Hacker News
6 hours ago by spicyjpeg

The article does not make it particularly clear, but the malware in question is delivered through official first-party OTA updates on cheap Chinese aftermarket head units that happen to run Android. It cannot self-propagate to any Android-based head unit, nor does it affect Android Auto which is a "dumb" screen mirroring protocol with the bulk of the software running on the connected phone rather than the head unit. This seems to be a very similar situation to that of cheap generic Android TV streaming boxes, which often come pre-infected from the factory with residential proxies and other malware as well; most of the infrastructure is likely shared.

6 hours ago by manbash

Indeed this is an odd disclosure and I am not familiar with past posts by them.

Moreover, no CVE is associated with this claimed vulnerability. It's not even stated which Android version or automotive head-unit variant version is affected.

an hour ago by _joel

Oh, I see I'm getting downvoted by the Russian bots, quelle surprise.

5 hours ago by p-e-w

It’s astonishing how this relatively long article contains not a shred of actual evidence that any of this is true. It’s all “alleged”, “raised concerns”, “sources said” etc.

an hour ago by ghostly_s

Why do they gloss right over how this was distributed? Barring details of any other kind of exploit we would have to assume the vendor's update server was compromised? If so why don't they just say so.

7 minutes ago by supriyo-biswas

To avoid charges of libel.

3 hours ago by markus_zhang

This makes me think whether the whole chain is an intelligence side business — sell cheap electronics for profit and at the same time own them too.

4 hours ago by reaperducer

It cannot self-propagate to any Android-based head unit

Remember that not that long ago viruses spread through floppy disks.

Today, people share USB sticks full of music from one car to another all the time. They also bring their music from their home car to a rental car and back.

3 hours ago by charcircuit

Most people just bring their phone between cars for music.

7 hours ago by Retr0id

> Since a head unit typically holds nothing of value to an attacker, one of the more likely attack scenarios using “classic” Android malware is infecting the device to recruit it into a botnet

People do pair them with their phones, though. I could imagine a future version of malware like this propagating laterally.

6 hours ago by axegon_

Almost, though I understand I am the exception rather than the rule: Personally I have an aftermarket android head unit since the standard one was incredibly basic, no real time navigation updates, updating maps was a pain in the ass and so on. Initially I did pair it with my phone but since it is an aftermarket unit from a company which apparently does not exist anymore, newer phones cannot be paired with it. So my only option was to go the opposite route and use my phone as a wireless hotspot(almost - there's a raspberry pi with openwrt between the two). And since I self-host everything, I had no choice but to hook it up to my vpn. That said, I understand the implications of doing this so ultimately the network access it gets is incredibly limited: everything that is not my music server and the maps provider has been cut off completely. The downside is that every now and then I get a "can't connect to google services" notification though that is technically reassuring from a security perspective.

an hour ago by madduci

Some automakers like Nissan bring their own 4G SIM, which makes the pairing of phone not important, as the head unit can access Internet by itself

an hour ago by ghostly_s

"Pairing" with a head unit is not an open socket to dump anything you care to down the wire. That would require finding a rather remarkable vulnerability in one of the audio/address book/screen mirroring APIs the devices use.

an hour ago by Retr0id

Bluetooth RCEs have happened in the past and will happen again.

6 hours ago by buckle8017

Head units can log location, navigation start and end points, call logs, call audio, and scrape full contact lists.

Just off the top of my head.

6 hours ago by Retr0id

That's scary from a user perspective, but harder to monetise at scale as an attacker. Proxy endpoints are just another commodity (and offer recurring revenue).

6 hours ago by wongarsu

If you infect tens of vehicles that's not that valuable. But if you infect ten thousand vehicles, convinced a trusted member of one of the bigger black hat forums it's real and have him vouch for your marketplace post, there should be some buyers for full movement profiles, call logs and address books of ten thousand people

And doing that doesn't really interfere with also setting up and selling proxy endpoints

6 hours ago by stymaar

Yeah, especially since most of these are already available for purchase from data brokers.

2 hours ago by carstenhag

Some head units (working with a 1st party one atm) have two networks: OEM-paid (unlimited data) and user-paid. A 3rd party apk would be consuming all bought traffic quite soon.

Also typical Android permissions still apply. The user would need to grant the malicious app contacts, call logs, etc permissions.

6 hours ago by dzdt

There are a lot of cars out there where the head unit has connection to the CAN bus. Which means this malware vector could be used to directly cause crashes. E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19751872

5 hours ago by Ccecil

The car hacker's handbook [1] has a chapter on just using the infotainment system to access the CAN. Specifically mentions "attacking through the update system".

[1]https://opengarages.org/handbook/ebook/ (chapter 9)

5 hours ago by 01100011

An aftermarket head unit connects to the CAN bus? The aftermarket head unit I installed certainly doesn't. Are you sure what you are saying, which is true for OEM units, applies to aftermarket ones?

5 hours ago by RealityVoid

Can't vouch for all car architectures, but in most cases the head unit is QM and safety domains are usually segmented from each other. So even if the head unit talks CAN (it needs to get car data somehow) it will only communicate with the rest of the car through a gateway that will not allow it to take any dangerous actions.

5 hours ago by karlshea

Mine does. Its dashboard shows fuel level and a bunch of other things and I can bring up a speedometer/rpm app.

I believe the connection exists because the steering wheel buttons/iDrive talk to the original head unit over CAN.

4 hours ago by rootusrootus

That’s wild, I’ve never run across a head unit that had me connect OBD2. I think I would just ignore that bit of the install instructions.

3 hours ago by kanbankaren

> speedometer/rpm

This is available on standard OBD-II. Maybe, it is accessible over CAN?

2 hours ago by dx4100

Many do - the one I was looking at for my vehicle in particular uses it to restore the steering wheel controls (which are broadcast over the CAN-B low speed bus)

5 hours ago by jiaosdjf

Manufacturers should be sued to absolute oblivion for doing what any developer would tell you is a security hole.

6 hours ago by jackdecker

For whatever reason, the idea of this being in my car is relatively scarier for me than if this was just my phone ?

I think partially as my mental model of both android auto and CarPlay is that they operate as a passthrough of my device rather than as an separate installation of the OS entirely (I wasn’t aware the head unit itself had the ability to install APKs independently).

Also, feel like John Gruber is going to have a field day with this one

6 hours ago by MBCook

Android Automotive is the infotainment system’s OS and runs fully without a phone.

Android Auto is the Google equivalent of CarPlay and runs on your phone.

It’s easy to confuse. Like watching Apple TV on your Apple TV in Apple’s TV app.

5 hours ago by jackdecker

So I can use android auto on an android automotive head unit - got it but also this seems needlessly confusing naming structure. Apple TV comparison is apt lol

2 hours ago by MBCook

It makes perfect sense in isolation. It’s a good name.

Unfortunately Android Auto already existed. So it’s confusing.

5 hours ago by Zigurd

Did they hire their branding person from Microsoft? And how about AppFunctions (Google) and AppIntents (Apple)?

3 hours ago by izacus

How would you name them?

6 hours ago by dybber

I don’t believe this is Android auto running from a phone, but a situation where the manufacturer have used Android Automotive as operating system for the built in head unit. As e.g. on Volvo’s.

6 hours ago by inquirerGeneral

[dead]

6 hours ago by davoneus

The logical endpoint of the entire "the car as software" concept. Can't wait for the security vendors to start hawking "AV for your car"

6 hours ago by Retr0id

I hope we see "de-smartification" conversion kits that replace the electronics with more straightforward (and repairable) offline equivalents. The ultimate AV.

5 hours ago by doublerabbit

It's already in televisions. Not long now.

5 hours ago by jiaosdjf

"How has the automotive industry adapted to decades of computing best practices?"

- Head units connected to CAN bus with bluetooth vulnerabilities allowing attacker to remotely activate locks and windows and sometimes even driving controls

- Unsecured CAN bus cables everywhere allowing cars to be stolen through headlights and behind mud guard flaps

- Keyless entry basically a shit show of faraday pouches

- OBD port allowing thieves to clone a full key in seconds

- Even cars in decent neighbourhoods have to use steering locks

Sorry but this is a fucking joke and the automotive industry is cancer.

At least Tesla actually bothers with user updates and production improvements, most other manufacturers just shit out the same model 5 years in a row with an extra cup holder and USB port (probably rootable) if you're lucky. That said, Tesla's insistence that everything be done by touch screen is dog shit.

All this and still for 99% of cars my iPhone stuck to the dashboard provides better maps and entertainment and yet they can't even make a fucking phone holder standard, not even a fucking mounting point so I don't have to block an air vent.

5 hours ago by smilespray

You had me until you started giving Tesla the thumbs-up, despite your caveat.

2 hours ago by Telaneo

> "How has the automotive industry adapted to decades of computing best practices?"

Simple. It hasn't.

5 hours ago by gchamonlive

Can't be safer than the non-entertainment system from WV Up! that's just a built-in head mount for your phone. Grab one with a large screen and it's the safest thing you can get. Android still has an auto mode for this where it controls the car's audio system through headless bindings, not sure this malware would target this, but just by being a simpler system chances are it's safer too

6 hours ago by 1970-01-01

..to add to a botnet for click fraud.

The duality of cybersecurity is interesting. Sometimes the high bar is cleared just to enable a low bar to go lower. Those PLCs monitoring water were ignored for a very long time because they couldn't click on ads. It took a war for them to become a target.

3 hours ago by chrisjj

> Those PLCs monitoring water were ignored for a very long time because they couldn't click on ads.

Somehow I doubt it. They're ripe for ransomware attack.

6 hours ago by undefined
[deleted]
Daily Digest

Get a daily email with the the top stories from Hacker News. No spam, unsubscribe at any time.