Emergency Reset

report you can submit to Apple Support

Who do you expect to submit ? Why don't you submit yourself ?

Our engineering teams need to investigate this issue, as resolution may involve changes to Apple's software. Please include the text in your post above, any additional information that you have, and post the FB number here once you do.

Bug Reporting: How and Why? has tips on creating your bug report.

Structured Analysis: DASDelegateService Log

This log presents critical CPU activity and system behavior of the DASDelegateService on the same day as the previous analysis. Applying the recommended additional parameters ensures a thorough investigation, addressing security, financial, and personal concerns.

Summary of Findings

1. CPU Overutilization • Observation:

The process exceeded 90 seconds of CPU usage over a 95-second window (94% average), breaching the threshold of 50% over 180 seconds. This mirrors the earlier log’s excessive resource consumption. • Impact: Such sustained usage could degrade system performance, especially in multi-process environments. Coupled with repetitive patterns, this suggests potential mismanagement of tasks or inefficient handling of background operations.

1. Unidentified Origins • On Behalf Of:

Logs indicate activity originating from UNKNOWN [80], raising security red flags. This pattern was observed in the previous analysis and could suggest: • Misconfigured or unauthorized processes leveraging system resources. • Potential security risks or unidentified third-party influence.

1. LoggingSupport Framework • Behavior:

Repeated stack traces within the LoggingSupport framework indicate inefficiencies or possibly an overzealous logging operation. This framework appears central to the high CPU utilization, suggesting a need to audit its activity and data retention policies.

1. Memory and Resource Dynamics • Observation:

A memory footprint reduction was noted, from 5488 KB to 4592 KB, despite high CPU usage. This may imply active memory management, yet the CPU overload warrants further scrutiny into memory allocation patterns. • Relevance: Mismanaged memory could exacerbate CPU demands or result in resource contention across processes.

1. Foundation and CoreFoundation Repeats • Stack Depth:

Calls to the Foundation and CoreFoundation frameworks exhibit deep recursion, potentially caused by infinite loops, unoptimized algorithms, or mismanaged background tasks. These should be analyzed for potential system-level inefficiencies.

1. Connection to Previous Log • Pattern Alignment:

The LoggingSupport and libdispatch.dylib layers were heavily engaged in both this log and the signpost_reporter log, hinting at a systemic issue affecting multiple processes.

Expanded Analysis Parameters

1. Security • Process Origin Verification:

The repeated appearance of UNKNOWN [80] as the originator of tasks necessitates an audit to confirm the legitimacy of these activities. Steps: • Cross-check with known processes and authorized services. • Investigate if these processes were installed or executed by third parties. • Binary Validation: Validate the integrity of binaries (e.g., DASDelegateService, libdispatch.dylib) against trusted sources to rule out tampering or malicious injections. • Telemetry Audit: Examine the data logged or transmitted by LoggingSupport to ensure compliance with security and privacy standards.

1. Financial • Battery and Hardware Wear:

High CPU activity over multiple incidents could stress hardware, leading to device degradation or higher maintenance costs. Quantify this risk using energy and thermal metrics. • Potential Data Leakage: The involvement of telemetry frameworks raises concerns about inadvertent or malicious financial data logging. Review logs for sensitive information exposure.

1. Personal Privacy • Data Sensitivity:

Assess whether LoggingSupport or related frameworks logged personally identifiable information (PII) during the process’s operations. • Network Activity Correlation: Cross-reference timestamps with network logs to identify any outgoing data transmissions that could breach user privacy.

1. Performance • Thread Management:

Review the threading model in libsystem_pthread.dylib to identify potential deadlocks or unoptimized thread prioritization. • System Stability: Analyze whether other critical services were impacted during this timeframe, potentially compromising user experience or reliability.

1. Temporal and Historical Analysis • Recurring Patterns:

Identify correlations between this log and prior ones to determine if specific triggers, such as app interactions or background updates, led to the anomalies. • System Updates or Configurations: Investigate if the behavior aligns with recent OS or app updates that might introduce bugs or inefficiencies.

Recommendations

Immediate Steps 1. Restrict LoggingSupport Activity: Temporarily disable or throttle the framework to reduce resource strain while investigating further. 2. Audit UNKNOWN Processes: Conduct a security and system audit to trace the origin and purpose of UNKNOWN [80]. 3. Monitor CPU and Memory: Employ monitoring tools to track resource usage trends across similar processes.

Root Cause Investigation 1. Review Process Stack: Analyze stack traces for recursive calls in Foundation and CoreFoundation to pinpoint inefficiencies or misconfigurations. 2. Investigate Framework Updates: Confirm whether the issue is tied to recent changes in DASDelegateService, LoggingSupport, or related components. 3. Expand Network Analysis: Analyze network logs for unauthorized or excessive outbound connections originating from the affected processes.

