iPhone virus writer "could be charged" under hacking laws

David Braue10 November 2009, 10:54 PM

It may have just been a bit of fun, but Aussie iPhone virus developer Ashley Towns has opened himself up to criminal penalties under laws banning malicious damage to computers.


Towns, a 21-year-old software developer based in Wollongong, NSW, made worldwide headlines this week after developing Ikee, hailed as the first viable iPhone virus. And while Towns claims it was only done to prove a point about iPhone security, technology lawyer Steve White, principal of White SW Computer Law, believes the developer may have created a real legal problem for himself: "It's highly likely that he could be charged," he says.

A defence that the iPhone was not a computer for legal purposes wouldn't hold water, White warns. "Computer crimes legislation does extend to phones," he explains. "At the end of the day, they're yet another computer parked on a network. The devices were attacked in exactly the same way a computer would be attacked – picking up IP addresses, and scanning for IP addresses [to propagate]. It's my view that a commonsense approach would be taken" in extending existing legislation to cover hacking of phones.

The Commonwealth Cybercrime Act 2001 amended the Criminal Code Act 1995 with a criminal definition for unauthorised access, modification or impairment of data held in a computer. Division 478.1, for example, sets a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment for "unauthorised access to, or modification of, restricted data" using a telecommunications service".

NSW has its own computer crimes legislation, embodied in Part 6 of the Crimes Act 1900. Section 308D of
that legislation provides for up to 10 years' imprisonment for "unauthorised modification of data with intent to cause impairment", for example, while section 308H imposes up to two years' imprisonment for "unauthorised access to or modification of restricted data held in computer".

That would seem to be a clear description of the activity of Ikee, which exploits a weakness in 'jailbroken' iPhones – those which have been modified to allow the installation of non Apple-authorised applications – to change victims' home screen to a picture of British pop singer Rick Astley. The attack is the latest form of 'Rickrolling', a common Internet joke in which victims are tricked into viewing a video of Rick Astley's song 'Never Gonna Give You Up'. Google made the joke famous by redirecting all views of any YouTube video to the Astley video on April Fool's day.

Ikee spreads by targeting SSH (Secure Shell), a widely-used application to securely link computers that is often loaded onto jailbroken iPhones by users. Many of those users, Towns argues, forget to change the SSH password from the Apple-set default 'alpine', leaving their devices as sitting ducks for Ikee-like attacks.

After it has dropped its payload, Ikee disables SSH – but not before attempting to spread to other iPhones by pinging random IP addresses managed by Telstra, Optus, and Vodafone. Towns admitted to ABC News Online that his phone had hit "about 100 [other phones] alone but from there I have no idea".

While the threat to most iPhone users is remote – legitimate devices have nothing to fear and many users savvy enough to jailbreak their phones would know to change their SSH password – the attack vector has knocked a chink in the armour that has so far kept smartphones relatively virus-free. Ikee's source code is available online, meaning it is likely to be used as the basis of attacks that are potentially far more damaging.

And as for Towns? Prosecutors have not indicated whether they'll pursue charges against the self-confessed hacker. But by confessing to the attack in public, White says Towns has set himself up to be made an example of.

"It's rare to find [a hacker] who pops up and says 'I did it!'", White explains, referring to often convoluted and ponderous computer crimes investigations. "It was just a bit stupid. It sounds like fun, but just because something seems like fun doesn't mean you should do it."


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Unauthorised modification, hey? What exactly is "jailbreaking" again? Pretty sure Apple don't authorise that one on their "we own you" devices.

11 November 2009, 12:07 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Topher (New user):

The guy also posted how to remove it, If he was charged.. I doubt anything major would happen unless they felt like being dicks about it.

Yes I got hit by it, took about 5 mins to remove. No big deal.

Really he may have been making a statement that not enough people change their default password, I know I changed mine and all my friends who have jailbroken iphones.

I often thought that this could really be an easy way to take peoples information. sms database, contacts, photos, anything really if you knew where to look. We should be happy that it was so noticeable, and didn't just run in the background. It could have been a lot worse.



11 November 2009, 2:42 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

and many users savvy enough to jailbreak their phones would know to change their SSH password

Knowing how to and being smart enough to are entirely different things and the results of entirely different mindsets. It never ceases to amaze me how supposedly educated people will leave all the doors wide open.


the attack vector has knocked a chink in the armour that has so far kept smartphones relatively virus-free.

