Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 156 posts

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#141

Post by gruez »

dannyw wrote: post #111
gruez wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. 1. There's no reason why a threat actor would have to send you 3-4 messages per day. Of the exploits I've seen, they only need to send one. Sending 3-4 messages per day just unnecessarily increases the risk of getting caught (ie. the target getting suspicious and asking on hacker news whether they're getting hacked) 2. There's no reason why the message has to contain sketchy links. They could very well di…

Disagree with all 3 points. If I am sneaking a payload in, and I have different exploits for different OS versions, I would exactly disguise it as spam. Pretending to be a busines, or a random person with wrong number, and then DELETING IT is a noteable indicator of compromise. I know this isn't how Pegasus works, but I'm sure there are more exploit kits being sold in the world. Some may not be as sophisticated, and…

>If I am sneaking a payload in, and I have different exploits for different OS versions, I would exactly disguise it as spam.

Right, but the point is that GP seems to have been tipped off by the "sketchy links", rather than the spam itself, and that there are far better ways to compose your spam texts than ones with sketchy links.

>Pretending to be a busines, or a random person with wrong number, and then DELETING IT is a noteable indicator of compromise.

It depends on the nature of the exploit. I was operating under the assumption that "0 click" means the exploit gets run as soon as the phone receives it, which would allow for the exploit to clean up after itself without alerting the owner, unless the owner was staring at the phone the exact moment the message came in.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#142

Post by samstave »

p49k wrote: post #48
codetrotter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can't disable SMS entirely I don't think Buy a data-only subscription, and use Google Voice or some sort of PBX powered app to still be able to receive regular phone calls. Preferably I’d want a really basic voice only, open source PBX powered app for iOS that I could use. Then I could get me a data-only plan and SIM. Caveat: I still need Norwegian BankID to work with my SIM though. I dunno if any of the data-o…

Data-only subscriptions can still receive SMS messages in my experience, you just can't send them.

Also, in my experience in the US - Data Only SIMs tend to only be available if you have a primary 'regular' account with the carrier.

I haven't had too much luck just being able to get a stand-alone data sim from Verizon, AT&T or TMobile...

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#143

Post by thebean11 »

mavhc wrote: post #127
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, when I'm on the go, I certainly have a way better communication using phone calls than whatever VOIP du jour. Phone numbers, like emails, are very robust and reliable, interoperable, not centralized to one entity, and the quality of service vs cost ratio is excellent. Not to mention text messages: - they work no matter if the person is using whatsapp, telegram, signal or the new hype stuff - no GAFAM is collect…

Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read. SMS is unencrypted so someone's harvesting your data. They require a cell tower connection, that's only 1 step away from an internet connection, probably 0 in many cases. Cash and Phone numbers are trivial to steal.

> Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read.

Most people do not want this feature. 9/10 of my iMessage contacts turn off read receipts; I bet the number would be similar on Facebook/Whatsapp if they allowed it.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#144

Post by thehappypm »

ec109685 wrote: post #86

Why aren’t lightweight hypervisors used more outside the public cloud? It seems that would go a long way in protecting the rest of the device from poorly written c code parsing user input.

The answer is probably plain old complexity.

Getting an application that's running in a hypervisor to seamlessly, for example, accept deep-link clicks is more complicated for the same reason that they're more secure. That extra boundary is another wall, another interface. And of course that means more complexity for app developers, and more compute cost/battery utilization.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#145

Post by thehappypm »

CyberRage wrote: post #23
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #5

I wonder if Apple's devs are just going to say, screw it, we'll rewrite the whole thing in Rust with audits and formal analysis the whole way...

Well I would dare to say iMessage isn't the biggest target to convert to Rust. At the end of the day, it is still an app with app level permissions, sandbox etc. Kernel\Kernel modules are far more likely to be written as they allow for vastly more access than an app.

iMessage has the huge bonus that it's exposed to the internet. The kernel is much harder to actually get close to. iMessage? Send them a text.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#146

Post by BiteCode_dev »

mavhc wrote: post #127
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, when I'm on the go, I certainly have a way better communication using phone calls than whatever VOIP du jour. Phone numbers, like emails, are very robust and reliable, interoperable, not centralized to one entity, and the quality of service vs cost ratio is excellent. Not to mention text messages: - they work no matter if the person is using whatsapp, telegram, signal or the new hype stuff - no GAFAM is collect…

Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read. SMS is unencrypted so someone's harvesting your data. They require a cell tower connection, that's only 1 step away from an internet connection, probably 0 in many cases. Cash and Phone numbers are trivial to steal.

> Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read.

For me, ephemerality, one-shot, and unidirectionality are characteristics, not issues.

> SMS is unencrypted so someone's harvesting your data.

There is not a single entity that is getting all of it, which is the most important to me. Encryption is nice, but for most of my communications, that's not the most important feature.

> They require a cell tower connection, that's only 1 step away from an internet connection, probably 0 in many cases.

I'm regularly in situations where the phone works, but not internet. On the move, or in the country side.

> Cash and Phone numbers are trivial to steal.

Sure, and so is a bike. But I don't always want to take the bus.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#147

Post by steveklabnik »

hjnilsson wrote: post #135
xvector wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can Apple not rewrite the parsing components in a memory-safe language?

Replacing libjpeg, libpng, h264 & h265 codecs etc. is a gargantuan task. Even if Apple employs another 200 rust programmers (which don't exist in the market – so not possible) it would take years before that project is close to finishing. So intermediate solutions are necessary until then. It is also likely a rewrite would introduce other security issues (not memory safety issues) which would take time to fix. Rewrit…

There are more than 200 people working on the Rust project itself. Depending on how you define “Rust programmer” there are already companies that employ that number of people individually.

That said you’re not wrong that it’s a gargantuan task that can’t be realistically undertaken, just you’ve really really underestimated the number of Rust developers.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#148

Post by mavhc »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #146
mavhc wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read. SMS is unencrypted so someone's harvesting your data. They require a cell tower connection, that's only 1 step away from an internet connection, probably 0 in many cases. Cash and Phone numbers are trivial to steal.

> Email and SMS aren't reliable, you've no way to know if they've been read. For me, ephemerality, one-shot, and unidirectionality are characteristics, not issues. > SMS is unencrypted so someone's harvesting your data. There is not a single entity that is getting all of it, which is the most important to me. Encryption is nice, but for most of my communications, that's not the most important feature. > They require…

Given your whatsapp messages are encrypted, no one's getting them.

You've no idea if your SMS ever arrived, or if your email even got into the Inbox of the reader instead of the spambox.

Re: Apple iMessage Zero-Click Hacks

#149

Post by KaiserPro »

ricktdotorg wrote: post #137
KaiserPro wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This a million times. Whatsapp of all things has this. (mostly to save on bandwidth, because whatsapp as all about efficiency at one point) There is no real reason to auto process untrusted data. I would have thought we'd learnt from the years of exploits outlook dealt with in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Sometimes my dad sends me photos over Whatsapp, and I have noticed that they appear in my Photos app before I have opened/viewed the actual Whatsapp message. I assume that this is happening because i have given Whatsapp access to my Photos. But, it does appear that attachment/image processing is happening via Whatsapp without my control/without my viewing the message + its attachments.

for those that don't know how to turn it off:

settings -> storage & data -> media auto download

> But, it does appear that attachment/image processing is happening via Whatsapp without my control/without my viewing the message + its attachments.

For me at least, on iOS whatsapp doesn't insert pictures and video into my photostream even if I tap "download"

Post reply on HN