Comprehensive Overview of OWASP Mobile Top 10 2024

In an era where mobile devices have become an integral part of our daily lives, the security of mobile applications is paramount.

As we enter 2024, the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) has once again spotlighted the most critical security risks facing the mobile landscape.

The OWASP Mobile Top 10 2024 guides developers, security professionals, and organizations to fortify their mobile applications against evolving threats.

This blog provides the key insights provided by the newly released OWASP's Mobile Top 10 2024.

OWASP Mobile Top 10 2024

M1: Improper Credential Usage

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Automated attacks using publicly available or custom-built tools targeting hardcoded or misused credentials in mobile applications.
Attack Vectors	Exploitation is considered easy. Attackers identify vulnerabilities in hardcoded or misused credentials and gain unauthorized access to sensitive functionalities.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence, easily detectable through security testing. Inadequate credential management, including hardcoded credentials, and improper handling pose significant security risks.
Technical Impacts	Severe impact, potential unauthorized access to sensitive information, data breaches, loss of user privacy, and fraudulent activities.
Business Impacts	Severe impact, including reputation damage, information theft, fraud, and unauthorized access to critical data.
Detectability	Easy detection through comprehensive security testing. Examples include identifying hardcoded credentials in the source code or configuration files.
Am I Vulnerable?	Indicators include the presence of hardcoded credentials in source code or configuration files, insecure credential transmission, insecure storage, and weak user authentication.
Prevention Measures	Avoid hardcoded credentials, implement secure credential handling, encrypt transmissions, avoid storing credentials insecurely, and follow strong user authentication protocols.
Example Scenarios	1. Discovery of hardcoded credentials for unauthorized access. 2. Intercepting insecurely transmitted credentials. 3. Gaining access through insecurely stored credentials on a user's device.

M2: Inadequate Supply Chain Security

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Attackers exploiting vulnerabilities in the mobile app supply chain. This includes manipulating application functionality by inserting malicious code during development or exploiting weaknesses in third-party software libraries, SDKs, vendors, or hardcoded credentials.
Attack Vectors	Exploitation is considered average. Attackers can inject malicious code during development, compromise app signing keys or certificates, exploit vulnerabilities in third-party libraries or components and manipulate the supply chain to introduce backdoors, spyware, or other malicious code.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detecting this weakness is difficult and arises due to insufficient secure coding practices, inadequate code reviews, and testing. Other causes include insecure app signing and distribution processes, weaknesses in third-party components, and insufficient security controls for data, encryption, and storage.
Technical Impacts	Severe impact if exploited. Potential consequences include data breaches, malware infections, unauthorized access to sensitive data, and complete compromise of the mobile app or device's system. Specific technical impacts depend on the nature of the exploit but can result in long-term damage, data loss, and significant harm to users and the organization.
Business Impacts	Severe impact if exploited. Business consequences include financial losses, reputational damage, legal and regulatory consequences, and supply chain disruption. The organization may incur costs for breach investigations, notifying affected individuals, legal settlements, and revenue loss due to diminished customer trust. Disruption in the supply chain can lead to delays in goods or services delivery.
Detectability	Difficult to detect due to inadequate secure coding practices and insufficient testing. Inadequate supply chain vulnerabilities may result from a lack of security in third-party components, malicious insider threats, inadequate testing, and a lack of security awareness in the development process.
Am I Vulnerable?	Vulnerability may exist, especially for mobile apps developed by third parties or relying on third-party libraries. Lack of security in third-party components, malicious insider threats, inadequate testing, and a lack of security awareness are indicators.
Prevention Measures	Implement secure coding practices, code review, and testing throughout the mobile app development lifecycle. Ensure secure app signing and distribution processes. Use trusted third-party libraries. Establish security controls for app updates, patches, and releases. Monitor and detect supply chain security incidents through testing and scanning.
Example Scenarios	Malware Injection The attacker injects malware during development. Signs the app with a valid certificate. Distributes it to the app store bypassing security checks. The infected app steals user data. Data used for fraud or identity theft. Causes financial harm and reputational damage.

M3: Insecure Authentication/Authorization

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Threat agents exploit authentication and authorization vulnerabilities through automated attacks using available or custom-built tools.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered easy. Attackers can fake or bypass authentication by submitting service requests directly to the backend server, circumventing the mobile app. They can also log in as a legitimate user and force-browse to vulnerable endpoints to execute administrative functionality. These exploits are often carried out through mobile malware or botnets owned by the attacker.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detecting weaknesses in authentication and authorization requires average effort. Poor authorization may lead to over-privileged execution, while poor authentication may allow anonymous execution of functionality, often due to short passwords or PINs. Mobile apps' unique requirements, including offline usage, impact the implementation of authentication and authorization controls.
Technical Impacts	Severe impact. Poor authorization can lead to the destruction of systems or unauthorized access to sensitive information. Poor authentication results in an inability to log or audit user activity, exposing underlying authorization failures. Anonymous execution of code signifies failures in both authentication and authorization controls. Technical repercussions include data breaches, malware infections, unauthorized access, and system compromise.
Business Impacts	Severe impact. Business consequences include reputation damage, information theft, fraud, and unauthorized access to data. Financial losses, legal and regulatory consequences, and disruption of the supply chain may occur.
Detectability	Average detectability. Testing strategies involve binary attacks, testing offline authentication, and checking for insecure direct object references (IDOR) vulnerabilities. Detecting poor authorization includes binary attacks, executing privileged functionality with low-privilege tokens, and detecting hidden endpoints. Detecting insecure authentication involves testing offline authentication, executing backend server functionality anonymously, and checking for weak password policies.
Am I Vulnerable?	Indicators of insecure authorization include the presence of insecure direct object reference (IDOR) vulnerabilities, hidden endpoints, and user role or permission transmissions. Indicators of insecure authentication include anonymous backend API execution, local storage of passwords or shared secrets, weak password policies, and the usage of features like FaceID and TouchID.
Prevention Measures	- Avoid weak authentication design patterns, ensuring consistency with web application authentication requirements. - Perform server-side authentication to load application data onto the device only after successful authentication. - Use device-specific authentication tokens that can be revoked by the user. - Reinforce secure measures and avoid storing passwords locally. - Perform local integrity checks for offline authentication. - Use biometric features securely. - Assume all client-side controls can be bypassed and reinforce server-side controls.
Example Scenarios	1. Hidden Service Requests - Developers assume only authenticated users can generate a service request. - Adversaries submit service requests to the backend service and anonymously execute functionality. 2. Interface Reliance - Developers assume only authorized users can see a function. - Adversaries perform remote administrative functionality using low-privilege accounts. 3. Usability Requirements - Mobile apps allow 4-digit PINs. - Adversaries deduce passwords using rainbow hash tables.

M4: Insufficient Input/Output Validation

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Threat agents exploiting insufficient validation and sanitization of data in mobile applications.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered difficult. Vulnerabilities include SQL injection, Command Injection, and cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detectability is considered easy. The vulnerability arises from inadequate checking and sanitization of user input or validation and sanitization of output data. Weaknesses include insufficient input validation, output validation, contextual validation, and failure to validate data integrity. These vulnerabilities often result from errors in application logic, incomplete implementation of validation checks, lack of security awareness, or insufficient testing and code review practices.
Technical Impacts	Severe impact. Consequences include code execution, data breaches, system compromise, application disruption, reputation damage, and legal and compliance issues.
Business Impacts	Severe impact. Business consequences include reputation damage, legal and compliance consequences, and financial impact due to incident response, remediation costs, legal fees, and potential loss of revenue.
Detectability	Easy detectability. Testing involves identifying insufficient input/output validation by examining input validation, output sanitization, context-specific validation, and data integrity checks.
Am I Vulnerable?	An application can be vulnerable due to a lack of input validation, inadequate output sanitization, neglect of context-specific validation, insufficient data integrity checks, and poor secure coding practices.
Prevention Measures	- Implement strict validation and sanitization techniques for user input. - Apply length restrictions and reject unexpected or malicious data. - Properly sanitize output data to prevent XSS attacks. - Perform context-specific validation based on data context. - Implement data integrity checks to prevent corruption or unauthorized modification. - Follow secure coding practices, such as using parameterized queries and prepared statements. - Conduct regular security assessments, including penetration testing and code reviews.
Example Scenarios	1. Remote Code Execution via Malicious Input - Attacker crafts malicious input exploiting inadequate input validation. - Application mishandles the input, allowing arbitrary code execution. 2. Injection Attacks via Insufficient Output Validation - Attacker exploits inadequate output validation and sanitization. - Injects malicious code or scripts, compromising the application's integrity. 3. Remote Code Execution via Malformed Output - Attacker exploits insufficient output validation. - Crafts specially formatted data to execute code or trigger unintended actions.

M5: Insecure Communication

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	- Adversary sharing of the local network (compromised or monitored Wi-Fi). - Rogue carrier or network devices (routers, cell towers, proxies, etc.). - Malware on the mobile device.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered easy. Flaws in SSL/TLS implementation, such as using deprecated protocols, accepting bad SSL certificates, or inconsistent use of encryption, can lead to vulnerabilities.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detectability is considered average. Vulnerabilities stem from inconsistencies in implementing transport security protocols, leading to data and session IDs being exposed to interception. Issues include using deprecated protocols, accepting invalid SSL certificates, or having SSL/TLS only on select workflows. Detection involves observing network traffic on the phone and closer inspection of the application's design and configuration.
Technical Impacts	Severe impact. Exposure of user data, leading to account takeover, user impersonation, PII data leaks, etc. Attackers can intercept sensitive information like user credentials, session tokens, and 2FA tokens, opening the door for more elaborate attacks.
Business Impacts	Moderate impact. Privacy violation, potential identity theft, fraud, and reputational damage. Violation of user confidentiality may result in legal and compliance issues.
Detectability	Average detectability. Observing network traffic on the phone and a closer look at the application's design and configuration are required to identify basic flaws. More subtle flaws may need deeper analysis.
Am I Vulnerable?	All communications technologies that a mobile device might use are covered, including TCP/IP, WiFi, Bluetooth/Bluetooth-LE, NFC, audio, infrared, GSM, 3G, SMS, etc. Vulnerabilities include insecure data transmission between devices, from the app to servers, or to other local entities. The risk involves packaging sensitive data (encryption keys, passwords, user information, etc.) and transmitting it insecurely.
Prevention Measures	- Assume the network layer is not secure and is susceptible to eavesdropping. - Apply SSL/TLS to transport channels used by the mobile app. - Consider SSL versions when dealing with third-party entities. Avoid mixed SSL sessions. - Use strong, industry-standard cipher suites with appropriate key lengths. - Use certificates signed by trusted CA providers. - Never allow bad certificates. - Consider certificate pinning. - Always require SSL chain verification. - Alert users if an invalid certificate is detected. - Avoid sending sensitive data over alternate channels (SMS, MMS, notifications). - Apply a separate layer of encryption to sensitive data before transmission over SSL/TLS. - Avoid overriding SSL verification methods during development. - Analyze application traffic for plaintext channels during security assessments.
Example Scenarios	- Lack of certificate inspection: The Mobile app unconditionally accepts any certificate offered by the server, making it susceptible to man-in-the-middle attacks. - Weak handshake negotiation: Mobile app negotiates a weak cipher suite, jeopardizing the confidentiality of the communication channel. - Privacy information leakage: Personally identifiable information is transmitted via non-secure channels, compromising its confidentiality. - Credential information leakage: User credentials are transmitted in cleartext over non-secure channels. - Two-factor authentication bypass: Session identifier is transmitted via non-secure channels, allowing an adversary to bypass two-factor authentication.

