GitLab

I conducted a fixed analysis of DeepSeek, a Chinese LLM chatbot, utilizing variation 1.8.0 from the Google Play Store. The goal was to recognize possible security and photorum.eclat-mauve.fr personal privacy problems.

I've discussed DeepSeek formerly here.

Additional security and privacy issues about DeepSeek have actually been raised.

See also this analysis by NowSecure of the iPhone version of DeepSeek

The findings detailed in this report are based purely on static analysis. This suggests that while the code exists within the app, there is no definitive proof that all of it is performed in practice. Nonetheless, the existence of such code warrants analysis, coastalplainplants.org specifically offered the growing issues around data privacy, security, the prospective misuse of AI-driven applications, and cyber-espionage characteristics in between global powers.

Key Findings

Suspicious Data Handling & Exfiltration

- Hardcoded URLs direct data to external servers, raising issues about user activity monitoring, such as to ByteDance "volce.com" endpoints. NowSecure determines these in the iPhone app the other day as well.

• Bespoke file encryption and information obfuscation methods are present, with signs that they could be utilized to exfiltrate user details.
• The app contains hard-coded public secrets, instead of counting on the user gadget's chain of trust.
• UI interaction tracking captures detailed user habits without clear approval. - WebView manipulation is present, which could enable the app to gain access to private external browser data when links are opened. More details about WebView adjustments is here
  
  Device Fingerprinting & Tracking
  
  A substantial portion of the analyzed code appears to concentrate on event device-specific details, which can be utilized for tracking and fingerprinting.
  
  - The app gathers various distinct gadget identifiers, including UDID, Android ID, IMEI, IMSI, and provider details.
• System properties, set up packages, and root detection mechanisms suggest potential anti-tampering steps. E.g. probes for the existence of Magisk, a tool that privacy advocates and security scientists utilize to root their Android gadgets.
• Geolocation and network profiling are present, indicating prospective tracking abilities and allowing or disabling of fingerprinting regimes by region.
• Hardcoded gadget model lists recommend the application might behave differently depending on the identified hardware.
• Multiple vendor-specific services are used to extract extra device details. E.g. if it can not identify the gadget through basic Android SIM lookup (because approval was not granted), it attempts producer particular extensions to access the exact same details.
  
  Potential Malware-Like Behavior
  
  While no definitive conclusions can be drawn without vibrant analysis, a number of observed behaviors line up with recognized spyware and malware patterns:
  
  - The app uses reflection and UI overlays, which could facilitate unapproved screen capture or phishing attacks.
• SIM card details, identification numbers, and other device-specific information are aggregated for unknown functions.
• The app executes country-based gain access to constraints and "risk-device" detection, suggesting possible surveillance mechanisms.
• The app executes calls to load Dex modules, where extra code is packed from files with a.so extension at runtime.
• The.so submits themselves turn around and make additional calls to dlopen(), which can be utilized to pack additional.so files. This center is not generally examined by Google Play Protect and other fixed analysis services.
• The.so files can be carried out in native code, such as C++. The usage of native code adds a layer of complexity to the analysis procedure and obscures the full level of the app's abilities. Moreover, native code can be leveraged to more quickly intensify advantages, potentially making use of vulnerabilities within the operating system or device hardware.
  
  Remarks
  
  While data collection prevails in contemporary applications for debugging and enhancing user experience, aggressive fingerprinting raises considerable privacy issues. The DeepSeek app requires users to log in with a legitimate email, which need to already supply sufficient authentication. There is no valid factor for the app to strongly collect and transmit unique device identifiers, library.kemu.ac.ke IMEI numbers, SIM card details, and koha-community.cz other non-resettable system residential or commercial properties.
  
  The degree of tracking observed here exceeds common analytics practices, chessdatabase.science potentially enabling consistent user tracking and re-identification across gadgets. These behaviors, integrated with obfuscation strategies and network communication with third-party tracking services, necessitate a higher level of scrutiny from security scientists and users alike.
  
  The employment of runtime code loading in addition to the bundling of native code recommends that the app might allow the release and execution of unreviewed, from another location provided code. This is a serious prospective attack vector. No proof in this report is presented that remotely released code execution is being done, just that the center for this appears present.
  
  Additionally, shiapedia.1god.org the app's approach to discovering rooted gadgets appears extreme for an AI chatbot. Root detection is often warranted in DRM-protected streaming services, where security and material defense are critical, or in competitive video games to avoid unfaithful. However, there is no clear rationale for such strict measures in an application of this nature, raising more questions about its intent.
  
  Users and organizations thinking about installing DeepSeek should be aware of these prospective risks. If this application is being utilized within an enterprise or government environment, additional vetting and security controls must be implemented before enabling its release on handled devices.
  
  Disclaimer: The analysis provided in this report is based on static code evaluation and does not suggest that all identified functions are actively utilized. Further investigation is for definitive conclusions.