Reconciling GooglePlay's security recommendations with Xamarin deployment

February 25, 2016 7954 Views Sebastian Holst

An app control that both Microsoft and Google can get behind? What about Xamarin?

First - Congratulations Xamarin (and Microsoft) - as someone who has used Xamarin personally and worked with the people professionally, I see this as a win-win-win (for Xamarin, Microsoft, and, last but not least, developers!).

To the topic at hand... One might argue that the phrase "GooglePlay security recommendations" is a contradiction in terms or even oxymoronic - but I take a different view. If (EVEN) Google recommends a security practice to protect your apps - then it must REALLY be a basic requirement - one that should not be ignored.

I'm talking about basic obfuscation to prevent reverse engineering and tampering.

Here's an excerpt from Android's developer documentation

"To ensure the security of your application, particularly for a paid application that uses licensing and/or custom constraints and protections, it's very important to obfuscate your application code." ...and they go on to write "The use of ProGuard or a similar program to obfuscate your code is strongly recommended for all applications that use Google Play Licensing." (I did NOT add the emphasis)

For those unfamiliar with ProGuard - it's a free/open source obfuscator - quite a good one really for the money ;) - but seriously - it's kind of an analog to Dotfuscator Community Edition included with Visual Studio (also for free). The point being that both Google and Microsoft have long recognized that basic controls to prevent reverse engineering need to be ubiquitously available to every developer (no one is suggesting all apps be obfuscated).

...but what about Xamarin apps targeting Android or iOS? ...not so much. ProGuard cannot obfuscate Xamarin apps - nor can any of the other native Java/Android obfuscators (including PreEmptive's own DashO). ...But (good news) Dotfuscator Professional can. ...But (bad news) it's not free. Still, if you're serious about this topic, you'd probably want something other than the "free version" on either platform. Here's a link to a PreEmptive blog post on how to protect your Xamarin apps with Dotfuscator (both iOS and Android): Xamarin Applications and Dotfuscator.

Question: Given the Microsoft Xamarin acquisition, should we (PreEmptive/Microsoft) consider extending Dotfuscator CE (the free one) to provide comparable protection to Android and iOS apps generated by Xamarin as we do for .NET apps today (and since 2003)?

Let me know your thoughts - I really do want to hear from Xamarin developers (and the app owners that employ them :).

Latest Blog Posts

Protecting C# Applications That Use Dynamic Types

The dynamic type in C# provides flexibility that is not available in other statically-typed languages. Since its introduction in C# 4.0 (.NET 4.5), we have worked with customers who wanted to know more about how dynamic types are impacted by the obfuscation process.

Malicious actors — like any thieves — live by a simple rule: If the front door is locked, break the window.

It’s why threats like fileless malware and crypto-jacking have seen substantial gains over last few years. It’s why — despite increasing employee education and IT training — hackers are still hooking phish by developing more sophisticated and authentic-looking email spoofs. Cybercriminal communities, meanwhile, continue to grow on the dark web, allowing attackers to share info, purchase exploit kits and identify potential targets.

What does this mean for CISOs? That typical defense efforts are being outpaced as familiar attack vectors are replaced with non-traditional threats. But it’s not all bad news; here are three questions every CISO needs to ask to help close the doors, bolt the windows and leave hackers out in the cold.

Gabriel, you have been in the security industry for over 2 decades. You have seen many different tools and services. Why create a company around something as specific as obfuscation and in-app protection?

Our customers build a lot of really innovative apps that enable their users and customers to do new and cool things. These apps frequently run on untrusted client computers/devices and they control access to customer’s sensitive data or critical devices.

And after all the effort of designing, building, debugging, and deploying their applications, the last thing they want is for an attacker to steal their work or use it to look for vulnerabilities to break into their system.

Long ago, we built a Java code optimizer, but it became clear to us that our customer cared more about the obfuscation effects of the optimization than the actual performance improvement. That is when we really began to focus on app protection. First with Java, then .NET, Android, iOS, Xamarin, JavaScript, etc.

Gartner calls In-App Protection “crucial” in their July 2019 Market Guide for In-App Protection In-App Protection. The guide’s summary advises security and risk management leaders to “take due care in protecting their application clients” in order to avoid “security failure.”

This raises the question – what constitutes “due care?” Obviously, no development organization looks to recklessly expose their applications or sensitive data to attack or compromise. On the other hand, over-engineered (or poorly engineered) security controls can quickly lead to excessive development costs, performance and quality issues, and, ultimately, unacceptable user experiences. While terms and terminology may vary, there is broad consensus on how to best define “due care” for any given application/user scenario.

If you don’t follow application security closely, you might think of application obfuscation and symbol renaming as being synonymous – and with good reason. Many platforms and languages, like .NET, Java, and JavaScript have popular obfuscators that do little else--our own Dotfuscator Community Edition for .NET and ProGuard for Java are good examples. However, obfuscation is far more than symbol renaming – and in-app protection is far more than obfuscation. Much of this expansion has been driven by new security requirements, shifting attack vectors, the rise of mobile and IoT computing and, lastly, the growing recognition inside regulations and legislation of the exposure that can result from inadequately protected software.

Reconciling GooglePlay's security recommendations with Xamarin deployment

Protecting C# Applications That Use Dynamic Types

Non-Traditional Attack Vectors: Three Questions Every CISO Needs to Ask

Q&A With PreEmptive CEO Gabriel Torok

Gabriel, you have been in the security industry for over 2 decades. You have seen many different tools and services. Why create a company around something as specific as obfuscation and in-app protection?

The Secret to Effective In-App Protection

Symbol Renaming: App Security’s Maginot Line?

Latest Blog Posts

Protecting C# Applications That Use Dynamic Types

Non-Traditional Attack Vectors: Three Questions Every CISO Needs to Ask

Q&A With PreEmptive CEO Gabriel Torok

The Secret to Effective In-App Protection

Symbol Renaming: App Security’s Maginot Line?

Twitter