It's hardly a chink in any armour, when exploits simply take advantage of the operators poor security. That said the levels of protection and data security offered by by current smartphones is wholly inadequate given the types of information commonly being stored. ID thefts in too many cases is as simple as the removal of a micro SD from the victims phone.


11 November 2009, 9:36 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TV Bis (User):

These so called hackers are really smart when it comes to crime but boy are they dumb or what? Like any other person who tries to invade private property - go to jail! The only difference between a smart phone and a computer is the name. Break into a phone - break into a PC - no difference! Take the menace of the street - I hope they throw the book at him and I hope that people who break the laws and rules in regards to tampering with electronic devices wake up as well.......

11 November 2009, 11:25 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Yeah, sure... Throw people in jail for making proof of concept worms. That'll help convince people to go into the IT security industry.

These types of proof of concept worms have been required over the years to get companies and software authors to listen.

11 November 2009, 11:53 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Tin:
Yeah, sure... Throw people in jail for making proof of concept worms.

What concept was proven? The concept that if you leave your doors open some scrote with a ring in his nose will think your stuff is his stuff?


Quoting Tin:
proof of concept worms have been required over the years to get companies and software authors to listen.

The sublte difference being that in most cases the authors kept their POC corralled in a closed environment. The Moron in chief that authored this particular number has let it go in the wild. That it likely causes no damage makes it no less of a crime and no less of a stupid act.



11 November 2009, 12:02 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TV Bis:
These so called hackers are really smart

Some are, but this paticular exploit is not exactly genius.


Quoting TV Bis:
Like any other person who tries to invade private property - go to jail!

Or better still take financial liability for the damage caused.


Quoting TV Bis:
I hope they throw the book at him

Uh huh. No argument from my corner.


Quoting TV Bis:
and I hope that people who break the laws and rules in regards to tampering with electronic devices wake up as well.......

A lot of the owners need to do some waking up too. I hope for a drop in all crime but it doesn't mean I leave my home, car, phone or computer unlocked ever.



11 November 2009, 11:56 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CBR1100XX (Cornerstone member):

Quoting TV Bis:
These so called hackers are really smart when it comes to crime

No. they are smart when it comes to hacking. They are as dumb as doggy do do when it comes to what may be a crime.

Its analogous to robbing a bank, saying sorry on channel 7 news and giving the money back, expecting no recourse. D.U.M.B. .... Dumb!




11 November 2009, 12:19 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

 x  (User):

As I understand, there was no 'access to, or modification of restricted data', nor was there any impairment, let alone 'intent to cause impairment'.
They might actually have a case against Towns if they go for copyright infingment for the use of Rick's image from what is no doubt a copyrighted clip, but only becuase that's somewhat less of a stretch.
besides, i'm sure most of the iphones users didn't find the 'virus' to be another excelent chance for showing people their phone. They should be thanking Towns.


11 November 2009, 1:45 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting  x :
As I understand, there was no 'access to, or modification of restricted data', nor was there any impairment, let alone 'intent to cause impairment'.


Unless people start throwing around the idea of having any password (default or otherwise) is considered restricted. Which is sort of silly when talking about well known default passwords.


Quoting  x :
besides, i'm sure most of the iphones users didn't find the 'virus' to be another excelent chance for showing people their phone.


Especially given the media attention... Most of the people who jailbroke their iphone would be very keen to say something like, "you know that Rick Astley iPhone virus? Guess what I got!"

11 November 2009, 2:42 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting  x :
As I understand, there was no 'access to, or modification of restricted data', nor was there any impairment, let alone 'intent to cause impairment'.

So if I broke into your house to prove I could, but didn't steal anthing or do any damage that would be OK? Any entry into someone elses device without permission or authorisation is an illegal act.



11 November 2009, 2:49 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Aubrey (Advanced member):

Quoting Raindog:
So if I broke into your house to prove I could, but didn't steal anthing or do any damage that would be OK? Any entry into someone elses device without permission or authorisation is an illegal act.

I'm not sure this guy physically entered anyone's iphone. I may be wrong, but I suspect it was just some electrons moving about.

Maybe what he did was more like projecting a picture of Rick Astley onto your living room wall through an already open window (?)


Edit: ooo...ooo...I think I've just had an idea!


11 November 2009, 3:42 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Aubrey:
I'm not sure this guy physically entered anyone's iphone.