M6: Inadequate Privacy Controls

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Attackers aim to exploit Personally Identifiable Information (PII) for various malicious purposes, such as fraud, misuse of payment data, blackmail, or harm by manipulating critical data.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered average. Attackers need to breach security on various levels, such as network communication, file system, clipboard, logs, or device backups, to obtain PII. Sources of PII, including app sandbox, network communication, logs, and backups, are typically well-protected, but vulnerabilities may exist.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detectability is easy. Many apps process more PII than necessary, making them attractive targets. Risks increase due to careless handling of PII by developers. Privacy infringements occur if an app processes personal data that motivates attackers to manipulate or abuse it through insufficiently secured storage or transmission mediums.
Technical Impacts	The impact is low. Privacy violations have minimal technical impact on the system. However, manipulation of user data may render the system unusable for the affected user. Ill-formed data might disrupt the backend if proper sanitization and exception handling are lacking.
Business Impacts	Severe impact. The business impact depends on the number of affected users, the criticality of the data, and applicable data protection regulations. Impacts include violation of legal regulations, financial damage from user lawsuits, reputational damage leading to sales and usage drops, and loss or theft of PII with potential misuse. Compliance with regulations like GDPR, CCPA, PDPA, etc., is crucial to avoid legal consequences.
Detectability	Easy detectability. Apps processing PII are vulnerable to inadequate privacy controls. Detecting careless handling of PII involves assessing the necessity of collected data, anonymizing or reducing data, implementing consent mechanisms, and ensuring secure storage, transmission, and access with proper authentication and authorization. Privacy risks can be revealed through threat modelling and security checking tools.
Am I Vulnerable?	Severe impact. The business impact depends on the number of affected users, the criticality of the data, and applicable data protection regulations. Impacts include violation of legal regulations, financial damage from user lawsuits, reputational damage leading to sales and usage drops, and loss or theft of PII with potential misuse. Compliance with regulations like GDPR, CCPA, PDPA, etc., is crucial to avoid legal consequences.
Prevention Measures	- Minimize the amount and variety of processed PII. Assess the necessity of collected data. - Replace, reduce, anonymize, or blur sensitive PII. - Delete PII after an expiration period. - Implement user-consented optional PII usage. - Avoid storing or transferring PII unless necessary. - Protect access with proper authentication and authorization. - Consider defence in depth for critical data, such as encrypting with a key sealed in the device's TPM. - Focus efforts on securing likely privacy violation paths through threat modelling. - Use static and dynamic security checking tools to reveal common pitfalls.
Example Scenarios	1. Inadequate sanitization of logs and error messages. Developers include PII in logs or error messages, which can be visible to platform providers, users, or attackers, leading to privacy violations. 2. Using PII in URL query parameters. Transmitting sensitive information via URL query parameters exposes it in server logs, analytics, and browser history, risking privacy violations. 3. Exclusion of personal data in backups/not setting hasFragileUserData. Failure to configure data inclusion in backups or set hasFragileUserData may expose PII during backup extraction or subsequent installations, leading to privacy issues.

M7: Insufficient Binary Protections

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Attackers targeting app binaries for various motives: - Extract valuable secrets (API keys, cryptographic secrets). - Obtain critical business logic or pre-trained AI models. - Explore backend weaknesses for future attacks. - Manipulate binaries to access paid features for free. - Distribute modified popular apps with malicious code via third-party app stores.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered easy. Binary attacks involve reverse engineering (decompiling and scanning for valuable information) and code tampering (manipulating binaries). App binaries are usually downloadable or can be copied from devices, making them susceptible to attacks. Reverse engineering may leak sensitive information, while code tampering can change how the app works, leading to various security concerns.
Security Weakness	Common prevalence. Detectability is considered easy. All apps are vulnerable to binary attacks, especially those with sensitive data or logic hardcoded. Countermeasures are employed to delay attackers and make the effort of breaking protection more expensive than potential gains. Fully compiled apps (iOS) are less susceptible to reverse engineering than higher-level bytecode (Android). Specialized companies and detection mechanisms within apps are used to detect and remove manipulated copies.
Technical Impacts	Moderate impact. Reverse engineering may lead to the leakage of secrets, requiring quick replacement throughout the system. Information leakage from binaries can reveal vulnerabilities in the backend. Code tampering can have a more significant impact, allowing attackers to change how apps work, potentially disrupting backends or obtaining benefits such as free access to paid features.
Business Impacts	Moderate impact. Leakage of API keys or tampering with apps can result in significant costs if misused on a large scale. Businesses may face financial damage, loss of intellectual property, and reputational damage. Intellectual property, like algorithms or AI models, becoming public or stolen by competitors poses a threat to the business model. Reputational damage is heightened if popular apps are redistributed with malicious code. Legal consequences may arise due to data protection violations. The impact depends on the number of affected users, the criticality of data, and data protection regulations.
Detectability	Easy detectability. All apps are susceptible to binary attacks, and various tools are available to inspect binaries as attackers would. Specialized companies and detection mechanisms within apps aid in identifying and removing manipulated copies.
Am I Vulnerable?	All apps are vulnerable to binary attacks, with additional risk for those with sensitive data or logic hardcoded. Vulnerability depends on business impact, making it essential to assess the motivation for attackers and the potential impact of successful attacks. Developers can inspect app binaries using tools similar to those used by attackers.
Prevention Measures	- Assess whether critical content is hardcoded in the binary or if the app's popularity mandates binary protection. - Conduct threat modelling to identify high-risk areas and assess expected financial impact. - Employ countermeasures based on relevant risks. - Utilize obfuscation tools to make the binary incomprehensible. - Consider compiling parts of apps natively for added protection. - Enforce local and backend security checks. - Implement integrity checks to detect code tampering and redistribution. - Report violations to detect and remove unauthorized copies. - Regularly inspect app binaries using tools similar to those used by attackers.
Example Scenarios	- Hardcoded API keys: API keys hardcoded in the app's binary are extracted through reverse engineering, leading to unauthorized access and potential financial damage. - Disabling payment and license checks: Manipulating the binary to disable payment and license checks allows users to access paid features for free, causing financial loss to the app provider. - Hardcoded AI models: Extracting hardcoded AI models from a medical app's binary allows competitors to steal valuable intellectual property, impacting the business model and potentially harming patients relying on the app.

M8: Security Misconfiguration

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Attackers aim to gain unauthorized access to sensitive data or perform malicious actions. Threat agents include attackers with physical access to the device and malicious apps exploiting security misconfiguration on the device.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered difficult. Attack vectors include: - Insecure default settings - Improper access controls - Weak encryption or hashing - Lack of secure communication - Unprotected storage - Insecure file permissions - Misconfigured session management
Security Weakness	Prevalence is common, and detectability is easy. Security misconfigurations are common due to factors like time constraints, lack of awareness, or human error during development. Examples include failure to disable debugging features, insecure communication protocols, unchanged default usernames/passwords, inadequate access controls, and improper storage of sensitive data. Detection is relatively easy through manual code review, security testing, or automated scanning tools.
Technical Impacts	The impact is severe. Technical impacts include unauthorized access to sensitive data, account hijacking or impersonation, data breaches, and compromise of backend systems or infrastructure.
Business Impacts	Mobile apps are vulnerable to security misconfigurations if they have not been properly configured to follow security best practices. Common indicators of vulnerability include default settings not reviewed, lack of secure communication, weak or absent access controls, failure to update or patch, improper storage of sensitive data, insecure file provider path settings, and export activities that increase the attack surface. Thorough security assessments, including code review, security testing, and configuration analysis, are necessary to determine vulnerability.
Detectability	Easy detectability. Security misconfigurations are common and can be detected through manual code review, security testing, or automated scanning tools.
Am I Vulnerable?	Mobile apps are vulnerable to security misconfigurations if they have not been properly configured to follow security best practices. Common indicators of vulnerability include default settings not reviewed, lack of secure communication, weak or absent access controls, failure to update or patch, improper storage of sensitive data, insecure file provider path settings, and export activities that increase the attack surface. Thorough security assessments, including code review, security testing, and configuration analysis, are necessary to determine vulnerability.
Prevention Measures	- Ensure secure default configurations, settings, and permissions. - Avoid using hardcoded default credentials. - Implement the least privilege principle for permissions. - Use secure network configurations, disallow cleartext traffic, and consider certificate pinning. - Disable debugging features in production builds. - Disable backup mode on Android devices to prevent sensitive data inclusion in backups. - Limit the attack surface by only exporting necessary activities, content providers, and services.
Example Scenarios	1. Insecure Default Settings: A mobile app with weak security configurations in default settings allows attackers to gain unauthorized access to sensitive data or perform malicious actions. 2. Insecure File Provider Path Settings: Exposing the root path in an exported file content provider enables other apps to access the app's resources. 3. Overly Permissive Storage Permissions: Storing shared preferences with world-readable permissions allows other apps to read sensitive data. 4. Exported Activity: Exporting an internal-use activity increases the app's attack surface. 5. Unnecessary Permissions: A flashlight app requesting excessive permissions exposes user data to risks.

M9: Insecure Data Storage

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Various threat agents, including skilled adversaries, malicious insiders, state-sponsored actors, cybercriminals, script kiddies, data brokers, competitors, industrial spies, activists, and hacktivists.
Attack Vectors	The impact is severe. Technical impacts include data breaches, compromised user accounts, data tampering and integrity issues, unauthorized access to application resources, and potential damage to an app's reputation and trust.
Security Weakness	Prevalence is common, and detectability is average. Insecure data storage involves weaknesses such as weak or nonexistent encryption, storing data in easily accessible locations, insufficient access controls, poor user authentication mechanisms, and the absence of secure data transmission protocols. Detection is average and can be identified through manual code review, security testing, or automated scanning tools.
Technical Impacts	The impact is severe. Business impacts include reputational damage, loss of customer trust, legal and regulatory consequences, financial implications, competitive disadvantage, and compliance violations. Financial implications may include costs associated with investigating breaches, notifying affected customers, legal settlements, and loss of business opportunities.
Business Impacts	The impact is severe. Business impacts include reputational damage, loss of customer trust, legal and regulatory consequences, financial implications, competitive disadvantage, and compliance violations. Financial implications may include costs associated with investigating breaches, notifying affected customers, legal settlements, and loss of business opportunities.
Detectability	Average detectability. Insecure data storage is common and can be detected through manual code review, security testing, or automated scanning tools.
Am I Vulnerable?	Indicators of vulnerability include lack of access controls, inadequate encryption, unintentional data exposure, poor session management, insufficient input validation, cloud storage misconfigurations, vulnerabilities in third-party libraries, and unintended data sharing. Thorough security assessments, including code review, security testing, and configuration analysis, are necessary to determine vulnerability.
Prevention Measures	- Use strong encryption for sensitive data at rest and in transit. - Implement secure storage mechanisms provided by the mobile operating system. - Employ proper access controls and user authentication mechanisms. - Validate input and sanitize data to prevent injection attacks. - Apply secure session management techniques. - Regularly update and patch dependencies, including third-party libraries. - Stay informed about the latest security threats and vulnerabilities.
Example Scenarios	1. Storing Passwords in Plain Text: Storing user passwords in plain text format within a local database or file, allowing easy retrieval by attackers. 2. Unsecured Local Storage: Storing sensitive user data locally on the device without proper access controls or encryption, enabling unauthorized extraction. 3. Insecure Data Caching: Caching sensitive data without implementing security measures, allowing attackers to obtain credentials and impersonate users. 4. Unprotected Logging: Logging sensitive data without security controls, leads to unintentional exposure. 5. Insecure Cloud Storage Configuration: Misconfiguring cloud storage permissions, resulting in unauthorized access. 6. Improper Handling of Temporary Files: Creating temporary files without proper handling, leaving sensitive information exposed and vulnerable.

M10: Insufficient Cryptography

Aspect	Details
Threat Category	Application Specific
Threat Agent	Threat agents exploiting insecure cryptography include attackers targeting cryptographic algorithms, malicious insiders manipulating cryptographic processes, state-sponsored actors engaging in cryptanalysis, cybercriminals exploiting weak encryption, and attackers leveraging vulnerabilities in cryptographic protocols or libraries.
Attack Vectors	Exploitability is considered average. Attack vectors involve exploiting vulnerabilities in cryptographic mechanisms, including cryptographic attacks, brute force attacks, or side-channel attacks. Adversaries target weaknesses in encryption algorithms, key management, or implementation flaws to decrypt encrypted data, manipulate cryptographic processes, or gain unauthorized access to sensitive information.
Security Weakness	Prevalence is common, and detectability is average. Insecure cryptography introduces weaknesses like weak encryption algorithms, insufficient key lengths, poor key management, improper encryption implementation, insecure storage of keys, and lack of secure transport layer protocols. These weaknesses can be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or authenticity of sensitive data. Regular security audits, updates, and adherence to best practices are crucial to mitigate these risks.
Technical Impacts	The impact is severe. Insufficient cryptography can lead to unauthorized retrieval of sensitive information from the mobile device, compromising data confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity. Potential technical impacts include data breaches, compromised user accounts, data tampering, and unauthorized access to application resources.
Business Impacts	Manifestations of insecure cryptography include weak encryption algorithms, insufficient key lengths, improper key management, flawed encryption implementation, insecure storage of keys, lack of secure transport layer, and inadequate validation and authentication. Vulnerability can also result from insecure storage of data or encryption keys, use of deprecated or weak hash functions, lack of salting, and insufficient protection against cryptographic downgrade attacks. A thorough security assessment, including cryptographic vulnerability assessments and testing, is necessary to determine vulnerability.
Detectability	Easy detection through comprehensive security testing.
Am I Vulnerable?	Manifestations of insecure cryptography include weak encryption algorithms, insufficient key lengths, improper key management, flawed encryption implementation, insecure storage of keys, lack of secure transport layer, and inadequate validation and authentication. Vulnerability can also result from insecure storage of data or encryption keys, use of deprecated or weak hash functions, lack of salting, and insufficient protection against cryptographic downgrade attacks. A thorough security assessment, including cryptographic vulnerability assessments and testing, is necessary to determine vulnerability.
Prevention Measures	- Use strong encryption algorithms like AES, RSA, or ECC. - Ensure sufficient key length based on industry recommendations. - Follow secure key management practices, including the use of key vaults or HSMs. - Implement encryption correctly, avoiding custom implementations. <br> - Securely store encryption keys on the device. - Employ secure transport layer protocols like HTTPS. - Implement strong validation and authentication mechanisms. - Regularly update security measures and stay informed about industry standards. - Use strong hash functions and implement salting for password hashing.
Example Scenarios	1: Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: The attacker intercepts the communication, decrypts data, manipulates it, and re-encrypts it before forwarding. 2: Brute-Force Attacks: Systematic trial of key combinations to decrypt data. 3: Cryptographic Downgrade Attacks: Forcing the use of weak encryption by exploiting fallback options. 4: Key Management Vulnerabilities: Gaining unauthorized access to keys stored insecurely. 5: Crypto Implementation Flaws: Exploiting flaws in encryption implementation to bypass or weaken protections.