Incident: Apple's App Store Compromised by XcodeGhost Malware Incident

Published Date: 2010-02-03

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident mentioned in Article 114440 happened in September 2015. [114440] 2. The software failure incident mentioned in Article 577 happened more than a year before the article was published on February 3, 2010. Therefore, the incident likely occurred in 2008 or earlier.
System 1. Apple's iPhone app review process [577] 2. Xcode, Apple’s iOS and OS X app development tool [114440]
Responsible Organization 1. Developers who used a counterfeit copy of Xcode, resulting in the XcodeGhost malware incident [114440] 2. Apple's lax security screening at the App Store and design flaws that allowed malicious applications to be distributed to iPhone users [577]
Impacted Organization 1. 128 million iPhone users [114440] 2. Apple's iPhone App Store users [577]
Software Causes 1. The software failure incident was caused by a mass hack involving malicious apps in the Apple App Store, which led to iPhones and iPads being part of a botnet that stole potentially sensitive user information [114440]. 2. The incident was a result of legitimate developers unknowingly using a counterfeit copy of Xcode, Apple's app development tool, which contained malicious code inserted by XcodeGhost [114440]. 3. The incident highlighted a design flaw in Apple's iPhone app review process, which was inadequate to prevent malicious apps from being distributed to millions of users, allowing rogue apps to access personal data without user consent [577].
Non-software Causes 1. Lack of proper security screening processes at Apple's App Store [577] 2. Design flaws in the iPhone app review process that allowed malicious apps to be distributed [577]
Impacts 1. The software failure incident involving the XcodeGhost malware resulted in potentially sensitive user information being stolen from 128 million iPhone users, with 2,500 malicious apps being downloaded a total of 203 million times [114440]. 2. The lax security screening at Apple's App Store and design flaws allowed malicious applications to be downloaded by iPhone users, leading to the harvesting of personal data and spying on users [577].
Preventions 1. Implementing a more robust app review process to detect and prevent malicious apps from being distributed to users [577]. 2. Enhancing sandboxing techniques to better protect user data and prevent unauthorized access to sensitive information [577]. 3. Conducting thorough security assessments and audits of apps to identify and address potential vulnerabilities before they are released to the public [577]. 4. Providing more transparency to users about the data collected by apps and how it is being used, allowing users to make informed decisions about their privacy [577]. 5. Regularly updating security measures and addressing design flaws promptly to mitigate risks of data breaches and unauthorized access [577].
Fixes 1. Implement a more rigorous app review process to detect and prevent malicious apps from being distributed [577]. 2. Enhance security measures to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive user data [577]. 3. Regularly update security protocols and address design flaws in the software to improve overall security [577]. 4. Provide timely security updates to address identified vulnerabilities and protect user data [577]. 5. Increase transparency with users by notifying them of security incidents and providing clear guidance on how to protect their data [114440].
References 1. Email entered into court in Epic Games' lawsuit against Apple [114440] 2. White paper by Nicolas Seriot, a software engineer and scientific collaborator at the Swiss University of Applied Sciences [577]

