The only way to be safe is probably to access your financial sites from a browser running inside a VM, maybe even a dedicated laptop, and never sync the passwords to anywhere outside the VM unencrypted.
Ouch.
The only way to be safe is probably to access your financial sites from a browser running inside a VM, maybe even a dedicated laptop, and never sync the passwords to anywhere outside the VM unencrypted.
Ouch.
These folks don't want money.
And statue protects you from fraud - just set up text and email alerts so large transactions alert you ASAP.
These folks may not want money, but the phone is vulnerable and the next set of folks may. Do you really think the crooks who commit identity theft and ransomware attacks aren't salivating at these attacks?
I think the nation states that will want to use them will clamp down hard on two bit hustlers who interrupt the fun.
[1]: https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/82702/breaking-news/pwn...
Orders of magnitude more 0-days on whatever software is running on that laptop than on iOS.
This is bad advice.
What's more, every time you download a banking app on your phone, you have to place a little bit of trust in the competence of whoever the bank outsourced the programming job to. At least with a laptop, a poorly designed website site is not (by itself) a threat to everything on your computer or other sites you visit.
Even when it comes to "more 0-days", I think you're probably missing the point. There's a lot more software written for computers that can be compromised than just the handful of programs that comprise iOS, so the raw count is not very meaningful. More practically, I'm willing to bet the odds my (Linux) laptop is compromised are far lower than my phone. I don't install apps I don't trust on my computer, but I have little choice but to on my phone.
Both would require a 0-day exploit to be a threat.
Just because the attacks are dumb.
If your computer is pwned, it should wait for you to 2FA, and then when you "log out"-- don't, do malicious stuff instead.
If the device you are using is compromised, you're in for a bad time.
You could send some simple transaction summary to the other device to acknowledge, which is getting better. Even so that doesn't completely eliminate the opportunity for tomfoolery.
When user tries to transfer $1,000 of cash from user's investment account to user's bank account, instead, initiate transferring $100,000 to EvilGuy's bank account. Rewrite elements so it appears that $1,000 is being transferred to user's bank account, and wait for user to receive their 2FA code and authenticate. This may be as easy as string replacement both ways.
Someone "using Linux" is likely to be running various things such as SSH/HTTP/file servers, native IRC clients, random build systems (running "npm install" instills a lot of trust on the NPM repository and any packages involved). All of these things increase the attack surface.
This is a fallacy. Rather than assessing the security of the linux kernel or linux distributions you're making taking an assumption about linux users and transferring the blame for their insecure practices onto linux itself.
Think of it this way: If a random Windows user that didn't engage in such behavior was to switch to linux it's unlikely that would suddenly change. If the linux kernel and system programs are more secure than windows that make linux a good choice if that person cares about security.
Note: I'm not making a statement about the security of linux/windows, just pointing out a flaw in the above argument.
I was responding to that assumption made by the parent:
> people who run laptops using linux probably have more security in the laptop than on their phone
When you run an application on iOS or Android, it doesn't have those capabilities. It can only get them through security exploits. In theory it should be similar to looking at a web page. If a web page is able to read arbitrary files, that's obviously a bug in the system. If an application on your laptop is able to read arbitrary files, that's standard functionality.
Apps that keep all this data locally, as is common on phones, are dangerous. Add the fact that most people have a phone as their two factor and you have a really bad situation when a phone is compromised. This, alone, makes phones an attractive target.
Meaning the session cookies are stored on your computer, meaning I can steal those and then do whatever nefarious things I want to do off-box. Locality is a myth, attackers don't care about that. They just want the data, and finding/weaponizing bugs is the hard part.
Speaking of native applications, usually many regular users still use native native applications for email, chat, text processing, spreadsheets, etc.
So while you specifically might take care of having a very clean $HOME, most people don't.
If compromised, the attacker doesn't get a long log of comms, just a week's worth.