STE WILLIAMS

A competitive gaming company has admitted that for two weeks in April its software client was hijacking league members’ PCs to mine Bitcoins.

In an eyebrow-raising turn of events, the company, ESEA Gaming, admitted on Wednesday that its software client had been running Bitcoin-mining algorithms on customer PCs since April 14, generating over $3,700 worth of the virtual currency – not to mention a likely uptick in the electricity bills of the unwitting punters whose graphics cards’ GPUs been forced to mine the virtual currency.

ESEA is a competitive gaming company that lets paying punters play various video games competitively, with the chance of a cash prize as they rise through the ranks. It uses a bespoke software client to prevent cheating, and it was this software client that was loaded with Bitcoin mining routines.

The Bitcoin mining software had been originally rolled out in a test on ESEA Gaming admin accounts, the company’s co-founder Eric Thunberg explained in a forum post using the handle lpkane. But the test didn’t generate many Bitcoins (two in two days) and was shut down – or so Thunberg thought.

In fact, the miner wasn’t shut down. Rather, it was rolled out across ESEA’s entire user base.

An ESEA employee who was involved in the tests “has been using the test code for his own personal gain since April 13, 2013,” the company wrote in an official statement on Monday. “We are extremely disappointed and concerned by the unauthorized actions of this unauthorized individual. As of this morning, ESEA has made sure that all Bitcoin mining has stopped. ESEA is also in the process of taking all necessary steps internally to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.”

The program used player GPUs to perform the complex mathematical operations required to mine Bitcoins, and generated 29.27627734 Bitcoins for the ESEA employee.

ESEA became aware of the Bitcoin mining after concerned users made posts to the forum complaining of high GPU utilization, even when idle.

The unauthorized two-week long spell of mining apparently took Thunberg by surprise, who wrote in a later post to the forum:

as of the client update released in the last hour, all the btc stuff is out which should solve the gpu and av warnings, and in a blatant attempt to buy back your love (and less likely your trust), i’m going to do the following:

1. 100% of the funds are going into the s14 prize pot, so at the very least your melted gpus contributed to a good cause

2. every user who was premium this month will get a free one month premium code which they can use whenever and for whomever they like, and you’ll find the code under manage accounts – premium codes

Along with the prize pot, ESEA gaming is also donating double the value of the mined Bitcoins – $7,427.10 at current market rates – to the American Cancer Society.

“While it’s incredibly disturbing and disappointing that this happened, we’re committed to improving ourselves and rebuilding trust with our community,” the company wrote.

The case serves to highlight how the virtual currency’s recent dramatic rise in valuation relative to the US dollar has attracted speculators, chancers, and criminals in droves. The ESEA case follows the re-emergence of Bitcoin-mining malware earlier in April, along with a variety of other money-grubbing squint-and-they’re-legal schemes.

“If we had found out on our own that the miner was running we would have killed it anyway because a) we’d already decided it wasn’t worth it, and b) there are far less shady ways to make money,” Thunberg wrote in reply to a forum user. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/02/bitcoin_mining_game_client/

Firefox-maker Mozilla claims spook supplier Gamma International disguises its spyware as the popular web browser – and wants it to stop.

The non-profit software foundation slapped a cease-and-desist demand on FinFisher developer Gamma. In the legal letter, Mozilla said its Firefox trademark is being violated and that this infringement must end immediately.

Alex Fowler, the Firefox maker’s director of privacy and policy, added that Mozilla takes abuse of its Firefox trademark seriously because it hurts users, creates confusion and jeopardises Mozilla’s reputation.

At the centre of the allegations is Gamma’s FinSpy program [PDF], which is deployed by cops and G-men to infiltrate a suspect’s PC and allow it to be controlled from a remote server. It is claimed FinSpy masquerades as a harmless copy of the Firefox web browser so that victims who find it installed see no need to remove it.

Mozilla fired off its legal demand following the publication of a Citizen Lab report titled For Their Eyes Only: The Commercialization of Digital Spying (PDF) . See page 108 of the report for a side-by-side comparison of a legitimate install of the Mozilla browser and what the paper’s authors say is a copy of FinSpy to be downloaded by the unsuspecting snoopee.