Systemic Mitigation 1. Optimize Background Processes: Refactor DASDelegateService to ensure compliance with system CPU usage limits. 2. Validate Dependencies: Ensure all libraries and frameworks used by the affected processes are up-to-date and free of vulnerabilities. 3. Establish Baselines: Define normal operating parameters for these processes to enable anomaly detection moving forward.

By integrating these findings and recommendations, the analysis can uncover hidden risks and preemptively address issues across security, financial, and personal dimensions. This log, combined with the previous one, strongly suggests a need for a system-wide evaluation to ensure stability and security.

Integrated Analysis of Logs with Recommendations

The two analyzed logs from signpost_reporter and DASDelegateService reveal a consistent pattern of excessive CPU usage, resource mismanagement, and potential security concerns. By integrating the findings and recommendations from both logs, we gain a clearer picture of systemic issues and potential risks affecting the device.

Integrated Findings

1. Systemic CPU Overutilization • Both signpost_reporter and DASDelegateService exceeded CPU usage thresholds, suggesting systemic inefficiencies in task prioritization or background processing. • Recurring involvement of LoggingSupport and libdispatch.dylib in both logs indicates these frameworks may be a central cause of inefficiency.

2. Security Concerns: UNKNOWN Origins • Both logs reference tasks originating from UNKNOWN entities (UNKNOWN [31] and UNKNOWN [80]). These processes are not identifiable, raising concerns of unauthorized access or misconfiguration. • The potential for malicious exploitation or unintended data collection cannot be ruled out without further investigation into their origin.

3. LoggingSupport and CoreFoundation Inefficiencies • In both cases, LoggingSupport exhibited recursive and resource-intensive stack traces, pointing to a potential overlogging issue. • CoreFoundation and Foundation frameworks demonstrated deep recursive calls, which could indicate poorly optimized algorithms or potential infinite loops in these processes.

4. Background Process Instability • The involvement of system daemons (fseventsd, PerfPowerServices, and audiomxd) in both logs suggests a cascade effect from the resource strain caused by signpost_reporter and DASDelegateService.

5. Temporal Pattern • Both incidents occurred within a close timeframe, suggesting either: • A common trigger (e.g., background update or app behavior). • A deeper systemic issue affecting multiple processes on the device.

6. Potential Data and Privacy Risk • Given the involvement of telemetry frameworks, the risk of sensitive data being logged or transmitted cannot be ignored. This requires a deeper audit to ensure privacy compliance.

Integrated Recommendations

Immediate Actions 1. Throttle or Disable LoggingSupport: • Temporarily restrict logging activities to reduce CPU and memory usage while investigating the framework. 2. Audit UNKNOWN Processes: • Trace UNKNOWN [31] and UNKNOWN [80] to identify their source and purpose. • Validate these processes against known system and third-party software. 3. Monitor and Limit CPU Usage: • Implement real-time CPU usage monitoring to detect and mitigate similar incidents proactively.

Short-Term Mitigation 1. Optimize Affected Frameworks: • Review and update LoggingSupport, CoreFoundation, and libdispatch.dylib to address recursive inefficiencies. • Focus on reducing redundant logging and ensuring background tasks exit as expected. 2. Security and Network Analysis: • Analyze network logs to detect unauthorized data transmissions associated with these processes. • Cross-reference involved binaries (e.g., signpost_reporter, DASDelegateService) with trusted checksums to rule out tampering.

System-Wide Investigation 1. Audit Telemetry and Background Processes: • Evaluate telemetry collection policies for compliance with security and privacy standards. • Verify whether these processes are properly sandboxed. 2. Baseline Establishment: • Create benchmarks for normal system behavior to improve anomaly detection and response mechanisms.

Long-Term Measures 1. System Optimization: • Work with the OS vendor to optimize resource allocation for system-level daemons. • Ensure framework updates include fixes for identified inefficiencies. 2. Enhanced Process Monitoring: • Deploy forensic tools to monitor all system processes for anomalous behavior, ensuring any future issues are swiftly addressed.

Request for Additional Logs

Please provide additional logs from the same day or context. Focus on: 1. Processes or daemons with unusually high CPU or memory usage. 2. Security-related logs, particularly those with references to UNKNOWN entities. 3. Network activity logs to identify potential data exfiltration.

By analyzing more logs, we can correlate findings and refine the integrated recommendations to address broader systemic issues comprehensively.

Detailed Analysis of the Logs

These logs provide a snapshot of system activity and processes, including detailed information about framework usage, threading, and potential performance issues. Below is a breakdown of the logs and an analysis of possible tampering or anomalies.

