Privacy

31935 readers

750 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

Chat rooms

[Matrix/Element]Dead
Discord

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

142

Keyboard spyware? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago by vis4valentine@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

66 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I was taking a look at the Naomi Wu situation (A Chinese DIY tech youtuber who went missing after being watched by the government) and in one part they mentioned that she was concerned about her privacy, so started using Signal, but had a default chinese keyboard that had a keylogger and the police had looked into what she was talking on there.

I'm not sure if it was a mobile only thing, but it was mentioned that the keyboard app was used in like 70% por chinese smarthphones.

Now, I use AnySoftKey and refuse to use default keyboard apps, but how far can we reach on the keyboard security thing? Is typing on a computer or using a physical keyboard on a mobile device 100% safe? I think the keyboard issue is often overlooked and would like to know what recommendations your have? Or what should be known more?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

On a standard computer, be it a desktop or laptop, it's very hard to effectively avoid keylogging.

I don't say you 100% have a keylogger on your PC, that's not my point.
My point is that both on Windows, and on Linux systems that use the X11 window system instead of Wayland, any program can log your let presses with basically no effort.
On windows this is somewhat restricted when a program opens a secure desktop (a temporary "desktop", usually (always?) with a single window). This happens when you have to grant admin rights to a program, but other programs can request such a thing too, like the keepass password manager can be set to prompt for the password on a secure desktop. I don't know if the X11 window system of Linux has a similar feature.

But, as the other commenter said too, it depends on your threat model, because it can go a lot deeper than your choice of keyboard app.
If you use the original system of your smartphone, the manufacturer may have hidden software in it that can log your key presses even without cooperation if your keyboard app.
But if the modem - which is basically a different operating system that runs in parralel to the main one, but with the purpose of handling the connection with the cellular network, besides doing quite a few other things too - could get compromised, often it could be used to have open access to all the hardware that your main, android operating system uses. How is this on topic? This way intruders could observe where do you touch the touch screen, among a lot of other things.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is exactly why Wayland replacing X11 is a good thing. X11 was developed in an academic, on-prem LAN environment where such security wasn't a big consideration in its architectural design and needs to be allowed to gracefully retire from mainline use.

[–] jmp242@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really don't see why you couldn't attack wayland if you're running code locally. Wayland is going to need keyboard hooks anyway to enable important productivity tools like anykey and clipboard managers.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Absolutely. With local and physical access, attacks are very doable. Starting with a security-conscious architecture means that it's easier to improve over time.

ETA: The main point is that tech and use cases have evolved. This means that architecture of existing components needs to be re-evaluated for whether they are still a good way of accomplishing a task. In the case of X.org/X11, the architecture is more challenging to secure due to fundamental design. Wayland may not have full parity for remote use yet but, currently, security is generally a higher priority, so, its newer architecture that DOES consider security and sandboxing gives a better starting point in that area.

I fully anticipate that Wayland will also be replaced in the future as tech and use evolves further (does it consider AR/XR? Man-Machine-Interfaces that might see adoption? etc.). Like biology, it's the nature of tech to evolve and, since there isn't a sign that bad actors will be absent in the future, Wayland's architecture will likely end up being insufficient to secure against input logging attacks of the future.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My point is that both on Windows, and on Linux systems that use the X11 window system instead of Wayland, any program can log your let presses with basically no effort.

On Wayland, they probably still can. Wayland's core protocol doesn't allow it, but extensions to enable things like global hotkeys can almost certainly be used for shenanigans.

Also, if the keylogger is running under your user account, it can insert crafted .desktop files wrapping around your apps, ptrace your apps, you name it. Sandboxing as in Flatpak can stop this sort of thing, but if you run an app outside such a sandbox, and it's malicious, game over.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wayland's core protocol doesn't allow it, but extensions to enable things like global hotkeys can almost certainly be used for shenanigans.

But does it work without prompting the user?
Also, I'm not too familiar with how it works, but afaik global hotkeys on KDE are implemented by the display server/compositor/whatever it's called itself, and not sourced out to a different program.

Also, if the keylogger is running under your user account, it can insert crafted .desktop files wrapping around your apps, ptrace your apps, you name it.

Well, that's an interesting point, I haven't thought about that.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But does it work without prompting the user?
Also, I’m not too familiar with how it works, but afaik global hotkeys on KDE are implemented by the display server/compositor/whatever it’s called itself, and not sourced out to a different program.

Right, but they're configured by an unprivileged program: the settings app. Presumably, a keylogger can pretend to be the settings app.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Presumably, a keylogger can pretend to be the settings app.

Couldn't the display server check if the app is actually the settings app by looking at it's executable's location? Not sure how reliable that is, but if it is, it could check if it is coming from somewhere in /usr that is also not writable by the current user.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The display server has no way of verifying the process ID on the other end of the Unix-domain socket connection, and therefore cannot verify the executable image. It also cannot verify that the settings app hasn't had any malicious code injected with ptrace, LD_PRELOAD, or the like, since the injected code can remove any traces of that before connecting to the display server.