Citizen Lab is based at the Munk School of Global Affairs, at the University of Toronto, Canada, and warned of a FinFisher stealth update in March.

The surveillance software is sold by Gamma as a tool for criminal and intelligence agencies to hoover up emails, chatroom banter, Skype calls and other internet phone conversations, and to harvest a PC’s hard drive for material.

‘Gamma’s customers violate citizens’ human rights and online privacy’

FinSpy is part of Gamma’s FinFisher suite, which El Reg was told earlier this year had been updated to evade detection and had been discovered in 25 countries.

“We cannot abide a software company using our name to disguise online surveillance tools that can be – and in several cases actually have been – used by Gamma’s customers to violate citizens’ human rights and online privacy,” Fowler said.

“Gamma’s software is entirely separate, and only uses our brand and trademarks to lie and mislead as one of its methods for avoiding detection and deletion.”

Fowler stressed FinSpy does not affect Firefox. “Gamma’s software is entirely separate, and only uses our brand and trademarks to lie and mislead as one of its methods for avoiding detection and deletion,” Fowler claimed.

Gamma’s sales literature touts FinSpy as a tool for intelligence and law enforcement work – but Citizen Lab reckons citizens who are critical of the government in Bahrain and supporters of opposition candidates in Malaysia’s elections on 5 May have received emails that attempt to trick them into installing FinSpy on their Windows PCs.

Citizen Lab’s writers claimed victims are unaware of what they are downloading because it comes packaged as “Firefox.exe” and sports labelling, version number, product name and copyright and trademark descriptions copies from a legit build of the open-source web browser.

The Register contacted Gamma for comment on the Mozilla cease-and-desist order, and requested a response to the claims made by Citizen Lab. The company did not respond to our requests at the time of writing. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/mozilla_gamma_cease_and_desist/

The US Department of Labor’s website has been hacked and malicious code stuck behind the scenes, security tools firm AlienVault says.

Since yesterday, the DoL site has been serving out malicious code that installs malware on unsuspecting users’ computers, AlienVault’s labs director Jaime Blasco told The Register.

The DoL said that it was working on the problem, but had no other comment on the hack.

Browsers execute a script from a malicious server when folks visit the affected site, the DoL’s Site Exposure Matrices microsite. The infected script collects information including Flash versions, PDF plugins and MS Office versions from users’ systems. Captured data is then uploaded to the hackers’ server, AlienVault discovered.

The malware also checks if the target’s system is running antivirus programs like McAfee, AVG or Sophos. If it detects the popular Bitdefender free anti-virus program, the malware will try to deactivate the AV suite.

“Some of the techniques used in this attack are very similar to the ones we identified a few months ago in an attack against a Thailand NGO website,” Blasco said in a blog post.

The command-and-control protocol matches a backdoor used by a known Chinese hacker called DeepPanda.

AlienVault said it was still investigating the attack. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/dol_website_hack_malware/

US lawmakers are up in arms after it emerged that the Pentagon has leased a Chinese commercial satellite to support non-classified communications with its African bases.

The details of the one-year, $10m contract were revealed at a House Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill last week. The Apstar-7 satellite is owned and operated by APT Satellite Holdings, a Hong Kong-based firm which is itself owned by the Beijing-run China Satellite Communication Company.

Republican Mike Rogers, an outspoken critic of China and chair of the House Intelligence Committee which branded Huawei and ZTE national security risks last year, expressed deep concern at how the Pentagon deal had been done without any political input.

In a statement sent to Bloomberg he said the lease “exposes our military to the risk that China may seek to turn off our ‘eyes and ears’ at the time of their choosing”.

However, US military officials, while recognising that such decisions need to be taken with wider vetting from across the Deaprtment of Defense, appear to have few security concerns.

In another statement sent to the news wire, Pentagon spokeswoman Lieutenant Colonel Monica Matoush said the Defense Information Systems Agency and the Africa Command “made an informed risk assessment of operational security considerations and implemented appropriate transmission and communications security and information assurance measures”.

