[Puz_zled]

I came across this article with extensive background provide by Scott Totzke Senior VP Blackberry Security on the architectural development of BB10 security from the original QNX Neutrino RTOS. Enjoy!

BlackBerry 10 OS will have multi-layered security model

As security becomes important to consumers, device makers and app developers, RIM reacts

John Cox (Network World)
09 May, 2012 08:53

RIM's upcoming BlackBerry 10 operating system is intended to be as secure, if not more so, than the OS running on RIM's current crop of BlackBerry devices. Mobile security could become a major selling point for the new platform, for enterprises, carriers and end users alike.

Essentially, RIM is blending security elements from its BlackBerry heritage with the security architecture of the new OS, which is based on the QNX Neutrino real-time operating system, acquired when RIM bought QNX Software Systems in 2010. While RIM has not revealed BlackBerry 10 security in detail, Scott Totzke, RIM's senior vice president, BlackBerry security, talked about the topic generally during a briefing at last week's BlackBerry World conference.

BACKGROUND: RIM CEO vows to wow with BlackBerry 10

"Security is becoming more complex for consumers than for the enterprise," Totzke says. The enterprise typically has a security infrastructure in place, often with dedicated security staff. The BlackBerry Enterprise Server lets administrators set hundreds of device and data policies for the BlackBerry phones, and forges an encrypted link for the devices through RIM's Network Operations Center. "The industry has been promising mobile commerce [to consumers] for years: the idea of using your phone as your wallet. But if that happens, it better be secure," he says. "If the user can't trust the [mobile] platform, it's a tough sell."

BB10 security will have multiple integrated layers, with the tight, cooperating relationship between hardware and software that's been a BlackBerry hallmark. For mobile users, there will be a permissions-based security model for apps, in plain, understandable English, coupled with a various OS-level security and safety features borrowed from QNX's experience in the embedded systems market.

At the OS level, QNX has offered a hardened variant of its OS called Neutrino RTOS Secure Kernel for several years. The secure kernel has been certified under the Common Criteria ISO/IEC 15408 Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL) 4+. The Common Criteria is intended to show that a computer security product has been specified, implemented and evaluated in a standard and thorough way. QNX says Neutrino was the first full-featured RTOS certified under this standard.

(In December 2011, QNX announced that Neutrino has also been received a safety certification, under the IEC 61508 standard for Safety Integrity Level 3 (SIL 3). Strictly speaking, this isn't a security certification, but one intended to reduce the rate of "dangerous failures" to a system.)

But RIM doesn't appear to be using the Secure Kernel variant. Rather, after RIM acquired QNX, the device maker's security architects began working closely with the QNX software engineers, according to Totzke. The works seems to be focused on how to exploit the microkernel's strengths while adding new security features.

This combined group has been focusing on a range of protections, such as:

�Blocking root access, which enables a user or hacker to gain administrative access to the OS.
�Memory randomization, which in effect "scrambles" where in memory routines may run, making it harder for these to be leveraged by attackers.
�Adding security management, including auditing, to the kernel.


It's a work in progress. Code to jailbreak or root the QNX-based PlayBook OS (so you can load apps apart from BlackBerry App World) is available from DingleBerry.it, specifically Version 3.3, which was a big step up in simplicity and ease of use. A 4.0 version is in development. The PlayBooks will eventually run BlackBerry 10, so if blocking root access is a priority for RIM, then they may be harder to jailbreak with the release of the new OS.

One advance to protect data is already present in the PlayBook OS and will be a key part of BlackBerry 10, according to Totzke. BlackBerry Balance creates separate and secure work and personal "perimeters" at the data level. Corporate apps and data are encrypted in the work perimeter, and can't be transferred or copied to the personal perimeter. (Encryption for personal data will be available in the next release of the PlayBook OS, he says.)

"But I [as the end user] don't have to think about this separation," says Totzke. "There's a unified presentation to the data [in the user interface], but under the covers, the system separates the data." There is only one email system and UI, for example, on the device, but work and personal emails are kept separate by the underlying system.

Neutrino's microkernel architecture keeps an essential set of services in the core, but drivers, applications, protocol stacks, and the file system run outside the microkernel, effectively sandboxed in what's called memory-protected user space. This means that almost any of these external components can fail and be replaced and restarted without affecting other components or the kernel itself, according to QNX. Presumably malware designed to compromise the kernel likewise will be isolated in these protected spaces.

Another layer of protection lies in QNX Neutrino conforming to the POSIX standard, which specifies an API, and some shells and interfaces, for software compatibility between POSIX-compliant operating systems. "A POSIX API prevents the use of proprietary interfaces with the potential for insecure behavior and misunderstood results," among other benefits, according to the QNX website. The RTOS was designed from the outset for POSIX support, an approach that eliminates the need for adding a "complex POSIX adaptation layer" that some rivals RTOSs require. The result is faster performance and lower memory requirements for applications, according to QNX.

Much of this security infrastructure will be invisible to end users. But if mobile payment technologies actually find some traction, security or at least the need for it may become more pressing for end users. RIM been an enthusiastic adopter of near-field communications (NFC) in its BlackBerry smartphones, to support using them for "contactless" mobile payments. U.K.-based The Inquirer reported this week that RIM says it accounted for 80% of NFC phones shipped to U.K. retailers in the first quarter.

"I think that's where people want to go," says Totzke. "I sometimes forget my wallet, but I never forget my phone."

"Security has to become a little more in the forefront for consumers and a lot more in the forefront for device makers and app developers," he adds.

John Cox covers wireless networking and mobile computing for Network World. Twitter: johnwcoxnww (@johnwcoxnww) on Twitter Email: [email protected] Blog RSS feed: John Cox's blog

Read more about anti-malware in Network World's Anti-malware section.

Got more on this story? Email ARN.

Follow ARN on twitter.

More about: BlackBerry, ISO, NFC, OSIX, QNX Software Systems, RIM, Scott

References Show all 9 links
�Security Research Center - Network World
�QNX Neutrino RTOS
�RIM CEO vows to wow with BlackBerry 10

[T�nis]

I just hope the encryption of data stored on an OS 10 device is at least as secure as it is on the current BlackBerry os and has the same or more options. With a strong password and proper settings applied, current BlackBerry encryption is unbreakable.

[Economist101]

With a strong password and proper settings applied, current BlackBerry encryption is unbreakable.

And there you have it, today's winner of the "hyperbole" award.

[morlock_man]

BlackBerry encryption 'too secure': National security vs. consumer privacy | ZDNet

Unbreakable? Maybe not... but its still pretty damn secure.

[T�nis]

And there you have it, today's winner of the "hyperbole" award.

This "economist" can't stop acting like an a$$ in every topic. Say something else about the stock price, okay?

[jechow]

I've always wondered if encryption /security will always result in a slower mobile experience compared to a similarly spec'ed Smartphone?

[hornlovah]

Thanks for posting the article Puz_zled! Good to hear RIM speak about BB10 to security minded consumers. BlackBerry phone security has held up amazingly well over time, and it's nice to know that BB10 will benefit from the same level of commitment and expertise.

And there you have it, today's winner of the "hyperbole" award.

Technically, what Tonis wrote is correct. All platforms are vulnerable to browser exploits and targeted malware from time to time. All phones and computers are hackable over time, but attacks against 256-bit AES encryption are theoretical. Exploiting a BlackBerry�s 256-bit symmetrical or 571-bit ECC encryption keys would require quantum computing. You can attempt to isolate a key, determine how it's derived and attack the password. You can obtain data at run-time when it's not encrypted...etc., but the encryption itself is not breakable at this time.

[lnichols]

This "economist" can't stop acting like an a$$ in every topic. Say something else about the stock price, okay?

Don't quote him and I will not see his posts . His account conveniently started right after the last troll cleaning and his post are always that valuable.

Now as for the security, BB10 will be in a class of its own compared to iOS and Android with just what we know now, and I'm sure we don't know all of it.

[Sith_Apprentice]

And there you have it, today's winner of the "hyperbole" award.

The encryption is NOT unbreakable with its stock levels. Is it extremely secure? Absolutely. But even the US Government does not use it for classified information (more or less). Its approved for sensitive but unclassified. Now going forward that very well may change, but if you look at RIMs security awards, that is what it says at this time. Additional layers of security and encryption can easily be added (and have in certain cases).

[Italianemperor]

NSA created hardened a version of Android, I would think an even more secure version of BB10 could be created for security conscious customers like the government.

[Sith_Apprentice]

NSA created hardened a version of Android, I would think an even more secure version of BB10 could be created for security conscious customers like the government.

They are still working on that. its basically secure Linux with many of the stock features stripped away. Also significantly limits the number of consumer apps that can run. The idea behind BB10 is that you wont need to do that, the same UI, same user experience with government level security. PB OS2 is currently being evaluated by DoD/NSA. Once it has its approval (and BB10 is currently being evaluated as well from what I understand), it will be good to go. RIMs idea (and something they should have done before) is to give the OS to NSA/DoD to evaluate before the hardware is available. The crypto kernel doesnt change significantly once the OS is fairly complete. New features are added but crypto is the same. So this process should help speed BB10 along in approval.

[Branta]

Don't quote him and I will not see his posts . His account conveniently started right after the last troll cleaning and his post are always that valuable.

The correlation has not gone unnoticed. After many warnings there is only one option remaining!

[Chrisy]

Awesome find, OP. Thanks for posting.

[avt123]

Good stuff. Now as long as everything else is as good as the security that will be great.

[Branta]

The encryption is NOT unbreakable with its stock levels. Is it extremely secure? Absolutely. But even the US Government does not use it for classified information (more or less). Its approved for sensitive but unclassified. Now going forward that very well may change, but if you look at RIMs security awards, that is what it says at this time. Additional layers of security and encryption can easily be added (and have in certain cases).

At the software approval level that policy is correct and appropriate. When it comes to hardware the physical requirements and increased cost for higher security levels in a smartphone would be inappropriate in a device intended for release to general circulation.

As far as anyone knows the encryption algorithms are still considered to be acceptably secure against practical attacks.

[hornlovah]

The encryption is NOT unbreakable with its stock levels. Is it extremely secure? Absolutely. But even the US Government does not use it for classified information (more or less). Its approved for sensitive but unclassified. Now going forward that very well may change, but if you look at RIMs security awards, that is what it says at this time. Additional layers of security and encryption can easily be added (and have in certain cases).

Please let me know what part of my post you did not understand. BlackBerry's device encryption is well-documented, and I can point you to an authoritative resource. Attacks against 256-bit AES encryption are theoretical at this time, and they come in the form of formal research papers submitted for peer review. I know from prior posts that Tonis has his device configured to write a 571-bit ECC keys, so they are roughly equivalent in strength to 256-bit symmetrical keys. At a rate of a billion billion (10^81) guesses per second, it would roughly take 3*10^51 (ten to the 51st) years to exhaust a 256-bit keyspace. That kind of computing power is considered to be large scale quantum computing, likely theoretical quantum computing at this time too.

[Sith_Apprentice]

Please let me know what part of my post you did not understand. BlackBerry's device encryption is well-documented, and I can point you to an authoritative resource. Attacks against 256-bit AES encryption are theoretical at this time, and they come in the form of formal research papers submitted for peer review. I know from prior posts that Tonis has his device configured to write a 571-bit ECC keys, so they are roughly equivalent in strength to 256-bit symmetrical keys. At a rate of a billion billion (10^81) guesses per second, it would roughly take 3*10^51 (ten to the 51st) years to exhaust a 256-bit keyspace. That kind of computing power is considered to be large scale quantum computing, likely theoretical quantum computing at this time too.

I did not say it would not take a long time, nor did I say it was impractical. I did however say that it was NOT unbreakable. You just gave a very good example of its impracticality, but even went so far to explain my point that it could be broken. They are extremely secure, yes. They are NOT secure enough for some things at this time. The BlackBerry devices are to be (or are currently) being evaluated for Secret (and in some cases much higher) classification levels. But as of yet, they have not passed the requirements.

[jasonvan9]

@Sith_apprentice

I agree with your statement, that nothing is impossible, but if it takes 2.15E+126 years for it to theoretically be hack as horniovah is suggesting, than how closer to impossible is needed? I don't know about you, but I don't think ill have my blackberry for QUITE that long....

[lnichols]

Actually there are a set of Cryptography standards that can be utilized on commercial devices that are certified for classified material. Look up NSA Suite B. Uses AES encryption. And according to RIM's UK Site BlackBerry - Security FAQs

Are BlackBerry devices NSA Suite B ready?

Yes, all in-market BlackBerry devices support the NSA Suite B algorithms.

[Sith_Apprentice]

Actually there are a set of Cryptography standards that can be utilized on commercial devices that are certified for classified material. Look up NSA Suite B. Uses AES encryption. And according to RIM's UK Site BlackBerry - Security FAQs

Yes you are correct. However the BlackBerry devices have not been certified as Suite B compliant in the United States (which would also have to secure voice, onboard, removable storage, usb ports, etc). As I said, they are going to be/being evaluated, but this is the second time I know of that they are going through it. The first was a couple years ago.

As for it being impractical I completely agree, and this is an discussion on semantics at this point.

Edit: Also the security FAQ above indicates that the device supports the Suite B algorithms, in the security certifications section the UK has only awarded Restricted approval to BlackBerry.

[daveycrocket]

Nice post Puz_led.

[hornlovah]

I did not say it would not take a long time, nor did I say it was impractical. I did however say that it was NOT unbreakable. You just gave a very good example of its impracticality, but even went so far to explain my point that it could be broken. They are extremely secure, yes. They are NOT secure enough for some things at this time. The BlackBerry devices are to be (or are currently) being evaluated for Secret (and in some cases much higher) classification levels. But as of yet, they have not passed the requirements.

That was my mistake Sith_Apprentice, and I apologize for the lecture. Anyway, I look forward to seeing how RIM implements encryption, key chain management, and any new/enhanced security features in BB10. It looks like they off to a great start!

[Sith_Apprentice]

That was my mistake Sith_Apprentice, and I apologize for the lecture. Anyway, I look forward to seeing how RIM implements encryption, key chain management, and any new/enhanced security features in BB10. It looks like they off to a great start!

No need to apologize You are well educated in this area and I am sure you helped more than a few individuals understand the encryption better.

QNX is highly certified OS, those guys know what they are doing. Add that to RIM's own encryption team, and their embedded individuals within DoD and NSA, you will definitely see great things coming. Scott is a very sharp guy and security is his baby. He will not fail to have his team impress.

http://www.qnx.com/products/standards.html

[T�nis]

Guys, though I don't know for sure, I'm thinking the reason why BlackBerry security might not be deemed secure enough for top level government security could very well be that the voice part would need to be encrypted. If you look at the specs on the Sectera Edge, it has phone to phone voice encryption that the users can turn on. The only thing I was trying to say in my first post is that:

1. BlackBerry encryption, for my purposes, is unbreakable, because, as AES, in a practical sense it is, requiring those exponential lengths of times you've mentioned to crack; and

2. I hope BlackBerry 10 security is at least as good (or better) with at least as many (or more) settings and features, and that it won't be watered down to accommodate consumer desires or come with a back door installed.

[Sith_Apprentice]

Guys, though I don't know for sure, I'm thinking the reason why BlackBerry security might not be deemed secure enough for top level government security could very well be that the voice part would need to be encrypted. If you look at the specs on the Sectera Edge, it has phone to phone voice encryption that the users can turn on. The only thing I was trying to say in my first post is that:

1. BlackBerry encryption, for my purposes, is unbreakable, because, as AES, in a practical sense it is, requiring those exponential lengths of times you've mentioned to crack; and

2. I hope BlackBerry 10 security is at least as good (or better) with at least as many (or more) settings and features, and that it won't be watered down to accommodate consumer desires or come with a back door installed.

It could be certified just as a secure data device as well, but you are correct, (while they could) they do not offer encrypted voice yet. CellCrypt (which uses RIMs crypto kernel) is compliant with NSA standards, but not certified.