Does this mean Bitdefender can detect these tools?
A newly uncovered strain of Android spyware lurked on the Google Play Store disguised as cryptocurrency wallet Coinbase, among other things, for up to four years, according to a new report by Bitdefender. The malware, named Mandrake by the threat intelligence agency, featured a three-part structure that allowed its operators …
"...it detects if its being virtualised..."
People don't realize how common this is. I write network diagnostic software, among other things, and the first thing my utilities do is check if they are running in a virtualised environment, and let the user know with the appropriate warnings that they should take that into account when evaluating the info the utilities are reporting.
when I started reading this, I was thinking that you had to load multiple applications, but apparently that loading is coordinated by the original. I did not see whether or not the user still had to confirm and allow permissions, etc. but most people just "click through" all of that blindly.
However, what _IF_ the malware was in parts, and would NOT run unless ALL of the parts were loaded? That is, you might need to install the wallet, the e-mail, AND the music player [for example] and let's say all three of them SELF PROMOTE [and to make the ads stop you can install them]. Then when all three are loaded, the malware does its thing... how well could THAT be detected by current means?
At any rate, what the article made me think [initially] is actually a bit WORSE than a "payload downloader". But it definitely points out that "App Stores" are NOT inherently "safe", no matter how much of a LOCK DOWN [that would be YOU, Apple] is being done to "prevent infections".
Hey. LOCK DOWNS DO NOT WORK. There. I said it.
"Hey. LOCK DOWNS DO NOT WORK. There. I said it."
Ugh OK I'll take the bait. It depends on what you mean by "work". If you mean "reduce the loss of life" then yes, they do. As evidenced by anyone paying attention. You'd have to be PRETTY FUCKING STUPID (or a young child) not to grasp the reasons why that is. Pick a country. South Korea, New Zealand, China. Even in the UK the delayed lockdown has now passed the peak of the first wave. Unless you think the reduction in daily deaths is unrelated?
Hey, if you know better than the epidemiologists, then perhaps you went into the wrong career. Perhaps you could teach those climatologists a thing or two while you're at it. PMSL
People breaking lockdown make them... not work. Half assing the enforcement make them more likely to be broken. People have understood basic quarantine measures since the plague, but apparently Bob knows better.
That'd be fine, if you were only going to kill yourself, and others who think like you, but unfortunately, many of the people you are endangering don't have a choice. Some professions are *required* for society to continue to function. There is some wiggle room as to which ones those are. Hint: hairdressers are not on that list.
Then we have those lacking a basic grasp of the concept of how communicable diseases spread. I don't know about in the states, but in the UK the whole "coughs and sneezes spread diseases" thing was pretty well drummed into children with *competent* parents before they got to secondary school.
So why do we have people arguing technicalities when you know damn well what the social distancing rules are there for? If every break in the transmission chain is saving a life, every person *deliberately* breaking those rules by coughing and spitting on police/health workers should be locked up... and potentially tried for attempted murder.
Frontline police and health workers not having masks or other PPE is *different* competency issue.
You coin a metaphor that Bob might listen to. Y'all are out there running Windows XP with minimal anti-virus, while the people running Linux listening to competent experts in their field are staying at home.
Or perhaps a slightly more accurate analogy:
Everyone is running XP with minimal anti-virus.
Some folks are using external firewalls like face masks
Some folks are air gapping completely by staying at home.
and some folks are having fucking LAN parties complaining that the other two groups are pussies.
Well it ain't a rumor aggregator!
"director of threat research and reporting at Bitdefender" Titles - internal embiggeneses - don't get hung up on their egos, when the side-effect is that you know more now than you did before.
It's about time they got clever with this stuff. The ole "stupid user" routine is beyond tired. I'm honestly surprised that we don't have more games that do this sort of thing. Carving up the components could make the entire mechanism appear to be innocuous in parts but a real problem when they all pulled together to make Voltron.
