That's exactly my point, you can put in all the safeguards against remote exploits. but when u root a device you can circumvent most of those countermeasures and get to the data.
Defense in depth, trust no channel-the best option is to protect data on disk using encryption, protect a key encryption key using a user supplied password. On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Kevin Chadwick <[email protected]>wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:45:07 -0700 > Subbu Srinivasan wrote: > > > Forget Android security. > > > > Today in server - foolishly people assume firewalls, DB cannot be hacked > > etc. But this is a fallacy. > > There are ancient OpenBSD firewalls (non-ipv6) still running without any > known remote exploits. I guess you meant the services behind them. > Cisco, forget it though Cisco's can be very fast. > > It is far easier to prevent remote exploits than local ones, OTOH your > multiplying attack surface but maybe, if your clever, reducing the > window by adding a server, or if your dumb like Blackberry conducting > priviledge and risk amalgamation at the server. > > > In Android, you can put it in sqllite, but that data is persisted > somewhere > > in disk unencrypted. AFAIK Android does not encrypt anything on > flash(unlike > > iOS) . So anyone who > > roots the device gets full access. > > Well if someone has root or physical access then the IOS encryption is > almost certainly a false sense of security, in many ways. Of course it > might stop the local thief in his tracks, but I doubt he'd even look > at anything more than media files. > > The idea of priv seperation per app is debateably! more appropriate and > useful, especially as the bugs are found and the architecture fixed > becoming more solid. Fairplay to Google and Open Source, priviledge > seperation is often overlooked. > > The ssh keys on my mobile have very limited server access (chrooted > sftp access to certain files). Thinking about it, I could add some > sanitisation there, it's never ending and so easy to forget something in > security, you just hope your ahead of the game. > > At the end of the day what data are you willing to put in a device that > is 'expected' against security best-practice to be always connected > and maybe has apps installed willy nilly. That certainly doesn't mean I > agree with Google's boss that only criminals want to hide e.g. their > browsing habits, how about an innovator who wants to keep a low profile > and doesn't want a big company to notice them, hack in and come out with > some highly marketed inferior product, likely reducing future > innovation in that market. 80% of companies report IPR theft online. > > -- > 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.