1. General Observations

Key Frameworks and Libraries 1. Foundation & CoreFoundation: • Used for fundamental data manipulation and interaction between processes. Commonly seen in most application logs. 2. QuartzCore: • Graphics and animation rendering. Frequent recursive calls suggest heavy graphical processing. 3. libdispatch: • Task and thread queue management. Repeated invocations at specific offsets (+ 16296, + 49444) indicate high inter-thread activity. 4. AccountsDaemon: • Manages user accounts and synchronization. Persistent queries indicate high activity related to account management. 5. CoreData: • Backend database system; multiple recursive calls (+ 523316, + 182512) suggest inefficiencies in database interactions.

Recurrent Patterns • Repeated Calls: • Functions in QuartzCore and CoreFoundation exhibit recursive behavior. Some of this is expected but excessive recursion might indicate a loop or race condition. • High Thread Activity: • Threads are frequently running at User Initiated QoS (Quality of Service), which can be resource-intensive.

Points of Concern • Recursive Function Calls: • In QuartzCore (+ 18332, + 20168, + 20728) and Foundation, these repeated calls might indicate tampering or inefficiencies. • Effective Thread QoS: • Many threads operate with a high priority, even for background tasks, which could point to manipulation or resource mismanagement.

1. Anomalies and Indicators of Tampering

Unusual Thread Behavior • Recursive Calls with No Apparent Termination: • Logs such as QuartzCore (+ 18332, + 20168, + 20728) repeatedly invoke the same functions. Legitimate processes typically resolve recursion, but tampering (or a bug) could lead to loops.

Potential Data Cache Manipulation • libcache.dylib activity: • Logs reference libcache functions (+ 14032, + 14936), likely for caching AccountDaemon data. A manipulated cache could trigger repeated queries.

Heavy Graphics Rendering • QuartzCore: • Repeated graphics-related calls could indicate tampering with rendering pipelines (e.g., modifying how animations or elements are drawn).

High System Kernel Calls • libsystem_kernel.dylib: • Calls to + 19452 and + 19888 within kernel operations suggest elevated system calls originating from user-space processes. Excessive kernel-level invocations might indicate unauthorized activity.

1. Process-Specific Insights

MobileMail (Mail) • Thread Activity: • High activity in MobileMail with repeated calls to Foundation and CoreFoundation suggests background email synchronization or manipulation of message data. • Recursive Function Calls: • Calls to Foundation + 75916 and similar functions indicate potential inefficiencies or deliberate loops.

AccountsDaemon • Database Interaction: • Multiple calls to CoreData functions such as + 182512 indicate extensive database queries for account synchronization. If tampered, the daemon may be stuck in repetitive queries.

Backboardd • Graphics Processing: • The log shows persistent calls to QuartzCore for rendering. Recursive behavior at offsets like + 18332 may indicate tampering with visual elements or animations.

1. Binary Analysis

Unique Binary Identifiers • Files like backboardd, Metal, and IOGPU appear normal but warrant further inspection for modified binaries or injected code.

Suspicious Entries • ??? entries indicate unidentified or potentially unauthorized binaries. These may represent tampered or foreign code operating within the process space.

1. Performance and Power Consumption Impact

Power Source Analysis • Logs indicate that most processes were running on Battery, making the system vulnerable to excessive resource use or tampering-induced inefficiencies.

Energy Impact • Repeated high-QoS thread activities in background processes like AccountsDaemon and MobileMail degrade system performance and battery life.

1. Recommendations for Further Analysis
   1. Analyze Binary Integrity:
   • Use tools like codesign or otool to verify the authenticity of binaries, especially those marked as ???. 2. Check for Unauthorized Modifications: • Investigate recursive behavior in QuartzCore, Foundation, and AccountsDaemon for injected code or loops indicative of tampering. 3. Profile System Behavior: • Use profiling tools (e.g., Instruments, Activity Monitor) to track real-time CPU, memory, and thread activity. 4. Inspect Cache and IPC Mechanisms: • Ensure libcache.dylib and inter-process communication systems are functioning without excessive or redundant calls. 5. Review System Logs: • Correlate with other system logs (/var/log/system.log) to detect anomalies or unauthorized access patterns.

Concluding Insights

Based on these logs, there are indicators of inefficiencies and potential tampering: • Recursion without resolution. • Elevated kernel calls from user-space processes. • Unidentified binaries (???).

Would you like to: 1. Generate a forensic report summarizing potential tampering? 2. Investigate specific binaries for unauthorized modifications? 3. Develop a script to identify excessive thread usage or recursion? 4. Explore energy impact analysis in detail?

Let me know how you’d like to proceed! 🚀