> concealing their own presence by hiding notifications
This makes no sense and comes across as either article padding or editing that removed an important part of the phrase. Why would malware send you notifications about what it is doing? If it doesn't make any notifications in the first place there is no need to hide them.
No. Nothing can be trusted.
Political activists and people working in sensitive or senior positions within companies of interest should assume they're already compromised because they either are, or are able to be.
Unfortunately, most of us have lives of so little significance that we won't get hacked for anything other than money, amusement or to be part of a botnet.
Yay, more fun and games...
For the truly paranoid the idea is to have two cellphones, one for general, daily usage.
The second with only the necessary banking apps, and is used only for online banking, nothing else.
I'm planning to obtain a second device, and use that for general use, whilst the first device is used only for banking and nothing else.
The truly paranoid will most probably do regular factory resets on their device(s).
I think there are also article(s) on el reg that describes how malware can survive a factory image flashing (PC and phone) - due to much hardware having its functions defined by software which has its own memory that isn't touched by an OS reimage...
In undating a bunch of PC's recently, I found one device family required a Bios downgrade (to a specific version) followed by an upgrade to the new patched version to ensure UEFI disk and memory areas were overwritten and thus erased.
Maybe google could add api's to Android which generate fake privacy related information.
If a searchlight app asks for access to: photo's, contacts, location etc to work, google could add a checkbox: Give fake information only.
With the checkbox default on, users would be better protected against such apps.
Developers of such malicious apps would of course develop techniques to detect they are being conned and make the app stop working, but then the user knows what is the true intent of the developer is.
> Maybe google could add api's to Android which generate fake privacy related information
Not only they don't have any reason to want to waste money on this, but most of all it would be shooting themselves in the foot: Their whole business model is based on collecting and reselling "privacy related information".
"Yeah, we'll wait until it's a big problem before we do something about it" <-- should be sarcasm but this is genuinely the approach of my organisation.
Even when they're told it'll blow up in their faces.
Even when they're told the work will have to be done eventually so they might as well do it before it blows up in their faces.
They pride themselves on being 'agile'. I've seen slugs with more agility.
Why am I not surprised?
Google's Android handling has been rubbish - security seems to be just an unpleasant after-thought.
The only real way to cure this is to vote with your wallet - as the consumer.
If you choose to keep buying Android products, you're enabling these faceless people (both Google and said criminals - no, don't make a joke about a parallel there - that's too easy...)
(Insert some old trope about the equivalent of helping Nazis here...)
But it seems to me that every Android user I've spoken to doesn't care about this - they prefer to focus their vitriol on Apple.
Which makes no sense.
There is device security,personal privacy, and malware on the approved app stores. Three separate topics to evaluate when selecting a walled garden to join.
In my personal opinion Apple do better than Google on all three counts.
Then consider phone firmware / OS updates, and Apple win hands-down.
YMMV, you are free to come to a different conclusion.
Apparently iPhones aren't any more secure, they're just more expensive.
This is an ignorant statement in may ways. But irrational Apple Hate goes on forever. And yes, Apple deserves real anger and hate for many Apple Bungles over the years. It's just that Apple has never even remotely come up to the level of Bungles and outright carelessness of Microsoft and now Google.
Q1: Are iPhones found to have malware discovered on a weekly basis, like Android malware?
A1: Of course not.
Q2: Does the iPhone suffer from OS version fragmentation like Android phones, resulting in unclosed and frequently exploited security holes?
A2: Of course not.
Q3: Considering the usable life as well as functionality of iPhones, are they more expensive than Android phones.
A3: Of course not.
Q4: Which mobile phones are most often on the cutting edge of innovation? iPhones or Android phones?
Q4: iPhones of course.
. . . And so on. I could point out battery explosions, bendable/breakable screens, IP ripoffs, user surveillance tech vs privacy, warranty service, attitude toward customers . . .
And again yes, Apple has committed plenty of blunders. Apple is never perfect. Apple is simply the best. √ Fact.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020