Raising the Shield: A Comprehensive Look at Security Risks in Native vs. Hybrid Apps

Authors : Nurul Asha Jeffridin¹, Ummi Haziqah Mohd Jumari²

1 ABSTRACT ON NATIVE AND HYBRID MOBILE APPS

There are almost over 6.3 billion smartphone users all around the world. Along with the booming mobile app industry, it is forecasted that mobile app and smartphone usage will be rapidly climbing with no abatement. These studies state that 88% of mobile time is spent using mobile apps [1].

Native mobile applications have transformed on how we use smartphones and tablets by providing a tailored experience made specific on the design of the operating systems (OS), especially iOS and Android. Native apps are designed to take full advantage of the hardware and software capabilities given by the respective operating systems and been written in platform-specific programming languages such as Swift, Objective-C, Java, or Kotlin. To create mobile app(s) that communicates elegantly with the underlying operating system, native app development necessitates with the used of Integrated Development Environments (IDEs). By adhering to the specifications and standards that were established based on the OS platforms, developers may use the power of the device’s hardware characteristics to provide optimum performance and functionality.

Figure 1: Platform-specific Programming Languages

Hybrid mobile applications have emerged as an appealing alternative for businesses and developers seeking to create mobile apps seamlessly running across several platforms. In contrast to native apps, which are designed for a specific operating system (OS), hybrid apps use web technologies such as HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript to deliver a comprehensive user experience.

Figure 2: Web Technologies

2 WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT APPS: NATIVE VS HYBRID

Mobile applications have become essential to our daily lives, influencing how we interact with technology and the world around us. Developers must choose between native and hybrid app development as the demand for smooth and engaging user experiences develops. Each strategy has specific advantages that cater to different project requirements. Overview of the benefits of both native and hybrid mobile apps, focusing on their distinctive features that drive app innovation.

2.1 NATIVE APPS PROS

One of the primary benefits of native apps is their ability to efficiently use built-in device functions such as the camera, microphone, GPS, and others. These apps may delight in hardware features as well as OS-specific APIs to provide an enhanced and smoother user experience because native apps have unlimited accessibility to the device’s functionality. According to Adam and Christoffer (2013), native apps outperform WebView counterparts in terms of performance, consuming less CPU, RAM, and energy. This supremacy is visible in devices such as the Samsung Galaxy S2, Galaxy 3, and AllWinner A10. Native programs do CPU-intensive operations more efficiently, maintain moderate memory growth, and are more power efficient. These benefits emphasize the enhanced efficiency and resource management that native app development provides, resulting in seamless user experiences [2]. Therefore, they can provide significant and pertinent interactions that adhere to the design principles and user interface standards of the individual OS. The ability of native apps to fully interact with the mobile OS environment gives them a distinct edge. Native apps can tap into the extensive range of UI graphical elements, animations, and device-specific experiences by properly complying with the OS requirements. This kind of integration enables developers to develop visually compelling, responsive, and user-friendly interfaces that meet the needs and preferences of the user.

2.2 HYBRID APPS PROS

Developers can use a hybrid approach to design a single codebase that can be published on different operating systems, including iOS, Android, and web browsers. Integration across platforms provides considerable benefits in terms of development time, price effectiveness, and reach. Frameworks such as Apache Cordova (formerly known as PhoneGap), React Native, or Ionic are used to create hybrid apps. These frameworks offer a native-like container that wraps around the web code of the app, allowing it to access device features via native APIs. This bridging allows hybrid apps to integrate with capabilities like the camera, accelerometer, and geolocation in a similar way that native apps do. In addition, hybrid apps can benefit from web-based technologies such as responsive design to give a consistent user experience across a variety of devices and screen sizes. They are an enticing alternative for businesses that want to reach a wide range of users because of their adaptability. Hybrid apps provide the extra benefit of lower maintenance in addition to cross-platform compatibility and responsive design [3]. A single codebase allows developers to make modifications and enhancements more simply, reducing the time and effort required to manage several versions of an application. As hybrid mobile applications expand, developers are coming up with creative approaches to bridge the gap between native and web-based technologies, resulting in improved performance and user experiences. Because of their potential to combine the strengths of native and web-based development, hybrid applications have become an appealing solution for businesses wishing to expand the reach of their app while lowering development overhead.

