Symbian signing is no protection from spyware

One man's Trojan is another's legitimate app


Spyware for Symbian version 9 is now available signed and verified through the Symbian Signed process, according to anti-malware specialist F-Secure.

Though such applications track what the user is doing and automatically upload that information to a remote server, at least one application is carrying a Symbian Signed qualification; removing warnings that usually pop up when software is installed on a phone.

To gain Symbian Signed status an application must pass a series of tests such as displaying a privacy statement when the application is first launched, and a notification the first time a billable event is triggered. A signed application bypasses the warnings normally displayed when establishing network connections - ideal for spyware, but also useful for dozens of legitimate applications.

In theory, Symbian Signed, or anyone else, could certify applications as benign, but attempts to do so have fallen down in identifying what "benign" actually means. "Nokia OK", the predecessor to Symbian Signed, attempted to vet applications for quality, but ended up being too restrictive. The Symbian-Signed spyware now available would never have passed Nokia OK, but neither did many useful applications.

The problem is that users may perceive the presence of a signature, and certificate, to be proof of an application's benign nature. Indeed, according to the Symbian Signed website: "Symbian Signed builds trust and confidence in third party applications and assists the industry in delivering high quality applications to end-users."

Though quite how much trust is gained by signing spyware applications we don't know.

Digital signatures do serve a useful purpose - they track who wrote and published that application, no more and no less. But knowing that an application was signed by RBackupPRO (as in the case of the Symbian spyware) is little use when even a Google search turns up nothing more than a few articles highlighting this very problem.

A digital signature might tell you who to sue after the event, assuming you become aware that your data has been compromised, but it won't protect you before the damage is done.

It looks as though mobile phone users are just going to have to stick to installing software from known brands, and paying companies such as F-Secure to keep track of malware, rather than realising the potential digital signatures offered. ®


Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022