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring one_organization, multiple_organization (a) The software failure incident related to lax security screening at Apple's App Store and a design flaw putting iPhone users at risk of downloading malicious applications has happened again at Apple. The incident involved a design flaw that allowed rogue apps to harvest personal data and spy on users, leading to concerns about the inadequate app review process and potential data privacy violations [577]. (b) The software failure incident involving a mass hack on iOS devices through malicious apps distributed via the App Store has also happened at other organizations. The incident highlighted the risks associated with legitimate developers unknowingly using a counterfeit copy of Xcode, resulting in the insertion of malicious code into apps. This incident demonstrated the potential for widespread compromise of user information through a supply chain attack [114440].
Phase (Design/Operation) design, operation (a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in Article 577, where a Swiss researcher warned about a design flaw in Apple's App Store that was putting iPhone users at risk of downloading malicious applications. The design flaw allowed rogue apps to harvest personal data and send it to a remote server without the user's knowledge. The flaw was related to the inadequate iPhone app review process that failed to stop malicious apps from being distributed to millions of users [577]. (b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase can be observed in Article 114440, where Apple faced criticism for not notifying 128 million iPhone users about a mass hack that compromised their devices. Despite uncovering 2,500 malicious apps downloaded by 128 million users, Apple chose not to send an email to notify the affected users, instead opting for a general post that listed only the top 25 most downloaded apps affected by the hack. This failure in the operation phase led to a lack of direct notification to users affected by the security lapse [114440].
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system, outside_system (a) within_system: The software failure incident reported in the articles is primarily due to contributing factors that originate from within the system. In Article 114440, it is mentioned that the mass hack affecting iPhone users in 2015 was a result of legitimate developers unknowingly writing apps using a counterfeit copy of Xcode, Apple's app development tool. This counterfeit tool, known as XcodeGhost, inserted malicious code into the apps, leading to the compromise of user information [114440]. (b) outside_system: The software failure incident also involves contributing factors that originate from outside the system. Article 577 highlights how lax security screening at Apple's App Store and a design flaw put iPhone users at risk of downloading malicious applications that could steal data and spy on them. The inadequate app review process at the App Store allowed malicious apps to be distributed to millions of users, indicating a vulnerability in the external screening process [577].
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions, human_actions (a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions: - The software failure incident in Article 114440 was caused by a mass hack where legitimate developers unknowingly used a counterfeit copy of Xcode, Apple's app development tool, which inserted malicious code into their apps [114440]. - The malicious code inserted by the counterfeit Xcode tool, known as XcodeGhost, made iPhones part of a botnet that stole potentially sensitive user information [114440]. - The infections were the result of the counterfeit Xcode tool surreptitiously inserting malicious code alongside normal app functions, causing iPhones to report to a command-and-control server and provide various device information [114440]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions: - The software failure incident in Article 577 was due to lax security screening at Apple's App Store and a design flaw that allowed malicious applications to be downloaded by iPhone users [577]. - The design flaw in Apple's iPhone app review process was highlighted by a Swiss researcher, Nicolas Seriot, who demonstrated how an innocent-looking app could be designed to harvest personal data and send it to a remote server without the user's knowledge [577]. - Seriot created open-source proof-of-concept spyware called "SpyPhone" to demonstrate how rogue apps could access personal information, track user activities, and harvest data from iPhone users [577].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware, software (a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware: - The incident reported in Article 577 highlights a design flaw in Apple's iPhone app review process that puts iPhone users at risk of downloading malicious applications that could steal data and spy on them. This design flaw is related to the hardware aspect of the iPhone devices, as the flaw allows rogue apps to access personal data and send it to remote servers without the user's knowledge [577]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to software: - The incident reported in Article 114440 discusses a mass hack on iOS devices that occurred due to legitimate developers unknowingly using a counterfeit copy of Xcode, Apple's app development tool. This counterfeit tool, known as XcodeGhost, inserted malicious code into apps, leading to the compromise of potentially sensitive user information. This incident is a clear example of a software failure originating from the use of compromised software tools [114440].
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) malicious (a) The software failure incident reported in the articles is related to a malicious objective. The incident involved the distribution of malicious apps on Apple's App Store, which were designed to steal user data and spy on them [577]. The rogue apps were able to access sensitive information such as the user's device details, location, activities, interests, and friends without the user's knowledge or consent. The incident highlighted the inadequacy of Apple's app review process in preventing malicious apps from reaching users [577]. Additionally, there was a mass hack incident in which legitimate developers unknowingly used a counterfeit copy of Xcode, known as XcodeGhost, to develop apps. This counterfeit tool inserted malicious code into the apps, creating a botnet that stole potentially sensitive user information [114440]. The incident involved a large number of affected users, but Apple chose not to directly notify them, opting instead to provide general information about the malicious app campaign through a now-deleted post [114440].
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) poor_decisions, accidental_decisions The intent of the software failure incident reported in the articles can be categorized as both poor_decisions and accidental_decisions: (a) poor_decisions: The incident involved poor decisions made by Apple managers in 2015 when they chose not to notify 128 million iPhone users about a mass hack compromising their devices. Despite uncovering 2,500 malicious apps downloaded by millions of users, Apple decided not to send a notification email to the affected users, opting instead to publish a general post that was eventually deleted [114440]. (b) accidental_decisions: The incident also involved accidental decisions or unintended consequences related to lax security screening at Apple's App Store and a design flaw that allowed malicious applications to be distributed to iPhone users. The inadequate app review process and design flaws led to the distribution of rogue apps that could harvest personal data without users' knowledge, indicating unintended consequences of the app approval process [577].
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) development_incompetence, accidental (a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is evident in the articles. Article 577 discusses how lax security screening at Apple's App Store and a design flaw put iPhone users at risk of downloading malicious applications that could steal data and spy on them. The article highlights that the iPhone app review process was inadequate to stop malicious apps from being distributed to millions of users, indicating a failure in ensuring the security of the platform [577]. (b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is also present in the articles. Article 114440 describes a mass hack in September 2015 where legitimate developers unknowingly wrote apps using a counterfeit copy of Xcode, Apple’s iOS and OS X app development tool. This counterfeit tool, known as XcodeGhost, inserted malicious code into apps, causing iPhones to report to a command-and-control server and provide sensitive user information. This incident was not intentional but resulted from developers using a faster-to-download counterfeit version of Xcode without realizing the malicious code it contained [114440].
Duration permanent (a) The software failure incident described in the articles is more of a permanent nature. The incident involves a design flaw in Apple's App Store review process that allows malicious apps to be distributed to millions of users, putting them at risk of data theft and spying [577]. Additionally, there were instances where Apple failed to notify users of compromised apps, indicating a systemic issue in handling security breaches [114440]. These factors suggest a long-standing problem rather than a one-time or temporary failure.
Behaviour omission, timing, other (a) crash: The articles do not mention any specific instances of a system crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. (b) omission: The incident described in Article 577 highlights a design flaw in Apple's App Store review process that allowed malicious apps to be distributed to iPhone users, potentially leading to the omission of performing intended functions related to user data privacy and security [577]. (c) timing: The incident in Article 114440 discusses a mass hack on iOS devices in 2015 where Apple managers debated whether to notify affected users, indicating a potential timing issue in deciding when to inform users about security breaches [114440]. (d) value: The articles do not explicitly mention a failure due to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. (e) byzantine: The articles do not describe a failure due to the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. (f) other: The incident in Article 577 highlights a situation where the system's approval process for apps in the App Store was inadequate to prevent malicious apps from being distributed, potentially leading to a failure in ensuring the security and privacy of user data [577].

