From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: 陆朱伟 <alex_lu@realsil.com.cn>
Cc: Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Max Chou <max.chou@realtek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: Fix the vulnerable issue on enc key size
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 19:33:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B1309F72-4077-45BD-BD12-DEF324CAE2C6@holtmann.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21f9469eda2747eca351a1cb811a4834@realsil.com.cn>
Hi Alex,
>>> When someone attacks the service provider, it creates connection,
>>> authenticates. Then it requests key size of one byte and it identifies
>>> the key with brute force methods.
>>>
>>> After l2cap info req/resp exchange is complete. the attacker sends l2cap
>>> connect with specific PSM.
>>>
>>> In above procedure, there is no chance for the service provider to check
>>> the encryption key size before l2cap_connect(). Because the state of
>>> l2cap chan in conn->chan_l is BT_LISTEN, there is no l2cap chan with the
>>> state of BT_CONNECT or BT_CONNECT2.
>>>
>>> So service provider should check the encryption key size in
>>> l2cap_connect()
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Lu <alex_lu@realsil.com.cn>
>>> ---
>>> net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c | 7 +++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
>>> index ade83e224567..63df961d402d 100644
>>> --- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
>>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
>>> @@ -4150,6 +4150,13 @@ static struct l2cap_chan *l2cap_connect(struct
>> l2cap_conn *conn,
>>>
>>> if (conn->info_state & L2CAP_INFO_FEAT_MASK_REQ_DONE) {
>>> if (l2cap_chan_check_security(chan, false)) {
>>> + if (!l2cap_check_enc_key_size(conn->hcon)) {
>>> + l2cap_state_change(chan, BT_DISCONN);
>>> + __set_chan_timer(chan,
>> L2CAP_DISC_TIMEOUT);
>>> + result = L2CAP_CR_SEC_BLOCK;
>>> + status = L2CAP_CS_NO_INFO;
>>> + goto response;
>>> + }
>>> if (test_bit(FLAG_DEFER_SETUP, &chan->flags)) {
>>> l2cap_state_change(chan, BT_CONNECT2);
>>> result = L2CAP_CR_PEND;
>>
>> I am not following what you are trying to fix here. Can you show this with a
>> btmon trace from an attacking device?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Marcel
>>
>>
>
> I'm sorry, I didn't have btmon trace from an attacking device.
> I didn't have the real attacking device. I just simulate the attacking.
> I have a device that can create one byte size encryption key.
> It uses the link key that was produced by pairing with the service provider. Actually the KNOB (Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack) says, the link key is unnecessary for the reconnection.
> I use this device to reconnect to service provider, and then initiate the Key Negotiation for one byte size encryption key. Actually the attacker identified the encryption key with some brute force methods.
>
> I want to provide the trace on service provider side.
what kernel version are you running? I wonder if we should always return L2CAP_CR_PEND here. Do you have a reproducer code?
The problem really is that the MASK_REQ_DONE indication is not enough to make a decision for the key size. We have to ensure that also the key size is actually available. If that is not yet done, then we should not check it. This means that any response to L2CAP_Connect_Request PDU needs to be delayed until the key size has been read.
Regards
Marcel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-25 17:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-21 6:08 陆朱伟
2020-09-25 17:33 ` Marcel Holtmann [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-09-27 5:47 陆朱伟
2020-09-27 12:04 ` Marcel Holtmann
2020-09-18 11:02 Alex Lu
2020-09-20 6:09 ` Marcel Holtmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=B1309F72-4077-45BD-BD12-DEF324CAE2C6@holtmann.org \
--to=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=alex_lu@realsil.com.cn \
--cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.chou@realtek.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®