Attacker then emulates the card and makes withdrawals or payments from victim’s account.

  • Lojcs@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    There is nothing being subverted, nfc has applications other than contactless payments that require it acting as the reader, which is why it’s supported. It would be better if it was behind an explicit permission (just like other sensors would) but limiting it to only responding to readers is like limiting Bluetooth to audio transmission.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This isn’t about subscribing to NFC events, the malware is creating fake NFC events without the NFC sensor being involved in a physical interaction with a tag or reader.

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        No? The nfc sensor is next to the credit card, which is why it’s able to communicate with it to relay it.

        Why would it need to create fake events? How would that even help?

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          There’s no credit card involved in this scenario.

          1. The attacker uses phone A and touches the ATM NFC reader. This creates a NFC event on phone A that requests a token.
          2. Phone A sensds the request data to the malware running on victim’s Phone V.
          3. The malware on phone V creates a fake NFC event that makes it look like the phone V was touched against the ATM. <– this is the huge security issue IMO
          4. The app on phone V that’s currently associated with NFC contactless payments responds to the fake NFC event by issuing a token.
          5. The malware on Phone V sends the token to phone A.
          6. Phone A uses the token to “prove” to the ATM that the real customer is in front of it.
          7. The ATM asks for the PIN and the attacker supplies the correct PIN (which they’ve previously obtained via social engineering).
          8. Attacker can now withdraw cash from the ATM from the victim’s account.
          • Lojcs@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            What scenario are you talking about?? From the article:

            NGate malware can relay NFC data from a victim’s card through a compromised device to an attacker’s smartphone, which is then able to emulate the card and withdraw money from an ATM.

            Masquerading as a legitimate app for a target’s bank, NGate prompts the user to enter the banking client ID, date of birth, and the PIN code corresponding to the card. The app goes on to ask the user to turn on NFC and to scan the card.

            Physical card is involved, mobile payments isn’t.

            • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              In that case I call bullshit. What I described can work (relaying banking apps on the victim’s phone to authenticate to ATM), with cards it should not. If you read the comments on the site you’ll see people are just as confused as to how this can work.