made slow. Typically Cellebrite like tools bypass the lockouts but still have brute forcing limited so it only practically works on short or poor pin or passcodes. Still, it’s unlikely a device is going to remain safe for 15 years, if the adversary is patient it’ll eventually be unlocked; technology advances and bugs are found in everything.
1000units 7y ago
Apple pays people to write these stories.
MFogleman 7y ago
I was a cellebrite certified operator/analyst. The answer is a combination of "The iPhone is that secure" and "Androids usually aren't". The tools that Cellebrite sells will handle all but the most recent iPhones and maybe the most recent Androids. The newer the iPhone, the less likely a law enforcement officer is gonna have the tools to get into it. Cellebrite offers a service where you can ship them the phone and let their techs go at it. Whether it is because of legitimate limitations in their technology, or purely a marketing/commercial limitation, is unknown. In general, any non-i{hone is Android. Most Androids are garbage phones that are sold by the dozen in the bottom of a bin at a gas station. Security isn't something its creator or buyer is really concerned about. I have been out of the field for a few years, so things may have changed slightly in either direction, but I imagine its the same general concept. Newer is harder to break into, brand new iPhone model is probably impossible for now.
- AndroidTempAcc 7y ago
  Using a throwaway. I was arrested and had technology devices raided. Cellebrite was able to bypass the login screen and encryption of my powered on seized Android cellphone, but they were not able to access a different Android phone that was powered down fully. Nobody was able to access my Veracrypt computers.
  - torified 7y ago
    Thanks for the post. I'm curious, did they try to put any pressure on you to unlock the devices for them?
    - AndroidTempAcc 7y ago
      During my initial arrest they politely asked me once for the passwords, which I declined. Around 9 months later they asked my legal counsel for the passwords, which was declined. I found a subsequent court case where my same prosecutor tried via the court system to get a different defendant to reveal their passwords and they failed. Oh well. Reading their internal emails regarding encryption and their general tech capabilities was enlightening. AMAA if you'd like.

filoleg 7y ago

>Is this because they are generally not as airtight in design as iphones are? >Is it because iPhones are more likely to be up-to-date in terms of patches and security updates, and hence android is easier to crack? I don't want to make premature judgements without factual supporting evidence, but my personal anecdotal evidence suggests that these two guesses might be the correct ones. Me and some of my friends got S8+ a few years ago, back when it was Samsung's flagship smartphone. Among other things, we were all appalled by the update cadence. We were getting security updates, not even talking about major OS updates, about 3-6 months after Pixel phones were getting theirs. I cannot even imagine the horror show that non-flagship Android device owners have to go through in terms of updates.

DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
the problem with Android fragmentation is as old as Android. If you're a journalist, activist or anyone who needs critical security on a phone you're better off not having one. The options for anyone else is usually a) always use the latest iOS device or b) use a hardened Android, or c) use a dumb phone for all non-critical comms. I should repeat that: if you're worried about security consider using f2f interaction because the number of places you're likely to trip up are endless no matter what device.
- panpanna 7y ago
  Counterpoint: a bunch of bored teenagers hacked every single iPhone in Hollywood just to get some celebrity nudes. I don't believe in "hardened Android" either, unless it's developed and maintained by nsa or gchq.
  - pertymcpert 7y ago
    That was iCloud.
    - panpanna 7y ago
      Does it matter? The data is out, and while the attack surface was not the iphone itself it was a service closely connected to it.
      - lutoma 7y ago
        Right, but the exact same thing could have happened with Google Photos or whatever it's called these days if you don't have 2fa enabled.
        MyelinatedT 7y ago
        Not really. Google has invested heavily in making its login process as secure as possible. Unless you had a very easily guessed password and were unlucky enough to live in the same region as your attacker, it'd be very unlikely for this to happen to a Google Photos user. That said, nudes don't belong in any cloud.
        panpanna 7y ago
        The vulnerabilities that opened iCloud to these attacks were due to its iPhone integration (restoring device from backup to be more specific). It also allowed the attacker to bypass 2FA (probably in the name of user experience).
  - inapis 7y ago

DyslexicAtheist 7y ago

historically iphones have been better in terms of security. but the landscape has shifted since recent releases. Android security has come a long way. The problem is still that Android can't be compared with iphones due to fragmentation. The fragmentation has an unintended positive side-effect to offsec which is your Android exploits don't scale as well as for iphones due to monoculture. this is a very good thread by thegrugq on ios vs android: https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/1168981940462149644 https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/1168981940462149644 edit: another thing that rubs me the wrong way about Apple recently is their stubborn stance against any outsider who might offer iOS introspection capabilities. this raises the bar for security researchers but is counterproductive to iOS security.

kipchak 7y ago

My understanding is iPhones enable full disk encryption when a pass-code is created, even if it's fairly weak (1112), you can't have a passcode or password and not have full disk encryption. Android Devices past 9 do not support full disk encryption and instead use file based encryption, and as far as I know just having a password doesn't necessarily mean FBE is turned on.

tialaramex 7y ago
If you have a modern Google branded device (say, a Pixel) encryption is mandatory out of the box. Something older (and so insecure by default because it isn't receiving security updates) like the Nexus 10 tablet has an actual user interaction step to enable encryption.
h4waii 7y ago
iOS has essentially always used FBE and not FDE, you can see more about this in the iOS Security Guide [0], while yes, versions of Android up to 7.0 only allowed FDE. Google has since done away with FDE and it's no longer supported by AOSP in version 10 and above, where FBE is enforced. Whether or not this is more or less secure really depends on your threat level. IMHO, turned on, the data is more secure if apps are configured properly with FBE. Turned off, data is more secure with FDE (assuming both scenarios the same key). 0. https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf
WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
So that's kinda weird now, because iPhones under APFS do File-Based encryption (each file gets it's own key) but the Full Disk is encrypted while Androids are now using Full Disk Encryption.
tinus_hn 7y ago
It never works like this because then it would take hours to set your pincode. What actually happens is the disk or each file is encrypted and the key is protected or unprotected, depending on passcodes. On iOS the files are encrypted so that some of them become available at boot, some the first time you unlock the device and some only while the device is locked. On modern devices the key protection is managed by the security chip/Secure Enclave zo it can both attempt to limit attempts to a number of times and prevent people from brute forcing the key because only the chip can run attempts which are purposely made slow. Typically Cellebrite like tools bypass the lockouts but still have brute forcing limited so it only practically works on short or poor pin or passcodes. Still, it’s unlikely a device is going to remain safe for 15 years, if the adversary is patient it’ll eventually be unlocked; technology advances and bugs are found in everything.

1000units 7y ago

Apple pays people to write these stories.

MFogleman 7y ago

I was a cellebrite certified operator/analyst. The answer is a combination of "The iPhone is that secure" and "Androids usually aren't". The tools that Cellebrite sells will handle all but the most recent iPhones and maybe the most recent Androids. The newer the iPhone, the less likely a law enforcement officer is gonna have the tools to get into it. Cellebrite offers a service where you can ship them the phone and let their techs go at it. Whether it is because of legitimate limitations in their technology, or purely a marketing/commercial limitation, is unknown. In general, any non-i{hone is Android. Most Androids are garbage phones that are sold by the dozen in the bottom of a bin at a gas station. Security isn't something its creator or buyer is really concerned about. I have been out of the field for a few years, so things may have changed slightly in either direction, but I imagine its the same general concept. Newer is harder to break into, brand new iPhone model is probably impossible for now.

AndroidTempAcc 7y ago
Using a throwaway. I was arrested and had technology devices raided. Cellebrite was able to bypass the login screen and encryption of my powered on seized Android cellphone, but they were not able to access a different Android phone that was powered down fully. Nobody was able to access my Veracrypt computers.
- torified 7y ago
  Thanks for the post. I'm curious, did they try to put any pressure on you to unlock the devices for them?
  - AndroidTempAcc 7y ago
    During my initial arrest they politely asked me once for the passwords, which I declined. Around 9 months later they asked my legal counsel for the passwords, which was declined. I found a subsequent court case where my same prosecutor tried via the court system to get a different defendant to reveal their passwords and they failed. Oh well. Reading their internal emails regarding encryption and their general tech capabilities was enlightening. AMAA if you'd like.