154 lines
8.7 KiB
Typst
154 lines
8.7 KiB
Typst
#import "../lib.typ": APK, etal, ART, SDK, DEX, eg,
|
|
#import "../lib.typ": todo, jm-note, jfl-note
|
|
#import "@preview/diagraph:0.3.5": raw-render
|
|
|
|
//== Android Reverse Engineering Techniques <sec:bg-techniques>
|
|
|
|
//#todo[swap with tool section ?]
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Static Analysis <sec:bg-static>
|
|
|
|
In the past fifteen years, the research community released many tools to detect or analyse malicious behaviors in applications.
|
|
Two main approaches can be distinguished: static and dynamic analysis~@Li2017.
|
|
Dynamic analysis requires to run the application in a controlled environment to observe runtime values and/or interactions with the operating system.
|
|
For example, an Android emulator with a patched kernel can capture these interactions but the modifications to apply are not a trivial task.
|
|
Such approach is limited by the required time to execute a limited part of the application with no guarantee on the obtained code coverage.
|
|
Dynamic analysis is also limited by evading techniques that may prevent the execution of malicious parts of the code.
|
|
As a consequence, a lot of efforts have been put in static approaches. //, which is the focus of this paper.
|
|
|
|
Static analysis program examine an #APK file without executing it to extract information from it.
|
|
Basic static analysis can include extracting information from the `AndroidManifest.xml` file or decompiling bytecode to Java code.
|
|
|
|
More advance analysis consist in the computing the control-flow of an application and computing its data-flow~@Li2017.
|
|
|
|
The most basic form of control-flow analysis is to build a call graph.
|
|
A call graph is a graph where the nodes represent the methods in the application, and the edges reprensent calls from one method to another.
|
|
@fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg b) show the call graph of the code in @fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg a).
|
|
A more advance control-flow analysis consist in building the control-flow graph.
|
|
This time, instead of methods, the nodes represent instructions, and the edges indicate which instruction can follow which instruction.
|
|
@fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg c) represents the control-flow graph of @fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg a), with code statement instead of bytecode instructions.
|
|
|
|
#todo[Add alt text for @fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg and @fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cfg]
|
|
|
|
#figure({
|
|
set align(center)
|
|
stack(dir: ttb,[
|
|
#figure(
|
|
```java
|
|
public static void fizzBuzz(int n) {
|
|
for (int i = 1; i <= n; i++) {
|
|
if (i % 3 == 0 && i % 5 == 0) {
|
|
Buzzer.fizzBuzz();
|
|
} else if (i % 3 == 0) {
|
|
Buzzer.fizz();
|
|
} else if (i % 5 == 0) {
|
|
Buzzer.buzz();
|
|
} else {
|
|
Log.e("fizzbuzz", String.valueOf(i));
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
```,
|
|
supplement: none,
|
|
kind: "bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg subfig",
|
|
caption: [a) A Java program],
|
|
) <fig:bg-fizzbuzz-java>], v(2em), stack(dir: ltr, [
|
|
#figure(
|
|
raw-render(```
|
|
digraph {
|
|
rankdir=LR
|
|
"fizzBuzz(int)" -> "Buzzer.fizzBuzz()"
|
|
"fizzBuzz(int)" -> "Buzzer.fizz()"
|
|
"fizzBuzz(int)" -> "Buzzer.buzz()"
|
|
"fizzBuzz(int)" -> "String.valueOf(int)"
|
|
"fizzBuzz(int)" -> "Log.e(String, String)"
|
|
}
|
|
```,
|
|
width: 40%,
|
|
alt: "",
|
|
),
|
|
supplement: none,
|
|
kind: "bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg subfig",
|
|
caption: [b) Corresponding Call Graph]
|
|
) <fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg>],[
|
|
#figure(
|
|
raw-render(```
|
|
digraph {
|
|
l1
|
|
l2
|
|
l3
|
|
l4
|
|
l5
|
|
l6
|
|
l7
|
|
l9
|
|
|
|
l1 -> l2
|
|
l2 -> l3
|
|
l3 -> l1
|
|
l2 -> l4
|
|
l4 -> l5
|
|
l5 -> l1
|
|
l4 -> l6
|
|
l6 -> l7
|
|
l7 -> l1
|
|
l6 -> l9
|
|
l9 -> l1
|
|
}
|
|
```,
|
|
labels: (
|
|
"l1": `for (int i = 1; i <= n; i++) {`,
|
|
"l2": `if (i % 3 == 0 && i % 5 == 0) {`,
|
|
"l3": `Buzzer.fizzBuzz();`,
|
|
"l4": `} else if (i % 3 == 0) {`,
|
|
"l5": `Buzzer.fizz();`,
|
|
"l6": `} else if (i % 5 == 0) {`,
|
|
"l7": `Buzzer.buzz();`,
|
|
"l9": `Log.e("fizzbuzz", String.valueOf(i));`,
|
|
),
|
|
width: 50%,
|
|
alt: "",
|
|
),
|
|
supplement: none,
|
|
kind: "bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg subfig",
|
|
caption: [c) Corresponding Control-Flow Graph]
|
|
) <fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cfg>]))
|
|
h(1em)},
|
|
supplement: [Figure],
|
|
caption: [Source code for a simple Java method and its Call and Control Flow Graphs],
|
|
)<fig:bg-fizzbuzz-cg-cfg>
|
|
Once the control-flow graph is computed, it can be used to compute data-flows.
