Thanks for your answers. It is much clearer to me now that native vs
Dalvik does not make much of a difference in this scenario.

On May 13, 11:47 am, Tim <[email protected]> wrote:
> FWIW, people may not have noticed that the latest IDA update has provided
> Dalvik support, so it's pretty easy to open up both a native library and the
> dalvik counter part.
>
> -Tim Strazzere
> Security Engineer
> Lookout Mobile Security
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Chris Palmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Twinkie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I was hoping to find a whitepaper/online article/book to bolster my
> > > argument that an All-Dalvik app is as good security-wise as an app
> > > with sensitive logic "hidden" in native code.
>
> > Some of my favorite examples of why native code is not "obscure" just
> > because most developers don't understand how computers work:
>
> >http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1130388
>
> > Linux' CRNG is so poorly written that it is easier to analyze the
> > object code than the source code. The authors found serious bugs in
> > the generator by analyzing the object code. They also did this for
> > Windows' CRNG, described in another paper. Obviously they never had
> > any source code for Windows.
>
> >http://blog.zynamics.com/2011/01/21/recovering-uml-diagrams-from-bina...
>
> > Thomas Dullien analyzes object code to generate documentation at least
> > as good as what the original developers of a proprietary product have.
>
> >http://www.hex-rays.com/idapro/
>
> > Just spend some time with this thing. If your native code developers
> > really understand native code, they will know that every line of C is
> > equivalent to about 1 - 10 lines of pretty straightforward assembler
> > code. I wish my IDE had a call/branch graph as good as IDA...
>
> > > I know with effort
> > > either can be decompiled, the aim is to make that effort as much as
> > > possible.
>
> > I once disassembled a program that required a dongle (= DRM) to run.
> > The program was encrypted with a key on the dongle, and it decrypts
> > itself at startup. (This is called "packing" a binary.) I probably
> > could have broken it in any number of ways, but the easiest was to
> > simply let the program launch and then attach WinDbg. Then I used
> > WinDbg to get assembly of the parts of the code I cared about. I could
> > probably have slurped the process memory image and fed it to IDA Pro
> > with a bit more work.
>
> > Chances are low you'll achieve a solution as "strong" as that on
> > Android. No dongles, for starters...
>
> > > I agree with your previous point that ideally there should be no
> > > sensitive logic client side. However, while most of it is server-side,
> > > some of it necessarily (business requirements) has to be client side -
> > > decryption of data in the intent & a couple of actions taken on the
> > > basis of it.
>
> > Why do you encrypt data in the Intent? It should be to prevent other
> > processes that sniff your Intents from understanding the data. Even
> > better, of course, is to not put sensitive data in Intents at all. See
> > this paper by Jesse Burns on developing secure Android applications:
>
> >https://www.isecpartners.com/files/iSEC_Securing_Android_Apps.pdf
>
> > --
> >http://noncombatant.org/
>
> > "These days, though, you have to be pretty technical before you can
> > even aspire to crudeness." — William Gibson
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Android Security Discussions" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected].
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/android-security-discuss?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Security Discussions" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-security-discuss?hl=en.

Reply via email to