I'd like to suggest attempts be made to press him into one, just to prove/disprove the theory. :>


Quoting Aubrey:
but I suspect it was just some electrons moving about.

he cop a short shift if he ever attempt to mess with any of my electrons.


Quoting Aubrey:
Maybe what he did was more like projecting a picture of Rick Astley onto your living room wall through an already open window

And you don't see that as a hidious crime? :>


11 November 2009, 4:30 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Aubrey (Advanced member):

Quoting Raindog:
And you don't see that as a hidious crime? :>


Point taken. But that is a cultural offense; nothing to do with hacking.

More importantly, where can I get a portable projector?



11 November 2009, 7:11 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Raindog:
So if I broke into your house to prove I could, but didn't steal anthing or do any damage that would be OK?


To make the house thing more accurate - He walked up to a random house, asked if anyone was home, got a reply, tried to open the door with a known insecure key, and then left a note saying he had been and their locks were crap.

And even then, the houses he has been visiting are only ones where they've done extensive renovations without council approval...

11 November 2009, 6:38 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Aubrey (Advanced member):

Woohoo, analogies at 40 paces.

Quoting Tin:
To make the house thing more accurate -

If it was an iphone, he may have owned the house but all "his" equipment and fittings were leased.


Quoting Tin:
only ones where they've done extensive renovations without council approval...

I think "leasing company" rather than council - you get to vote for a council.




11 November 2009, 7:08 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tthe great Jonno (New user):

Hmmm, so we prosecute a person who exposes weaknesses of software to the public and we cant find criminals who exploit these weaknesses in the code.
Why don't we prosecute the manufacturers who fail to protect the public when they leave a serious security problem like this? Or are we protecting the manufacturers by doing this, by saying we know we have a problem, so shut up? Its time an open ethical approach on the workings of all commercial software is made, and submitted to organsations to check its workings, and manufacturers explained what all code does and doesn't do, and laws made to protect the general public from corporations who spy on them or use the software outside the boundaries of a units application.

12 November 2009, 10:12 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Well in this case, it only effects people who've manually modified the OS, and then installed a 3rd party program which they failed to configure. Not the vendors fault, but the users. If you install 3rd party tools you don't understand, you should expect problems if you don't read up on them at least a little bit.

12 November 2009, 10:24 AM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Tthe great Jonno:
so we prosecute a person who exposes weaknesses of software to the public and we cant find criminals who exploit these weaknesses in the code.

The world does not need some guy with a ring through his head creating amateur mayhem, to become aware of weakness in code. Just thank heaven this moron didn't discover a local outbreak of ebola, he'd have put it in the drinking water to alert authorities.


Quoting Tthe great Jonno:
Why don't we prosecute the manufacturers who fail to protect the public

Why don't we prosecute stupid people who refuse to take any personal responsibility for themselves instead. How a bout a stupid tax? $900 fee for loading a jailbreak patch without any clue to the consequences, another $900 for every password on every sytem users were too stupid to secure. I might send my suggestion to Kev, he's looking for new opportunities to spend other peoples money.


Quoting Tthe great Jonno:
and laws made to protect the general public from corporations

THe thinng most victims of this one need to be protected from is their own stupidity.


Quoting Tthe great Jonno:
from corporations who spy on them

here comes the black helicopters, now



12 November 2009, 8:20 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

The Big Baboo (User):

Jeez Oi must be behind the toimes :( All i use moi fone for is to make calls to people and the odd sms now and then. And wood you beleeve I still haven't got a plan with any company or ever connected to the net with it. Jaysus I must be a sick puppy :)

12 November 2009, 12:08 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

The Big Baboo (User):

Quoting The Big Baboo:
Jaysus I must be a sick puppy :)

O yea and PS: Who in Gods green earth ever had the nerve to make me a "senior member" here.
I may be a "senior" but I'll be damned if I'll ever let myself be dragged into being a member!!!!!




12 November 2009, 12:18 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ausman (Regular user):

I think people who do this do serve a benefit for the community in general (as long as ther code demonstrates potential and is not destructive). It forces developers to think smart and protect their users. Otherwise money wouldn't be invested in security by developers - it's not a sexy feature for consumer brochures/ads sadly.

15 November 2009, 7:26 PM (4 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

junqin (New user):

I have written a comprehensive solution to removing the iKee virus. I have tried it out on my iPhone. So it should work fine for you.

goto-> junqin1.blogspot.com/2009/11/ikee-iphone-worm.html

24 November 2009, 4:02 AM (3 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags