zlacker

[return to "F-Droid Fake Signer PoC"]
1. mappu+ib[view] [source] 2025-01-04 00:30:56
>>pabs3+(OP)
Is it as bad as they're making it out to be? The fdroidserver get_first_signer_certificate can give a different result to apksigner, but then fdroidserver calls apksigner anyway for verification, and F-Droid mitigates the issue in various other ways.

I think F-Droid were acting in the right up to that point; and then the latest update (regex newlines) is 0day? Has there been a response from F-Droid about the updates?

◧◩
2. KennyB+sJ[view] [source] 2025-01-04 07:25:57
>>mappu+ib
Well, this is pretty concerning all on its own:

> Instead of adopting the fixes we proposed, F-Droid wrote and merged their own patch [10], ignoring repeated warnings it had significant flaws (including an incorrect implementation of v1 signature verification and making it impossible to have APKs with rotated keys in a repository).

This concerns me more than the vulnerabilities themselves. It's a pretty serious failure in leadership and shows that F-Droid is still driven by egos, not sound software engineering practices and a genuine interest in doing right for the community.

F-Droid has numerous issues:

* glacially slow to release updates even when security patches are released

* not enforcing 2FA for developer accounts

* no automatic vulnerability or malware scanning

...and more problems: https://privsec.dev/posts/android/f-droid-security-issues/

[go to top]