File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Cloak and Dagger: From Two Permissions to Complete Control of the UI Feedback Loop

TitleCloak and Dagger: From Two Permissions to Complete Control of the UI Feedback Loop
Authors
Issue Date2017
Citation
Proceedings - IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2017, p. 1041-1057 How to Cite?
AbstractThe effectiveness of the Android permission system fundamentally hinges on the user's correct understanding of the capabilities of the permissions being granted. In this paper, we show that both the end-users and the security community have significantly underestimated the dangerous capabilities granted by the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW and the BIND-ACCESSIBILITY-SERVICE permissions: while it is known that these are security-sensitive permissions and they have been abused individually (e.g., in UI redressing attacks, accessibility attacks), previous attacks based on these permissions rely on vanishing side-channels to time the appearance of overlay UI, cannot respond properly to user input, or make the attacks literally visible. This work, instead, uncovers several design shortcomings of the Android platform and shows how an app with these two permissions can completely control the UI feedback loop and create devastating attacks. In particular, we demonstrate how such an app can launch a variety of stealthy, powerful attacks, ranging from stealing user's login credentials and security PIN, to the silent installation of a God-mode app with all permissions enabled, leaving the victim completely unsuspecting. To make things even worse, we note that when installing an app targeting a recent Android SDK, the list of its required permissions is not shown to the user and that these attacks can be carried out without needing to lure the user to knowingly enable any permission. In fact, the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW permission is automatically granted for apps installed from the Play Store and our experiment shows that it is practical to lure users to unknowingly grant the BIND-ACCESSIBILITY-SERVICE permission by abusing capabilities from the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW permission. We evaluated the practicality of these attacks by performing a user study: none of the 20 human subjects that took part of the experiment even suspected they had been attacked. We also found that it is straightforward to get a proof-of-concept app requiring both permissions accepted on the official store. We responsibly disclosed our findings to Google. Unfortunately, since these problems are related to design issues, these vulnerabilities are still unaddressed. We conclude the paper by proposing a novel defense mechanism, implemented as an extension to the current Android API, which would protect Android users and developers from the threats we uncovered.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/303529
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.407
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFratantonio, Yanick-
dc.contributor.authorQian, Chenxiong-
dc.contributor.authorChung, Simon P.-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Wenke-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-15T08:25:30Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-15T08:25:30Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationProceedings - IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2017, p. 1041-1057-
dc.identifier.issn1081-6011-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/303529-
dc.description.abstractThe effectiveness of the Android permission system fundamentally hinges on the user's correct understanding of the capabilities of the permissions being granted. In this paper, we show that both the end-users and the security community have significantly underestimated the dangerous capabilities granted by the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW and the BIND-ACCESSIBILITY-SERVICE permissions: while it is known that these are security-sensitive permissions and they have been abused individually (e.g., in UI redressing attacks, accessibility attacks), previous attacks based on these permissions rely on vanishing side-channels to time the appearance of overlay UI, cannot respond properly to user input, or make the attacks literally visible. This work, instead, uncovers several design shortcomings of the Android platform and shows how an app with these two permissions can completely control the UI feedback loop and create devastating attacks. In particular, we demonstrate how such an app can launch a variety of stealthy, powerful attacks, ranging from stealing user's login credentials and security PIN, to the silent installation of a God-mode app with all permissions enabled, leaving the victim completely unsuspecting. To make things even worse, we note that when installing an app targeting a recent Android SDK, the list of its required permissions is not shown to the user and that these attacks can be carried out without needing to lure the user to knowingly enable any permission. In fact, the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW permission is automatically granted for apps installed from the Play Store and our experiment shows that it is practical to lure users to unknowingly grant the BIND-ACCESSIBILITY-SERVICE permission by abusing capabilities from the SYSTEM-ALERT-WINDOW permission. We evaluated the practicality of these attacks by performing a user study: none of the 20 human subjects that took part of the experiment even suspected they had been attacked. We also found that it is straightforward to get a proof-of-concept app requiring both permissions accepted on the official store. We responsibly disclosed our findings to Google. Unfortunately, since these problems are related to design issues, these vulnerabilities are still unaddressed. We conclude the paper by proposing a novel defense mechanism, implemented as an extension to the current Android API, which would protect Android users and developers from the threats we uncovered.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofProceedings - IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy-
dc.titleCloak and Dagger: From Two Permissions to Complete Control of the UI Feedback Loop-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1109/SP.2017.39-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85025133844-
dc.identifier.spage1041-
dc.identifier.epage1057-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000413081300057-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats