iPhone photo-slurping loophole sparks app privacy fears
Contact lists, pics, vids ... what else can devs grab?
Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery
Exactly how much data can be extracted from iPhones by apps without explicit user consent has been called into question after it emerged that software granted access to location-finding services can siphon off punters' photos.
The extraction of address book information without permission from the user has already raised privacy concerns, heightened this week after Facebook was obliged to deny that its iPhone app was reading private text messages.
But contact information is not the only thing Jesus-mobe owners need to be wary about.
Once an Apple fanboi grants permission for an iPhone or iPad app to access location information, the app can copy their photo library without any further notice or warning, The New York Times reports.
When an app wants to use location data, Apple's devices prompt users for permission via a pop-up window that warns that proceeding "allows access to location information in photos and videos".
Developers reckon this warning is a mildly misleading because once granted, an iOS application might have access to the actual photos and video clips – not just the location where they were recorded. The functionality to support this was bundled in iOS version 4, which was released in 2010.
Whether any apps are actually using this to covertly extract user photos is unclear. Apple screens applications before allowing them to be be made available through its App Store. However this precaution may be insufficient, according to iOS developers.
"Conceivably, an app with access to location data could put together a history of where the user has been based on photo location," David E Chen, co-founder of iOS application developer Curio, told The NYT. "The location history, as well as your photos and videos, could be uploaded to a server. Once the data is off of the iOS device, Apple has virtually no ability to monitor or limit its use."
Other developers quizzed by The NYT said that the problem basically stemmed from a misleading pop-up dialogue, rather than anything inherently bad.
"Apple is asking for location permission, but really what it is doing is accessing your entire photo library," said John Casasanta, owner of iPhone app development studio Tap Tap Tap. "The message the user is being presented with is very, very unclear."
The NYT asked an independent developer to write an iOS application that collected photos and location information from an iPhone as a test. The proof-of-concept app, dubbed PhotoSpy, was capable of siphoning photos from smartphones and tablets but (once again) its permission dialog screen only asked for location information.
Crucially the app was not submitted to the App Store. So privacy of photos on iPhones hinges on the robustness of Apple's approval process, which is pretty tight, if not foolproof.
"Apple has a tremendous responsibility as the gatekeeper to the App Store and the apps people put on their phone to police the apps," said David Jacobs, a fellow at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Apple and app makers should be making sure people understand what they are consenting to.
"We’ve seen celebrities and famous people have pictures leaked and disclosed in the past. There’s every reason to think that if you make that easier to do, you’ll see much more of it," he warned.
Android users who give permission for an application to modify or delete SD card contents are equally opening up their photograph albums, along with everything else, often without the user realising it. So the issue of smartphone privacy is far from restricted to iPhone users.
Frankly the whole business is enough to tempt the more privacy-conscious back to the trusty Nokia 6310 – or carrier pigeons. ®
COMMENTS
I suppose you could just
have a phone that's a phone and a camera that's a camera and never the twain shall meet, but then I keep forgetting that's horribly old-fashioned and that, if you can't produce your own ill-considered drunken-night-out blackmail material and distribute it planetwide in seconds, you hardly even count as a member of society any more.
Still better than Android
Android apps don't show or request any permission, not even location, to read any photo - or actually any file - stored on the SD card (the default storage location for photos)
Don't get why the media is only targeting iOS over this.
ps - Here's a little Android APK I cooked earlier to show this: http://oron.com/ks4idg9txfru
Check the manifest, no permissions at all.
Re: I suppose you could just
Slight correction required there. What's "old-fashioned" is the idea of a camera phone with software that was provided by the manufacturer without malicious intent.
To be a member of society, you need a "device" that can run "apps" written by untrusted third parties. This is no different from the web in the 90s or PCs in the 80s and the solution is the one identified in the 60s -- put some security in the OS that allows end-users to control what apps can look at. And if that sounds "too user-unfriendly", then perhaps it is time you regressed to the old-fashioned approach of not running arbitrary shit on the same device that you use for online banking.
Though I'm an old fogey myself, I don't personally care *which* of the alternatives *you* choose. I just wish people would choose and stop being "shocked, shocked I tell you" each time we get a story like this. Trust is what comes out of the top of a security model, not what you blindly put in as the foundation.

IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider