Comments on: Adobe AIR security concerns http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html Tech writing blog Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:28:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Sean http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-108214 Sean Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:56:00 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-108214 I found this article after installing AIR and then going to install Kuler. While I do have reasonable trust for Adobe here, I did click cancel instead of install. It seemed like a big fat hole in the thought process. I don't want applications mining my personal documents. I found this article after installing AIR and then going to install Kuler. While I do have reasonable trust for Adobe here, I did click cancel instead of install. It seemed like a big fat hole in the thought process.

I don’t want applications mining my personal documents.

]]> By: Mike http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-38804 Mike Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:14:59 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-38804 @Chris: In fact, there have been worldwide outbreaks of attacks by malicious code. You said: "Common sense dictates you only download from trusted sources" and common sense also dictates you don't double click an unexpected attachment called 'Love-Letter-For-You.txt.vbs'. But many did and the outbreak of the "I Love You-virus" was a fact. ---------- @Alan Yes, _we_ know that, but does your 11 year old nephew know that? ---------- This post actually raises an excellent point, and it's not about technology, it's about perception. Flash games are extremely popular time wasters. They _will_ be extended with offline capabilities through Air (like playing on a laptop and later synchronizing high scores, or extrra down loadable levels/characters). At this point, Air applications will be perceived to be relatively save, and many users will click Yes to the 'scary' dialog. @Chris:

In fact, there have been worldwide outbreaks of attacks by malicious code.

You said: “Common sense dictates you only download from trusted sources” and common sense also dictates you don’t double click an unexpected attachment called ‘Love-Letter-For-You.txt.vbs’. But many did and the outbreak of the “I Love You-virus” was a fact.
———-
@Alan

Yes, _we_ know that, but does your 11 year old nephew know that?
———-

This post actually raises an excellent point, and it’s not about technology, it’s about perception. Flash games are extremely popular time wasters. They _will_ be extended with offline capabilities through Air (like playing on a laptop and later synchronizing high scores, or extrra down loadable levels/characters). At this point, Air applications will be perceived to be relatively save, and many users will click Yes to the ‘scary’ dialog.

]]> By: James A. Donald http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-38394 James A. Donald Thu, 11 Oct 2007 20:21:58 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-38394 The following file access restriction should be broad enough to allow almost any legitimate application, and safe enough to prevent malware: The application should be able to access its initially empty home directory at will, and should be able to access any file that the user has selected from a file open dialog controlled by the Adobe AIR runtime and displayed in fashion that shows its relationship to the particular AIR appliction. Similarly for access to anything sensitive - only through dialogs whose appearance and behavior is controlled by the runtime, not the particular application. The following file access restriction should be broad enough to allow almost any legitimate application, and safe enough to prevent malware:

The application should be able to access its initially empty home directory at will, and should be able to access any file that the user has selected from a file open dialog controlled by the Adobe AIR runtime and displayed in fashion that shows its relationship to the particular AIR appliction.

Similarly for access to anything sensitive – only through dialogs whose appearance and behavior is controlled by the runtime, not the particular application.

]]> By: Alan Karp http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-38378 Alan Karp Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:32:19 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-38378 The simple way to protect yourself from AIR and other applications is to use the Windows runAs facility to launch the application in a restricted user account. I routinely do that with my browser. Applications run this way don't have access to my stuff. If the account gets corrupted, I can just throw it away and create a new one. The simple way to protect yourself from AIR and other applications is to use the Windows runAs facility to launch the application in a restricted user account. I routinely do that with my browser. Applications run this way don’t have access to my stuff. If the account gets corrupted, I can just throw it away and create a new one.

]]> By: Chris Seahorn http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-23621 Chris Seahorn Wed, 27 Jun 2007 20:39:02 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-23621 This has been discussed at many a place since the alpha and while I know Adobe doesn't care to be compared to commercial wrappers, nor does it even aspire to, the distribution of the end product AIR creates exactly mirrors a model that already exists (ZINC, SWF Studio, SWFKit Pro, Mprojector, SwishStudio, etc). Comparing an online Flash game to an offline one assumes a lot of factors that aren't applicable. I can't chance upon a desktop application...I can only choose to download it from somewhere and install it with free will (I can't be redirected to one or have it unintentionally forced upon me with creative browser commands). In this respect the rules that apply to all downloadable applications (whether AIR or not) apply here as well. Common sense dictates you only download from trusted sources. The fact AIR right now has limited access to the OS isn't really a debit in this regard...it's actually smart while in beta so they can work out how it will differ from the way commercial wrappers handle things now (and there is a huge userbase of people cranking out desktop apps with far more OS access than AIR offers right now....with no catastrophic worldwide outbreaks of attacks by malicious code I might add) and what level of access they choose to allow. I do think they need to mirror the options offered by the existing commercial wrappers because if they don't, at least how it relates to desktop RIA's based on Flash/Flex content, they will cut their own throat limiting their platform by rules of engagement not respected (nor abused in large numbers) by their competitors. If a user wishes to put out malicious code, they will...no matter the platform....this isn't specific to AIR nor more susceptible to AIR. The question is...with a distribution model that cannot be compared to a web delivered one, what avenue would they have for distribution in today's world? Surely not any shareware repository...it would get reported too fast. They would be limited to distribution via personal means (self served as a download from their domain) and the word would get out quickly that their code is malicious should they choose become a developer that has "creating havoc" on his/her mind. We need to quit pretending that AIR invented the ability to create desktop applications with the benefit of a lower level language encompassed by a higher level one and they need to stay focused on how it will differ from these existing applications (with dedicated runtimes, dedicated html engines, internal DB handling and etc for example) and ignore the stabs at security and other supposed flaws by people that tend to...in fact...pretend they did invent it. I personally think (I wrote about this at an earlier date) that scary install splash screen you mention is being done on purpose. To me it simply negates any worries that users will jump the gun and begin commercial distribution of anything AIR based until it at least hits final version 1. I sure wouldn't (imagine the look on a clients face when they see that). If I had to guess it's that way for a reason and will not look anything like that when it's all said and done. :) Chris This has been discussed at many a place since the alpha and while I know Adobe doesn’t care to be compared to commercial wrappers, nor does it even aspire to, the distribution of the end product AIR creates exactly mirrors a model that already exists (ZINC, SWF Studio, SWFKit Pro, Mprojector, SwishStudio, etc).

Comparing an online Flash game to an offline one assumes a lot of factors that aren’t applicable. I can’t chance upon a desktop application…I can only choose to download it from somewhere and install it with free will (I can’t be redirected to one or have it unintentionally forced upon me with creative browser commands). In this respect the rules that apply to all downloadable applications (whether AIR or not) apply here as well. Common sense dictates you only download from trusted sources.

The fact AIR right now has limited access to the OS isn’t really a debit in this regard…it’s actually smart while in beta so they can work out how it will differ from the way commercial wrappers handle things now (and there is a huge userbase of people cranking out desktop apps with far more OS access than AIR offers right now….with no catastrophic worldwide outbreaks of attacks by malicious code I might add) and what level of access they choose to allow. I do think they need to mirror the options offered by the existing commercial wrappers because if they don’t, at least how it relates to desktop RIA’s based on Flash/Flex content, they will cut their own throat limiting their platform by rules of engagement not respected (nor abused in large numbers) by their competitors. If a user wishes to put out malicious code, they will…no matter the platform….this isn’t specific to AIR nor more susceptible to AIR. The question is…with a distribution model that cannot be compared to a web delivered one, what avenue would they have for distribution in today’s world? Surely not any shareware repository…it would get reported too fast. They would be limited to distribution via personal means (self served as a download from their domain) and the word would get out quickly that their code is malicious should they choose become a developer that has “creating havoc” on his/her mind.

We need to quit pretending that AIR invented the ability to create desktop applications with the benefit of a lower level language encompassed by a higher level one and they need to stay focused on how it will differ from these existing applications (with dedicated runtimes, dedicated html engines, internal DB handling and etc for example) and ignore the stabs at security and other supposed flaws by people that tend to…in fact…pretend they did invent it.

I personally think (I wrote about this at an earlier date) that scary install splash screen you mention is being done on purpose. To me it simply negates any worries that users will jump the gun and begin commercial distribution of anything AIR based until it at least hits final version 1. I sure wouldn’t (imagine the look on a clients face when they see that). If I had to guess it’s that way for a reason and will not look anything like that when it’s all said and done. :)

Chris

]]> By: John Dowdell http://www.itwriting.com/blog/261-adobe-air-security-concerns.html/comment-page-1#comment-23613 John Dowdell Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:46:27 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=261#comment-23613 Yes, the ability for Flash or Ajax to read and write the local file system is a significant beyond-the-browser ability. I do not expect people to install Adobe Integrated Runtime applications as casually as they would click a link to go to a new webpage. Browsers will remain uniquely valuable when visiting strangers. The security restraints have not been fully set in the current beta... here's the current situation: http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/AIR:Developer_FAQ#What_security_model_does_the_Adobe_AIR_runtime_provide.3F The issues you raise are valid ones, and the team here has had these explicitly in mind the past few months. When the release goes 1.0 it'd be great if you could provide a reality-check then too, thanks. jd/adobe Yes, the ability for Flash or Ajax to read and write the local file system is a significant beyond-the-browser ability. I do not expect people to install Adobe Integrated Runtime applications as casually as they would click a link to go to a new webpage. Browsers will remain uniquely valuable when visiting strangers.

The security restraints have not been fully set in the current beta… here’s the current situation:
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/AIR:Developer_FAQ#What_security_model_does_the_Adobe_AIR_runtime_provide.3F

The issues you raise are valid ones, and the team here has had these explicitly in mind the past few months. When the release goes 1.0 it’d be great if you could provide a reality-check then too, thanks.

jd/adobe

]]>