She added that “all signals to and through the Apstar-7 satellite are fully protected with additional transmission security”, although failed to clarify exactly what these were.

Although commercial satellites are thoughts to be used by US military on a fairly regular basis for low-level comms, perhaps more worrying for the States is that a Chinese satellite appears to have been the only option for the Pentagon in this instance.

It also appears to go, in spirit at least, against a recent spending bill which banned various government agencies from buying technology from companies “owned, operated or subsidised” by the People’s Republic of China.

It’s perhaps indicative of the relative economic strengths of the world’s two superpowers and their military budgets that the Pentagon was forced to do a deal with a country described last year as “the most threatening actor in cyberspace”.

While the US exposes itself to greater risk, China, meanwhile, is taking concrete steps to reduce its dependence on the West, with the continued development of its GPS alternative Beidou.

The system’s 16 satellites currently provide a decent service only for the APAC region, although with more launches on the way, China plans it to be truly global by 2020. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/china_leases_satellite_pentagon/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/

Google’s high-tech Glass headsets might be a gadget enthusiast’s dream, but in their current form they’re far too vulnerable to malicious hacking, according to one developer who has had access to the devices.

In a lengthy blog post on Tuesday, technology consultant Jay Freeman – who goes by the hacker handle “Saurik” – gave a detailed explanation of how he was able to gain root access to his Google specs and the potential implications of that discovery for Glass wearers.

“Sadly, due to the way Glass is currently designed, it is particularly susceptible to the kinds of security issues that tend to plague Android devices,” Freeman writes.

One such security issue was the one Freeman was able to exploit to gain full control over his specs. That vulnerability is already eight months old, Freeman says, but it still affects all versions of Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” including the build that powers Glass.

In fact, exploiting it on Glass was particularly easy. Many Android vulnerabilities present minimal risks for tablets and phones, Freeman explains, because they can’t be exploited while the device is PIN-locked. But the Glass Explorer Edition devices don’t use any kind of PIN – just turn them on and they’re ready to go.

Because of this flaw, it would be unnervingly easy for someone to use the same technique Freeman employed to root his own device to gain root access to someone else’s Glass, Freeman says. All they would need is to gain access to the device, and then only for a few moments.

“If you leave [Glass] somewhere where someone else can get it, it is easy to put the device into Debug Mode using the Settings panel and then … launch into a security exploit to get root,” Freeman says.

Once an attacker has root access, installing malicious software is trivial – and with a device like Glass, Freeman says, that could be a true security nightmare.

“Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: they have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” Freeman writes. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do.”

That kind of access raises concerns that are far more serious than the privacy issues that have been much discussed in the press, Freeman says.

An attacker who has installed spyware on your Glass headset could potentially watch you entering door codes, take pictures of your keys, record your PIN as you enter it into a bank teller machine, and intercept everything you type on computer keyboards, including passwords.

“Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked,” Freeman bluntly states.

To address these concerns, Freeman says he would like to see Google make significant changes to the way Glass is designed, particularly before it is released in a version for consumers.

For starters, he says, he would like to see some way that Glass can be locked once the wearer takes it off. Perhaps the device could even scan the user’s eye to reactivate, he suggests, or respond to a voiceprint – but failing such high-tech measures, a PIN should suffice.

He also would like the devices to be more obvious about when they are recording, such as displaying an LED light or concealing the camera with a plastic shield when it’s not operating. That could not only help reassure people that they’re not being recorded, but also alert Glass users if their devices start recording without their knowledge.

Moreover, Freeman says he would like to see Google take security concerns with Glass more seriously – and particularly, to avoid comments such as Tim Bray’s “duh!” outburst on Friday.

“As long as engineers, advocates, and officers from Google make statements like these without carefully looking into the facts first, it will not be possible to have any kind of reasonable and informed discussion about this system,” Freeman writes. “The doors that Google is attempting to open with Glass are simply too large, and the effects too wide-reaching, for these kinds of off-the-cuff statements to be allowed to dominate the discussion.” ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/google_glass_security_nightmare/