In the hearts of many iOS users, the consensus is almost universal: "Not messing around, not installing random software, is inherently safer." Sandbox isolation is viewed as the final line of defense. However, a recent prompt from SlowMist's Chief Information Security Officer, 23pds, has revealed a terrifying crack in this "insurance" — he disclosed a security vulnerability in iOS named worse_query, categorizing it explicitly as a "container sandbox escape," rather than a traditional jailbreak. This means that under specific conditions, a malicious app might break through the otherwise solid app isolation boundaries and reach into the data of other application containers. More critically, worse_query itself does not automatically steal assets; the real risk comes from the door opened by the user themselves: installing and running unknown IPA files. Once a malicious IPA reads local data from other app containers, and your encrypted wallet happens to leave sensitive information like mnemonic phrases, keystores, or WebView caches in plaintext on your phone, then those key materials determining control over on-chain assets could be unknowingly copied away, transforming into the attacker’s substantial control over the associated addresses.

Unknown IPA: The Key to Breaching the Sandbox

23pds emphasized that the real risk of worse_query is not the "disaster" "brought" by a system update, but rather the hidden side door opened by the user themselves — installing and running unknown IPAs. The original intent of iOS design is to keep each app locked in its own independent sandbox container, unseen and untouched by others, which is also the underlying premise of many people's trust in the security of the iPhone. However, in the scenario of worse_query, once you actively install and run an IPA from an unknown source, it has the opportunity to bypass this layer of isolation and read data that does not belong to it from other app containers.

According to 23pds, worse_query transforms from a technical term into a real risk only when the premise of "installing and running a malicious IPA" is met. This high threshold makes it difficult for most users who only use official app stores to perceive the threat in their daily use, but it is extremely unfriendly to those who are used to searching for "cracked" or "internal versions" — once compromised, a malicious app could theoretically pack away sensitive data like mnemonic phrases, keystores, or WebView caches that wallet apps saved in plaintext, and the actual control of on-chain addresses is precisely tied to these seemingly "just stored on the phone" key materials.

Not Jailbroken, Yet Able to See Other Apps

23pds repeatedly emphasized in a technical explanation that worse_query is classified as "container sandbox escape," not traditional jailbreak. Jailbreaking means that system-level restrictions are lifted, and security mechanisms are broadly pried open, with unfamiliar icons appearing on the screen and abnormal system behaviors, making it clear to users and the system that they are in an "abnormal state." This time is different; the risk described by worse_query is concentrated between app containers: a certain application logically crosses the sandbox boundary that should not be breached, to touch something in the directory of another application. Whether the device is jailbroken is not a precondition.

Because there is no dramatic system-level disruption, this "cross-boundary access in a non-jailbroken state" is more covert and easier for ordinary users to overlook. On the surface, your phone is still that "clean, never jailbroken" iPhone, with no discernible abnormalities in the settings, but as long as that aforementioned condition is met — you have installed an unknown IPA, and it successfully exploited worse_query — the assumption of data isolation between different apps on this seemingly secure device has quietly been shaken. If it includes a certain encrypted wallet that throws mnemonic phrases or keystores in plaintext locally, then once these are read across containers, although the attacker does not directly "transfer funds" on your phone, they have already obtained all the keys necessary to perform operations on the corresponding address on-chain, and there has yet to be confirmed wild attack cases or official repair announcements in public materials.

Plaintext Storage of Wallet Mnemonic Phrases Becomes the Biggest Minefield

The real danger lies not in what malicious apps can "see," but rather in the type of data they can see once they gain access. 23pds made it very clear in the explanation: if certain wallets store key credentials such as mnemonic phrases and keystores, or caches of WebView, directly in plaintext in the local container, then once worse_query is maliciously exploited, and the user has installed and run an IPA of unknown origin, these files may be subject to cross-container reading and disclosure. Mnemonic phrases and keystores are the entire key to controlling assets on-chain; once taken away, an attacker could entirely import those into their device and initiate any transfer operations on-chain without needing to touch your phone again.

A more covert layer involves the "traces" left by WebView. Mobile applications interfacing with web wallets or DApps, which retain session information, signature-related data, or even some sensitive content in the WebView cache, once read by the same malicious IPA, amount to handing over the login state and signature entry. 23pds also emphasizes that there are currently no specific wallet projects publicly named with plaintext storage issues, and the risk remains at the level of "if such a design flaw exists, it could be amplified by worse_query." But among all the local data that has been breached, plaintext mnemonic phrases and keystores are evidently the portion that should not appear within the attacker’s line of sight.

This Does Not Mean Assets Have Already Been Stolen, but Risks Are Accumulating

23pds's original words on X have already drawn the boundary very clearly: worse_query itself does not automatically steal or misappropriate assets; the real attack requires multiple premises to overlap — the user must first install an unknown IPA, and the malicious app must also successfully exploit the vulnerability to read local data from other app containers under this premise. In other words, this is not the kind of zero-threshold attack where "clicking a link leads to losing everything," but rather a chain incident that requires stepping into a whole series of "pits," logically closer to a "high-risk hidden danger" than an already occurred disaster.

Because of this, as of now, there are no confirmed reports of wild exploitation in the public information: there are no specific victim wallet names, loss amounts, or systematic samples of address laundering available for traceability. Many Chinese crypto media statements have remained at the level of "security warnings" and "risk alerts." However, on the other hand, crucial information regarding technical details, impact range of versions, whether Apple has confirmed, and when patches will be released has all not been disclosed publicly. The industry can only speculate on the worst-case scenario based on the technical possibility of "container sandbox escape" and the practice of local plaintext storage: once mnemonic phrases or keystores are read locally, an attacker can fully initiate transfer operations on-chain for the corresponding address. Right now, we do not see realized losses but rather an unresolved uncertain risk that silently accumulates over every user who is accustomed to managing assets with mobile wallets.

What Ordinary Users and Wallet Teams Should Do Next

For ordinary users, the most immediate line of defense has actually been pointed out by 23pds: do not install unknown or unclear source IPAs, as this step can largely cut off the triggering premise of worse_query. At the same time, thoughtfully assess your asset structure — are high-value chips long-term compressed within a single software wallet on the same iOS device, and is the mnemonic phrase solely reliant on this one phone? Once local data is read, the control of the on-chain address equates to surrendering it to others. For wallet teams, this incident is more like a public pressure test: they should actively audit their local storage strategies, avoiding the direct plaintext storage of mnemonic phrases, keystores, or WebView caches. They should utilize system-provided more secure storage capabilities rather than taking shortcuts themselves. Currently, worse_query is still described as a potential risk, without confirmed large-scale wild exploitation cases or an official Apple repair timeline. The collective emphasis from multiple media outlets has amplified it from a technical discussion into a self-examination opportunity for the entire industry. Ultimately, what decides the risk ceiling is the design on the end device and the user’s own usage habits.

Join our community to discuss together and become stronger!
Exclusive Hyperliquid benefits for AiCoin: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
Exclusive Aster benefits for AiCoin: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到[email protected]，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。