IoT System Layer

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

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence property, theoretical_consequence (d) property: People's material goods, money, or data was impacted due to the software failure. The software failure incident discussed in the articles involved malicious apps on Apple's App Store that were able to steal potentially sensitive user information from iPhone users. These apps, created using a counterfeit copy of Xcode called XcodeGhost, inserted malicious code into legitimate apps, causing iPhones to report to a command-and-control server and provide various device information. The stolen data included the name of the infected app, app-bundle identifier, network information, device details, and unique identifiers [114440]. Additionally, a Swiss researcher highlighted the risks posed by malicious applications on Apple's App Store, which could harvest personal data and send it to remote servers without users' knowledge. The researcher created a proof-of-concept spyware called "SpyPhone" that could access Safari searches, YouTube history, email account parameters, keyboard cache, photos, and device Wi-Fi connections, potentially exposing sensitive information [577].
Domain information, finance (a) The software failure incident reported in the articles is related to the information industry. The incident involved the compromise of iOS devices through malicious apps distributed via the App Store, leading to the theft of potentially sensitive user information [Article 114440]. (h) The incident also has implications for the finance industry as it involves the security and privacy of user data on iOS devices, which could include financial information stored on the devices [Article 114440]. (m) Additionally, the incident could be related to the technology industry as a whole, given that it involves the security vulnerabilities in the iOS ecosystem and the App Store review process [Article 577].

Sources

Back to List