Incident: Malicious Battery Hack Compromises Smartphone Security and Privacy.

Published Date: 2018-06-25

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident described in the article happened in June 2018. [72555]
System 1. Smartphone batteries with implanted micro-controllers [72555]
Responsible Organization 1. Hackers [72555]
Impacted Organization 1. Users of smartphones were impacted by the software failure incident described in the article [72555].
Software Causes 1. The software cause of the failure incident was a vulnerability in smartphones that allowed hackers to record everything a user types by studying the power levels of the battery [72555].
Non-software Causes 1. The failure incident involved a physical component, the smartphone battery, being compromised by implanting a micro-controller to record power levels [72555].
Impacts 1. The software failure incident allowed hackers to potentially record users' passwords, monitor their most visited websites, track the last time the camera was used, and when calls were made on smartphones [72555]. 2. The attack required the smartphone to be in use and powered by the battery rather than on charge, making it a potential security threat for users [72555]. 3. The incident highlighted the vulnerability of smartphones to attacks that exploit power consumption data from batteries to track users' keystrokes and activities [72555]. 4. The attack method involved swapping a smartphone's battery for a malicious variant with an embedded microcontroller to sample power flowing in and out of the battery cell, enabling hackers to track user activity [72555]. 5. The software failure incident demonstrated that the attack was hard to detect as it left no software footprints on the device, making it a stealthy form of surveillance [72555].
Preventions 1. Implementing strict supply chain security measures to prevent unauthorized access to smartphones for battery swaps [72555]. 2. Developing security mechanisms to detect and prevent the use of compromised batteries with embedded microcontrollers [72555]. 3. Conducting regular security audits and assessments to identify potential vulnerabilities in smartphone batteries and power consumption monitoring systems [72555].
Fixes 1. Implementing additional security measures to detect and prevent unauthorized physical access to smartphones, such as tamper-evident seals or secure boot mechanisms [72555]. 2. Developing software solutions that can detect abnormal power consumption patterns indicative of a malicious battery implant [72555]. 3. Conducting further research to explore scalable and efficient defense mechanisms against battery-based attacks on mobile devices [72555].
References 1. Researchers from University of Texas at Austin, the Hebrew University, and Israel Institute of Technology Technion [72555]

