Researchers: Thieves Can Read A Mobile Phone From 14 Feet Away

Written by Frank Hayes
November 9th, 2011

Bringing Mobile Commerce in-store—for everything from mobile payments to mobile checkout—just hit another snag. Researchers have developed a way by which thieves could capture video of users typing on a smartphone screen from as much as 14 feet away inside a store, and then automatically extract passwords, PINs, payment-card numbers or other sensitive data from the video, which can be captured over the phone user’s shoulder or even in the reflection of a user’s sunglasses.

Shoulder surfing is an unavoidable problem with smartphones in a crowd, but 14 feet away feels like enough distance to be safe from video eavesdropping. And although there are workarounds to block the attack—turn down the screen brightness or turn off the pop-up keypress confirmation that makes the iPhone’s virtual keyboard so much easier to use—it’s unlikely that customers will be willing to do that. Store associates, on the other hand, might want to do both those things, along with being careful to guard their screens and watch for customers who happen to be using video cameras nearby. The biggest question is whether they can be convinced to do anything.

The researchers, from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, used consumer-grade cameras (ranging from a $1,000 Canon camcorder to a $90 Kodak PlayTouch) aimed at users keying in text on iPhones indoors, outdoors and on a moving bus. With more than a little algorithmic magic involving some computer vision techniques, researchers were able to reconstruct the text that users typed at better than 94 percent accuracy—certainly good enough to put passwords and PINs at risk.

The secret to their success was the pop-up feedback with each character typed. “Although the on-screen text is essentially unreadable, the pop-out event provides a strong visual cue to help identify the letter that was tapped,” the researchers wrote.

That made it possible to capture text from a distance even when the phone’s screen was reflected in a user’s sunglasses—a scenario that would usually be safe from a thief looking on. (It probably helped that computer processing is likely to be better at correcting for the distorted reflection in the lenses of sunglasses.)

As with all academic papers on security topics, there’s not quite enough information for thieves to simply lift the researchers’ work and put it immediately to evil use. But now thieves know it can be done. And even if the results aren’t as good as those that the researchers got, they may still be good enough to pose a security problem.

And for customers, there’s not much retailers can do.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.