Android fingerprint locks are on thin ice

In a recent discovery, researchers from Tencent Labs and Zhejiang University have revealed a concerning vulnerability that puts Android smartphone users at risk.
By employing a brute-force attack technique, the researchers successfully bypassed the fingerprint locks on these devices, raising serious security concerns. To protect against brute-force attacks, Android phones employ various safeguards such as limited login attempts and liveness detection.
However, the researchers discovered two previously unknown vulnerabilities, named Cancel-After-Match-Fail (CAMF) and Match-After-Lock (MAL), that rendered these safeguards ineffective. Exploiting these vulnerabilities, the researchers were able to surpass the security measures put in place by Android devices.
The BrutePrint attack
The researchers also uncovered a critical flaw in the protection of biometric data stored on the fingerprint sensors' Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI). This flaw opened the door to a potential man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack, allowing unauthorized individuals to steal users' fingerprints. Such an attack could have severe implications, as fingerprints are widely used for authentication purposes.
The researchers conducted extensive testing of their brute-force attack, known as BrutePrint, on ten popular smartphone models. Shockingly, they found that the attack could be performed an unlimited number of times on both Android and HarmonyOS (Huawei) phones, granting unauthorized access to the devices. In comparison, iOS devices exhibited stronger resistance, limiting the attack to only ten additional attempts on models like the iPhone SE and iPhone 7, making it significantly more challenging to breach their security.
Furthermore, the researchers discovered that the SPI MITM attack affected all Android devices, making them susceptible to fingerprint theft. However, this attack proved ineffective against iPhones, highlighting the comparatively robust security measures implemented in iOS.
It only takes 2 hours
The analysis conducted by the researchers revealed alarming insights into the potential impact of the BrutePrint attack. Devices with a single registered fingerprint could be compromised within a disconcertingly short timeframe, ranging from 2.9 to 13.9 hours.
Devices with multiple fingerprints registered were even more vulnerable, with success rates dropping to as little as 0.66 to 2.78 hours due to the higher likelihood of finding a matching fingerprint.
BrutePrint attacks need physical access to your phone
It is important to note that executing the BrutePrint attack requires certain conditions and resources. Attackers would need physical access to the targeted device, a significant amount of time, and access to fingerprint databases obtained through leaks or academic sources.
While the required hardware is relatively affordable, its availability may present limitations. Nevertheless, there is a concern that this technique could be exploited by law enforcement agencies or state-sponsored actors. You may read the full research here.
Advertisement
Thanks for the tip Martin.
It is for these kinds of posts that I follow GHacks.
What’s up with the generic comment, are you a bot?
2G?
Where on the planet is that still in use? I was forced to give up using my RAZRV3 years ago because 2G was phased out by AT&T.
Everywhere 3G has been turned off and you don’t have LTE coverage, and believe me there are many developed countries where this is the case and if it weren’t for 2G you wouldn’t even be able to make a phone call.
Maybe I missed it, but I don’t believe tha term “2G” is in the article. Perhaps you are referring to “AGM G2”??
@Martin
Your website has gone insane.
When I the post button I then saw my comment posted on a different article page. When I opened this article again, it is here.
@Tachy @Martin Brinkmann
” Your website has gone insane. ”
Same here. Has happened several times.
@Tachy,
@Martin P.,
For over two weeks now,
I’ve been seeing “Comments” posted by subscribers appearing in different, unrelated articles.
https://www.ghacks.net/windows-11-update-stuck-fixed-for-good/#comment-4572991
https://www.ghacks.net/windows-11-update-stuck-fixed-for-good/#comment-4572951
For the time being,
it would be better to specify the “article name and URL” at the beginning of the post.
@tachy a lot of non-phone devices with a sim in them rely on 2G, at least here in europe.
Usually things reporting usage or errors/alarms on something remote that does not get day to day inspection in person. They are out there in vast numbers doing important work. Reliable, good range. The low datarate is no problem at all in those cases.
3G is gone or on its last legs everywhere, but this stuff still has too much use to cancel.
Anyhow, interesting that they would put that in. I can see the point if you suspect a hostile 2G environment (amateur eavesdroppers with laptop, ranging up to professional grade MITM fake towers while “strangely” not getting the stronger crypto voip 4G because it is being jammed, and back down to something as old ‘stingray’ devices fallen into the wrong hands).
But does this also mean that they have handled and rolled out a fix for that nasty 4G ‘pwn by broadcast’ problem you reported earlier this year? I had 4G disabled due to that, on the off chance that some of the local criminals would buy some cheap chinese gear, download a working exploit and probe every phone in range all over town in the hope of getting into phones of the police.
>”While most may never be attacked in stingrays, it is still recommended to disable 2G cellular connections, especially since it does not have any downsides.”
The downside would be losing connectivity. I spend a lot of time way out in the countryside where there’s often no service or almost none. My network allows 2G, and I need it sometimes. I have an option on the phone to disable 2G, I may do that when I’m in the city and I have good 5G connectivity, but not out in the country.
I would imagine that the stingray exploits, like most of the bad things in this world, are probably things you will run into in the crowded big cities.
I stopped using it in a mobile (Wi-Fi line) environment, so I’m almost ignorant of the actual situation,
But the recent reality in Japan makes me realize that “the infrastructure of the web is nothing more than a papier-mâché fiction”.
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/08/17/google-chrome-to-enable-https-first-by-default-for-all-users/#comment-4572402
It is already beyond the scope of what an individual can do.
What we should be aware of is the reality that “governments and those in power want to control the world through the Web”, and efforts to counter (resist and prevent) such ambitions are necessary.
Why do you want people to disable the privacy features? Hmmmmm?
Now You: do you plan to keep the Ads privacy features enabled?
I’d like to tell you, but apparently if you make a post critical of Google, you get censored. * [Editor: removed, just try to bring your opinion across without attacking anyone]
@Martin
You website is still psychotic. Comments attach to random stories.
@Martin please do fix the comments, it’s completely insane commenting here! :[
@Martin
The comments are seriously messed up on gHacks now. These comments are mixed with the article at the below URL.
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/08/18/android-how-to-disable-2g-cellular-connections-to-improve-security/
And comments on other articles are from as far back as 2010.
What does this article has anything to do with all the comments on this article? LOL I think this Websuite is ran by ChatGPT. every article is messed up. Some older comments from 2015 shown up in recant articles, LOL
The picture captioned “Clearing the Android Auto’s cache might resolve the issue” is from Apple Carplay ;)
How about other things that matter:
Drop survival?
Screen toughness?
Degree of water and dust protection?