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring unknown (a) The software failure incident related to the battery hack described in the article has not been reported to have happened again within the same organization or with its products and services. The attack described in the article is a theoretical scenario presented in a research paper and has not been recorded in the real world [72555]. (b) The software failure incident related to the battery hack described in the article has not been reported to have happened again at other organizations or with their products and services. The attack described in the article is a theoretical scenario presented in a research paper and has not been recorded in the real world [72555].
Phase (Design/Operation) design, operation (a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is evident in the article where researchers found a way to extract sensitive information from smartphones by implanting a micro-controller into a phone's battery to record power levels and using AI to match power flows with specific keystrokes. This method exploited a vulnerability in the design of smartphones that allowed hackers to track users' keystrokes, web history, and call activities [72555]. (b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is demonstrated by the fact that hackers would need physical access to a smartphone to swap the battery for a malicious one with an embedded microcontroller. This operation-based vulnerability allowed attackers to monitor the phone's activity without leaving any software footprints on the device, making it hard to detect [72555].
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system (a) within_system: The software failure incident described in the article is within the system. The attack involves implanting a micro-controller into a phone's battery to record power flowing in and out of the device, which is a method of tracking that originates from within the system itself [72555].
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions, human_actions (a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions: The software failure incident described in the article is related to a potential security threat where hackers could exploit the power signatures registered by a smartphone battery to track users' keystrokes, web history, call history, and more. This attack involves implanting a micro-controller into a phone's battery to record power flows and then using AI to match power flows with specific keystrokes. The attack does not involve direct human actions but rather relies on the power consumption patterns of the device to infer user activity [72555]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions: The software failure incident discussed in the article involves a theoretical attack method where hackers could swap a smartphone's battery with a malicious variant containing an embedded microcontroller to record power flowing in and out of the battery cell. This attack requires physical access to the smartphone to replace the battery, which would involve human actions such as accessing the device, swapping the battery, and potentially deploying the compromised battery in various scenarios like at the supply chain, repair store, or during an airport security check [72555].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware (a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware: The software failure incident described in the article is related to a hardware attack where hackers could exploit the power signatures registered by the smartphone battery to track users' keystrokes, web history, call history, and more. This attack involves implanting a micro-controller into a phone's battery to record power flows and using AI to match power flows with specific keystrokes. The compromised battery, referred to as a 'poisoned' battery, records power traces which can be translated by AI to reveal the user's activity on the smartphone. This attack requires physical access to the device to swap the battery for the malicious variant with the embedded microcontroller [72555]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to software: The software failure incident in the article is not directly related to a failure originating in software. Instead, the incident involves a sophisticated hardware attack using a compromised battery to track user activity on a smartphone. The attack leverages the power consumption patterns of the battery to infer keystrokes and other activities on the device. The attack does not involve any software footprints on the device and is primarily focused on exploiting the hardware component, i.e., the battery, to gather sensitive information from the user's interactions with the smartphone [72555].
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) malicious (a) The software failure incident described in the articles is malicious in nature. The incident involves a sophisticated attack where hackers can use compromised smartphone batteries to record everything a user types, including passwords, by implanting a micro-controller into the battery to monitor power flows and match them with specific keystrokes. This attack is described as a 'malicious battery attack' and is aimed at tracking users' keystrokes, web history, call history, and more without leaving any software footprints on the device [72555]. The attack requires physical access to the smartphone to swap the battery for a malicious variant, indicating a deliberate intent to harm the system and compromise user privacy and security. (b) There is no information in the articles to suggest a non-malicious software failure incident.
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) unknown The intent of the software failure incident described in the articles is related to poor_decisions. The incident involves a sophisticated attack where hackers could use compromised batteries to record power signatures and track users' keystrokes, web history, and call activities. This attack method involves implanting a micro-controller into a phone's battery to monitor power flows and using AI to match power flows with specific keystrokes. The attack was described in a research paper by security researchers from various institutions, highlighting the potential security threat posed by exploiting the power consumption of smartphone batteries [72555].
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) unknown (a) The software failure incident in the article is not related to development incompetence. The incident described in the article is a sophisticated attack leveraging the power signatures of smartphone batteries to track users' keystrokes and activities. This attack was carefully planned and executed by hackers, rather than being a result of incompetence in software development [72555]. (b) The software failure incident in the article is accidental. The attack described in the article is not accidental but a deliberate and well-thought-out method by hackers to exploit the power consumption of smartphone batteries to track users' activities. It was a calculated and intentional act rather than an accidental software failure [72555].
Duration permanent The software failure incident described in the article is more of a permanent nature. The attack using compromised batteries to record users' keystrokes and activities on smartphones is a persistent threat that could potentially expose sensitive information without leaving software footprints on the device [72555]. The attack method, although theoretical at the time of the article, highlights a significant vulnerability that could be exploited continuously if executed successfully.
Behaviour value, other (a) crash: The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. (b) omission: The software failure incident described in the articles does not involve the system omitting to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). (c) timing: The software failure incident does not involve the system performing its intended functions correctly but too late or too early. (d) value: The software failure incident is related to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. In this case, the attack allows hackers to record keystrokes and monitor various activities on a smartphone by analyzing power consumption from the battery [72555]. (e) byzantine: The software failure incident does not involve the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. (f) other: The software failure incident involves a unique behavior where the system is compromised by a malicious battery that records power signatures to track users' activities, including keystrokes, web history, and call logs. This attack method is considered a novel and powerful threat to user privacy [72555].

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception None None
Communication None None
Application None None

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence property, non-human, theoretical_consequence (a) unknown (b) unknown (c) unknown (d) People's material goods, money, or data was impacted due to the software failure. The software failure incident described in the article involves a potential security threat where hackers could leverage the power signatures registered by the smartphone battery to track users' keystrokes, web and call history, passwords, and other activities [72555]. (e) unknown (f) Non-human entities were impacted due to the software failure. The software failure incident involves the use of a compromised battery cell to record power signatures of different features on the handset, potentially allowing hackers to monitor various activities on the smartphone [72555]. (g) There were no real observed consequences of the software failure. The article mentions that although the battery-based attack was included in a research paper and demonstrated as powerful and feasible, it remains theoretical for now, with no real-world attack of this type being recorded [72555]. (h) There were potential consequences discussed of the software failure that did not occur. The researchers discuss the potential consequences of the malicious battery attack, such as monitoring users' activities, keystrokes, and passwords, but note that the attack remains theoretical and no real-world instances have been recorded [72555]. (i) unknown
Domain information The software failure incident described in the article is related to the industry of information (a). The incident involves a security threat where hackers could exploit smartphone batteries to track users' keystrokes, web history, and call activities by analyzing power consumption patterns [72555].

Sources

Back to List