3 RISK FACTORS UNCOVERED: SECURITY CHALLENGES IN NATIVE AND HYBRID MOBILE APPS

It is vital in the rapidly evolving mobile app development industry to produce applications that are not just feature-rich but secured. As we acknowledge the utility and potential of mobile apps, we must also consider the security risks they may provide. This section explores the security of both native and hybrid mobile apps, covering several risks that developers and consumer should be aware of.

3.1 NATIVE APPS SECURITY RISK

Despite their numerous advantages, native mobile apps are not exempt from security risks, which can have far-reaching consequences for users and developers. These risks include:

1. Code Vulnerabilities: Native apps developed using platform-specific languages are susceptible to code vulnerabilities such as buffer overflows, SQL injection, and insecure data storage. Attackers can exploit these vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access or manipulate sensitive data.
2. OS Exploits: Native apps rely on the underlying operating system for security features. However, if the OS has vulnerabilities or security weaknesses, attackers can exploit them to compromise the app or the device. Unpatched OS vulnerabilities can leave native apps exposed to attacks. It is hard to achieve comprehensive OS security, although integrating features, securing architecture, deactivating inactive functions, and prioritizing the least privileges will improve protection [4].
3. Reverse Engineering: Native apps can be reverse-engineered, enabling attackers to access the app’s source code, algorithms, and sensitive data. Reverse engineering can lead to code tampering, the creation of counterfeit apps, or the extraction of sensitive information.
4. Malicious App Distribution: While native apps are typically distributed through official app stores, malicious apps can still slip through the screening process. Users who download and install these apps risk exposing their data to malware, spyware, or other malicious activities.

3.2 HYBRID APPS SECURITY RISK

Hybrid mobile apps, while offering convenience and cross-platform compatibility, are not immune to security vulnerabilities. The security risk of hybrid mobile apps are:

1. Use of WebViews in Hybrid apps can be vulnerable to Web-Specific attacks such as JavaScript Injection, Weak SSL implementation, and caching issues. These functions of native apps are more secure than hybrid apps. However, native apps cannot be considered fully secure in this function. Android’s WebView enhances user experience but compromises security [5]. To mitigate WebView’s vulnerable, developers can block the use of JavaScript. However, if JavaScript needs to be enabled, it is compulsory to include steps for sanitizing input to avoid cross-site scripting attacks.
2. Server-Side Vulnerability is a common mistake with hybrid apps having weak server-side controls. All communication between an app and the user occurs through a server. This means the server is often targeted to hack the app’s database. The application programming interface (API) should also have security measures that verify the identity and administrative privileges of the caller to thwart cybercriminals from hacking into the server.
3. Hybrid apps often use third-party libraries and plugins for enhanced functionality. However, if these libraries have security vulnerabilities, attackers can exploit them to compromise the app and its users.
4. Increased Attack Surface: Hybrid apps have a larger attack surface compared to native apps because they utilize web views and rely on web connections for certain functionalities. This broader attack surface can increase the risk of potential vulnerabilities and attacks.
5. Compatibility and Dependency Risks: Hybrid apps need to be compatible with multiple platforms and versions of web browsers. Ensuring compatibility across various devices and browser versions can introduce additional security risks if not thoroughly tested and maintained.
6. Limited Control over Security Updates: Hybrid apps depend on the web view and underlying system for security updates. This can create challenges as developers have limited control over the timely deployment of security patches, relying on the user’s device and web browser updates.

4 CONCLUSIONS

To meet the different needs of consumers, two major forces in mobile app development have emerged, which are native and hybrid apps. Native apps, crafted with platform-specific languages to perfection, provide a new level of flexibility and engagement with device hardware and software. In the meanwhile, hybrid apps powered by web technologies offer a versatile alternative for cross-platform deployment.

After we weigh the advantages of both frameworks, it is demonstrated that each had distinct advantages. Native apps stand out in terms of performance, responsiveness, and full hardware integration, whereas hybrid apps flourish on adaptability, lower maintenance, and a broader reach. Despite the greatness of innovation, security is an inevitable concern. Native and hybrid apps are both prone to various risks that must be managed with attention to detail. These issues highlight the importance of strong security safeguards at every level of development, from coding vulnerabilities and reverse engineering to server-side flaws and malicious distribution.

In conclusion, developers have the power to determine the direction of app experiences in a landscape abundant with opportunities and risks. They can ensure that the mobile apps we rely on remain not only dynamic but also safe by embracing security best practices, being informed about emerging risks, and building a culture of awareness. As we move deeper into the app-driven era, the balance between technology’s wonders and protections will pave the path for a more secure digital future.

REFERENCES