Proximity Tracing in an Ecosystem of Surveillance Capitalism

Paul-Olivier Dehaye, Joel Reardon
{"title":"Proximity Tracing in an Ecosystem of Surveillance Capitalism","authors":"Paul-Olivier Dehaye, Joel Reardon","doi":"10.1145/3411497.3420219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Proximity tracing apps have been proposed as an aide in dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. Some of those apps leverage attenuation of Bluetooth beacons from mobile devices to build a record of proximate encounters between a pair of device owners. The underlying protocols are known to suffer from false positive and re-identification attacks. We present evidence that the attacker's difficulty in mounting such attacks has been overestimated. Indeed, an attacker leveraging a moderately successful app or SDK with Bluetooth and location access can eavesdrop and interfere with these proximity tracing systems at no hardware cost and perform these attacks against users who do not have this app or SDK installed. We describe concrete examples of actors who would be in a good position to execute such attacks. We further present a novel attack, which we call a biosurveillance attack, which allows the attacker to monitor the exposure risk of a smartphone user who installs their app or SDK but who does not use any contact tracing system and may falsely believe they have opted out of the system. Through traffic auditing with an instrumented testbed, we characterize precisely the behaviour of one such SDK that we found in a handful of apps---but installed on more than one hundred million mobile devices. Its behaviour is functionally indistinguishable from a re-identification or biosurveillance attack and capable of executing a false positive attack with minimal effort. We also discuss how easily an attacker could acquire a position conducive to such attacks, by leveraging the lax logic for granting permissions to apps in the Android framework: any app with some geolocation permission could acquire the necessary Bluetooth permission through an upgrade, without any additional user prompt. Finally we discuss motives for conducting such attacks.","PeriodicalId":329371,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society","volume":"373 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3411497.3420219","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Proximity tracing apps have been proposed as an aide in dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. Some of those apps leverage attenuation of Bluetooth beacons from mobile devices to build a record of proximate encounters between a pair of device owners. The underlying protocols are known to suffer from false positive and re-identification attacks. We present evidence that the attacker's difficulty in mounting such attacks has been overestimated. Indeed, an attacker leveraging a moderately successful app or SDK with Bluetooth and location access can eavesdrop and interfere with these proximity tracing systems at no hardware cost and perform these attacks against users who do not have this app or SDK installed. We describe concrete examples of actors who would be in a good position to execute such attacks. We further present a novel attack, which we call a biosurveillance attack, which allows the attacker to monitor the exposure risk of a smartphone user who installs their app or SDK but who does not use any contact tracing system and may falsely believe they have opted out of the system. Through traffic auditing with an instrumented testbed, we characterize precisely the behaviour of one such SDK that we found in a handful of apps---but installed on more than one hundred million mobile devices. Its behaviour is functionally indistinguishable from a re-identification or biosurveillance attack and capable of executing a false positive attack with minimal effort. We also discuss how easily an attacker could acquire a position conducive to such attacks, by leveraging the lax logic for granting permissions to apps in the Android framework: any app with some geolocation permission could acquire the necessary Bluetooth permission through an upgrade, without any additional user prompt. Finally we discuss motives for conducting such attacks.
监视资本主义生态系统中的接近追踪
近距离追踪应用程序被提议作为应对COVID-19危机的助手。其中一些应用程序利用来自移动设备的蓝牙信标衰减来建立一对设备所有者之间近距离接触的记录。已知底层协议遭受误报和重新识别攻击。我们提供的证据表明,攻击者发动此类攻击的难度被高估了。事实上,攻击者利用具有蓝牙和位置访问的中等成功的应用程序或SDK可以窃听和干扰这些接近跟踪系统,而无需硬件成本,并对未安装此应用程序或SDK的用户执行这些攻击。我们描述了有能力实施此类攻击的具体例子。我们进一步提出了一种新的攻击,我们称之为生物监控攻击,它允许攻击者监控智能手机用户的暴露风险,这些用户安装了他们的应用程序或SDK,但没有使用任何接触追踪系统,可能错误地认为他们已经选择退出系统。通过使用仪器化测试平台进行流量审计,我们准确地描述了我们在少数应用中发现的一个这样的SDK的行为,但安装在超过1亿的移动设备上。其行为在功能上与重新识别或生物监视攻击无法区分,并且能够以最小的努力执行假阳性攻击。我们还讨论了攻击者如何轻松地获得有利于此类攻击的位置,通过利用Android框架中授予应用权限的宽松逻辑:任何具有某些地理位置权限的应用都可以通过升级获得必要的蓝牙权限,而无需任何额外的用户提示。最后,我们讨论进行这种攻击的动机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信