Google's Project Zero discovered a zero-click iMessage exploit, dubbed BLASTPASS, used by NSO Group to deliver Pegasus spyware to iPhones. This sophisticated exploit chained two vulnerabilities within the ImageIO framework's processing of maliciously crafted WebP images. The first vulnerability allowed bypassing a memory limit imposed on WebP decoding, enabling a large, controlled allocation. The second vulnerability, a type confusion bug, leveraged this allocation to achieve arbitrary code execution within the privileged Springboard process. Critically, BLASTPASS required no interaction from the victim and left virtually no trace, making detection extremely difficult. Apple patched these vulnerabilities in iOS 16.6.1, acknowledging their exploitation in the wild, and has implemented further mitigations in subsequent updates to prevent similar attacks.
Apple is reportedly planning to add support for encrypted Rich Communication Services (RCS) messaging between iPhones and Android devices. This means messages, photos, and videos sent between the two platforms will be end-to-end encrypted, providing significantly more privacy and security than the current SMS/MMS system. While no official timeline has been given, the implementation appears to be dependent on Google updating its Messages app to support encryption for group chats. This move would finally bring a modern, secure messaging experience to cross-platform communication, replacing the outdated SMS standard.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed skepticism about Apple's purported move towards supporting encrypted RCS messaging. Several doubted Apple's sincerity, suggesting it's a PR move to deflect criticism about iMessage lock-in, rather than a genuine commitment to interoperability. Some pointed out that Apple benefits from the "green bubble" effect, which pressures users to stay within the Apple ecosystem. Others questioned the technical details of Apple's implementation, highlighting the complexities of key management and potential vulnerabilities. A few commenters welcomed the move, though with reservations, hoping it's a genuine step toward better cross-platform messaging. Overall, the sentiment leaned towards cautious pessimism, with many anticipating further "Apple-style" limitations and caveats in their RCS implementation.
The blog post urges Apple to implement disappearing messages in iMessage, arguing it's a crucial privacy feature already offered by competitors like Signal and WhatsApp. The author emphasizes that ephemerality is essential for protecting user privacy against device seizure, data breaches, and unwanted surveillance, citing real-world scenarios where sensitive information shared via iMessage has been exposed. They highlight the inherent risk of permanent message storage and propose that Apple offer user-configurable expiration times, similar to existing self-destructing media features. This would empower users to control the lifespan of their messages and minimize the potential for misuse or unintended exposure.
Hacker News users generally supported the idea of ephemeral messages in iMessage, citing privacy benefits and the existing precedent set by other messaging platforms. Some commenters raised concerns about the potential for misuse, particularly regarding evidence preservation in legal cases or investigations. Others discussed technical implementation details, questioning the reliability and security of such a feature, and suggesting potential solutions like server-side deletion or client-side cryptography. A few pointed out Apple's historical resistance to features perceived as hindering law enforcement access to data, speculating that this might be a factor in the absence of ephemeral messaging in iMessage. Finally, some questioned the effectiveness of disappearing messages given the possibility of screenshots and screen recordings.
Summary of Comments ( 83 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43493056
Hacker News commenters discuss the sophistication and impact of the BLASTPASS exploit. Several express concern over Apple's security, particularly their seemingly delayed response and the lack of transparency surrounding the vulnerability. Some debate the ethics of NSO Group and the use of such exploits, questioning the justification for their existence. Others delve into the technical details, praising the Project Zero analysis and discussing the exploit's clever circumvention of Apple's defenses. The complexity of the exploit and its potential for misuse are recurring themes. A few commenters note the irony of Google, a competitor, uncovering and disclosing the Apple vulnerability. There's also speculation about the potential legal and political ramifications of this discovery.
The Hacker News comments section for the post "Blasting Past WebP - An analysis of the NSO BLASTPASS iMessage exploit" contains a robust discussion about the technical details of the exploit, its implications, and the broader context of zero-day vulnerabilities and the spyware industry.
Several commenters delve into the specifics of the exploit, appreciating the depth and clarity of Google's Project Zero analysis. They discuss the cleverness of using a seemingly innocuous image format like WebP as a vector for attack, highlighting the complexity of parsing image files and the potential for vulnerabilities within these parsers. The conversation explores how the exploit chained together different vulnerabilities to achieve code execution, including memory corruption issues. Some comments dissect specific lines of code mentioned in the Project Zero analysis, demonstrating a deep understanding of the technical intricacies involved.
The implications of this exploit are also a significant focus. Commenters express concern over the sophistication and stealth of the attack, emphasizing the difficulty of detecting such exploits. The discussion touches upon the power and potential abuse of zero-day vulnerabilities, particularly in the hands of entities like NSO Group. There's a general sense of alarm regarding the potential for these types of attacks to target individuals, including journalists and human rights activists.
Beyond the technical specifics, the comments branch into broader discussions about the spyware industry and the need for greater regulation. Some users criticize the lack of accountability for companies like NSO Group, arguing that their actions threaten privacy and security. The debate extends to the role of governments in either enabling or combating the use of such spyware, with some commenters suggesting international cooperation is necessary to address the issue effectively. The ethical dimensions of developing and deploying such powerful tools are also scrutinized.
A few commenters offer practical advice, such as disabling iMessage for users concerned about being targeted. Others question the feasibility of such advice, noting the prevalence of iMessage usage and the difficulty of completely mitigating such risks.
The overall tone of the comments section is one of serious concern, mixed with a degree of technical fascination. The commenters express a combination of apprehension about the increasing sophistication of cyberattacks and a desire for greater transparency and accountability within the industry. The discussion demonstrates a keen understanding of the technical complexities involved, alongside a recognition of the broader societal implications of such exploits.