• tidderuuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    requires a victim to first install a malicious app

    Let me stop you right there… and leave.

  • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    2 months ago

    "Our end-to-end attacks simply measure the rendering time per frame of the graphical operations… to determine whether the pixel was white or non-white.”

    This is a prime example of something that is so simple, yet elegant, and brilliant. Fantastically cool and scary.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Reminds me how in the early days the secret keys inside the smartchips in things like bank cards could be extracted by measuring the power consumption when the smartchips were doing things like signing data using those keys.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is a very big hypothetical.

    They’d need to already have access to your account credentials (email, password or at least something that is regarded the same) then have you install this malicious app, then you’d need this app to be open at the same time as your 2FA app

    It’s possible, yes, it’s an awesome find, yes, and this should be patches, yes yes yes, a thousand yes

    Having said that, I’m not too worried about the potential impact of this, it’ll be fine.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yes that’s why you verify the safety and security of the apps you’re installing on your phone and don’t just go, “ooo, this looks cool, let’s download it and try it out”. This is especially true if you are installing FOSS apps.

        • Noja@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          This is especially true if you are installing apps from the play store.

          fixed that small mistake

          • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            What “trusted” platform? Google play store? Their rules are lax as all fuck. And if you download an app from a reputable company and it has malware in it you have the Better Business Bureau to turn to. Otherwise buyer beware, scammers exist.

  • solrize@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Gotta wonder why random apps don’t need special permissions to run and operate other apps. You can cause plenty of trouble maliciously navigating a browser even if you can’t see the screen.

    • whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sandboxing by default and preventing Google and others from spying in and manipulating apps are good steps phone OS developers should use, but I don’t think those kind of things would help for this particular case.

  • BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    It has to be tailored to the specific hardware so I don’t think it’s a major concern for most users. It doesn’t seem like something that can be fully mitigated either, so it’s probably not worth worrying about. Side channel attacks are really cool but also kind of useless in most practical scenarios.