|
|
Data-flow analysis, also called taint-tracking, allows to follow the flow of information in the application.
|
|
Be defining a list of methods and fields that can generate critical information (taint sources) and a list of methods that can consume information (taint sink), taint-tracking allows to detect potential data leaks (if a data flow link a taint source and a taint sink).
|
|
For example, `TelephonyManager.getImei()` returns an unique, persistent, device identifier.
|
|
This can be used to identify the user, and it cannot be changed if #jfl-note[compromised][replace by: this imei is dislaxd (illisible) \ jm: ???].
|
|
This make `TelephonyManager.getImei()` a good candidate as a taint source.
|
|
On the other hand, `UrlRequest.start()` send a request to an external server, making it a taint sink.
|
|
If a data-flow is found linking `TelephonyManager.getImei()` to `UrlRequest.start()`, this means the application is potentially leaking a critical information to an external entity, a behavior that is probably not wanted by the user.
|
|
Data-flow analysis is the subject of many contribution~@weiAmandroidPreciseGeneral2014 @titzeAppareciumRevealingData2015 @bosuCollusiveDataLeak2017 @klieberAndroidTaintFlow2014 @DBLPconfndssGordonKPGNR15 @octeauCompositeConstantPropagation2015 @liIccTADetectingInterComponent2015, the most notable tool being Flowdroid~@Arzt2014a.
|
|
|
|
#todo[Describe the different contributions in relations to the issues they tackle, be more critical]
|
|
|
|
Static analysis is powerfull as it allows to detects unwanted behavior in an application even is the behavior does not manifest itself when running the application.
|
|
Hovewer, static analysis tools must overcom many challenges when analysing Android applications:
|
|
/ the Java object-oriented paradigm: A call to a method can in fact correspond to a call to any method overriding the original method in subclasses.
|
|
/ the multiplicity of entry points: Each component of an application can be an entry point for the application.
|
|
/ the event driven architecture: Methods of in the applications can be called when event occur, in unknown order.
|
|
/ the interleaving of native code and bytecode: Native code can be called from bytecode and vice versa, but tools often only handle one of those format.
|
|
/ the potential dynamic code loading: An application can run code that was not originally in the application.
|
|
/ the use of reflection: Methods can be called from their name as a string object, which is difficult to identify statically.
|
|
/ the continual evolution of Android: each new version of Android brings new features that an analysis tools must be aware of.
|
|
For instance, the multi-dex feature presented in @sec:bg-android-code-format was introduced in Android #SDK 21.
|
|
Tools unaware of this feature only analyse the `classes.dex` file an will ignore all other `classes<n>.dex` files.
|
|
|
|
A lot of those more advanced tools rely on common tools to interact with Android applications/#DEX bytecode@~@Li2017.
|
|
Reccuring examples of such support tools are Appktool (#eg Amandroid~@weiAmandroidPreciseGeneral2014, Blueseal~@shenInformationFlowsPermission2014, SAAF~@hoffmannSlicingDroidsProgram2013), Androguard (#eg Adagio~@gasconStructuralDetectionAndroid2013, Appareciumn~@titzeAppareciumRevealingData2015, Mallodroid~@fahlWhyEveMallory2012) or Soot (#eg Blueseal~@shenInformationFlowsPermission2014, DroidSafe~@DBLPconfndssGordonKPGNR15, Flowdroid~@Arzt2014a).
|
|
|
|
The number of publication related to static analysis make can make it difficult to find the right tool for the right task.
|
|
Li #etal~@Li2017 published a systematic literature review for Android static analysis before May 2015.
|
|
They analysed 92 publications and classified them by goal, method used to solve the problem and underlying technical solution for handling the bytecode when performing the static analysis.
|
|
In particular, they listed 27 approaches with an open-source implementation available.
|
|
Nevertheless, experiments to evaluate the reusability of the pointed out software were not performed.
|
|
#jfl-note[We believe that the effort of reviewing the literature for making a comprehensive overview of available approaches should be pushed further: an existing published approach with a software that cannot be used for technical reasons endanger both the reproducibility and reusability of research.][A mettre en avant?]
|
|
In the next section, we will look at the work that has been done to evaluate different analysis tools.
|