Google Partially Patches Flaw in Chrome for Android 3 Years After Disclosure

Jan 3, 2019

Google has finally patched a privacy vulnerability in its
Chrome web browser for Android that exposes users’ device model and
firmware version, eventually enabling remote attackers to identify
unpatched devices and exploit known vulnerabilities.

The vulnerability, which has not yet given any CVE number, is an
information disclosure bug that resides in the way the Google
Chrome for Android generates ‘User Agent’ string containing the
Android version number and build tag information, which includes
device name and its firmware build.

This information is also sent to applications using WebView and
Chrome Tabs APIs, which can be used to track users and fingerprint
devices on which they are running.

For example: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 5.1.1; Nexus 6
Build/LYZ28K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Chrome/46.0.2490.34 Mobile Safari/537.36

Yakov Shafranovich, a contributor at Nightwatch Cybersecurity
firm, initially reported ^[1] this issue to Google
three years ago, but at the time, the company rejected the bug
report saying that its browser app was “working as intended.”

“While Android does offer the ability to override these (via
WebSettings.setUserAgent() in WebView), most applications choose
not to do that to assure compatibility by relying on the default
header,” Shafranovich said.

“For many devices, this can be used to identify not only the
device itself but also the carrier on which it is running and from
that the country.”

^[2]

This privacy issue can also be used to determine the security patch
level on the device and vulnerabilities the device is vulnerable
to, which attackers can exploit in a targeted fashion.

However, Google has now partially addressed the issue with the
release of Chrome 70 in October 2018, after a new bug report
was filed earlier this year by a separate user on Google’s Chromium
forum.
^[3]

According to the researcher, the Chrome 70 update only removed the
firmware build information from the header, but the hardware model
identifier is still available in the User Agent.

However, since the update only applies to the app itself and not
to the WebView implementation, application developers are
recommended to manually override the User Agent configuration in
their apps.

“Also, unlike the desktop Chrome, on Android no extensions or
overrides are possible to change the header other than the “Request
Desktop Site” option on the browser itself for the current
session,” Shafranovich says in a new post ^[4].

“Both the vendor and MITRE refused to issue a CVE number to track
this issue since they do not consider it to be security related”

Shafranovich believes that all versions of Chrome for Android
prior to version 70 are affected by the vulnerability, so all users
are highly recommended to upgrade to Chrome version 70 or
later.

References

^{^}
reported
(bugs.chromium.org)
^{^}
said
(wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com)
^{^}
new bug report
(bugs.chromium.org)
^{^}
new
post (seclists.org)

The Hacker News Headlines

New Apple iOS 16 Exploit Enables Stealthy Cellular Access Under Fake Airplane Mode

Aug 18, 2023

The Hacker News Headlines

China-Linked Bronze Starlight Group Targeting Gambling Sector with Cobalt Strike Beacons

Aug 18, 2023

The Hacker News Headlines

NoFilter Attack: Sneaky Privilege Escalation Method Bypasses Windows Security

Aug 18, 2023

OWASP TOP !0

Injection. Injection flaws, such as SQL, NoSQL, OS, and LDAP injection, occur when untrusted data is sent to an interpreter as part of a command or query. The attacker’s hostile data can trick the interpreter into executing unintended commands or accessing data without proper authorization. Broken Authentication. Application functions related to authentication and session management are often implemented incorrectly, allowing attackers to compromise passwords, keys, or session tokens, or to exploit other implementation flaws to assume other users’ identities temporarily or permanently. Sensitive Data Exposure. Many web applications and APIs do not properly protect sensitive data, such as financial, healthcare, and PII. Attackers may steal or modify such weakly protected data to conduct credit card fraud, identity theft, or other crimes. Sensitive data may be compromised without extra protection, such as encryption at rest or in transit, and requires special precautions when exchanged with the browser. XML External Entities (XXE). Many older or poorly configured XML processors evaluate external entity references within XML documents. External entities can be used to disclose internal files using the file URI handler, internal file shares, internal port scanning, remote code execution, and denial of service attacks. Broken Access Control. Restrictions on what authenticated users are allowed to do are often not properly enforced. Attackers can exploit these flaws to access unauthorized functionality and/or data, such as access other users’ accounts, view sensitive files, modify other users’ data, change access rights, etc. Security Misconfiguration. Security misconfiguration is the most commonly seen issue. This is commonly a result of insecure default configurations, incomplete or ad hoc configurations, open cloud storage, misconfigured HTTP headers, and verbose error messages containing sensitive information. Not only must all operating systems, frameworks, libraries, and applications be securely configured, but they must be patched/upgraded in a timely fashion. Cross-Site Scripting XSS. XSS flaws occur whenever an application includes untrusted data in a new web page without proper validation or escaping, or updates an existing web page with user-supplied data using a browser API that can create HTML or JavaScript. XSS allows attackers to execute scripts in the victim’s browser which can hijack user sessions, deface web sites, or redirect the user to malicious sites. Insecure Deserialization. Insecure deserialization often leads to remote code execution. Even if deserialization flaws do not result in remote code execution, they can be used to perform attacks, including replay attacks, injection attacks, and privilege escalation attacks. Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities. Components, such as libraries, frameworks, and other software modules, run with the same privileges as the application. If a vulnerable component is exploited, such an attack can facilitate serious data loss or server takeover. Applications and APIs using components with known vulnerabilities may undermine application defenses and enable various attacks and impacts. Insufficient Logging & Monitoring. Insufficient logging and monitoring, coupled with missing or ineffective integration with incident response, allows attackers to further attack systems, maintain persistence, pivot to more systems, and tamper, extract, or destroy data. Most breach studies show time to detect a breach is over 200 days, typically detected by external parties rather than internal processes or monitoring.

Google Partially Patches Flaw in Chrome for Android 3 Years After Disclosure

References

Related Post

New Apple iOS 16 Exploit Enables Stealthy Cellular Access Under Fake Airplane Mode

China-Linked Bronze Starlight Group Targeting Gambling Sector with Cobalt Strike Beacons

NoFilter Attack: Sneaky Privilege Escalation Method Bypasses Windows Security

You missed

Protected: Rotary VI EAST

Protected: BetterCyberCareer Group

Protected: Benin Club 1931 – Official

Protected: Whatsapp AI Automation Group