Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

RE: Wireless device vulnerability?


From: "Toni Heinonen" <Toni.Heinonen () teleware fi>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:29:27 +0200

Evening.

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Toni Heinonen wrote:

 In the US and Europe, Bluetooth uses frequencies 2.400 MHz 
to 2.483,5
MHz, with 79 different bands to hop on, each 80 MHz wide or 
sometimes
more. Seeing as you would not try to synchronize your 
jammer with the

I suspect you mean 2.4000 GHz to 2.4835 GHz.

That's a total of 83.5 Mhz of bandwidth. I fail to see how 
you can get 79
*different* bands each 80 MHz wide in an 83.5 MHz space.

Ehh, sorry. One megahertz in between, and 79 bands, as said.
 
hop sequence, do you think it would really be capable of 
jamming that
whole band? After all, even a square wave won't produce 
that much of a
disturbance to the neighbouring bands. I mean, of course you could

Blotting out a signal is always easier than detecting it. 
Generating 83.5
Mhz of noise at 2.4 GHz isn't hard at all.

Okay.

Of course, the whole idea is that the protective safeguards for a
system do not cost more than the protected assets. Seeing as how a
Bluetooth chip is supposed to cost 5$ (of course not yet, 
but probably
so after mass production), would it really be possible to build a
jamming device of this magnitude for 10$ (the cost of a two-machine
Bluetooth network)?

Would it really be possible to build a Bluetooth network for 
$10? I'll bet
teleware.fi will never bill $10 for building one.

I wonder what you mean. Are you talking about a network infrastructure? After all, isn't the idea of Bluetooth that you 
have two devices, such as a laptop and a mobile phone, that are interconnected with Bluetooth transceivers instead of, 
say, a serial cable?

And, being an ad-hoc wireless network, it doesn't require base infrastructure. Instead, if you join your Bluetooth 
devices to some fixed network, e.g. Ethernet, you will have some sort of a gateway device (a router, a laptop computer) 
that has both Ethernet connectivity and a Bluetooth transceiver. So in essence, you won't have to get new network 
elements into your existing Ethernet network.

How could I "sell a Bluetooth network"? Are you talking about the routers and other gateways that interjoin an ad-hoc 
Bluetooth network into a company's fixed network?

And, as I stated in my previous post, my company has no financial interest in WLAN installations or the like.
 
While not a law of nature, it has been consistently demonstrated that
wireless networks cost more than the vendor claimed and 
aren't as reliable
as the vendor claimed.

Yes, indeed so. But with Bluetooth, aren't we talking simply about the transceivers and perhaps firmware/software?

Bluetooth is the 'latest and greatest' in a long line of 
solutions that
have consistently failed to live up to their claims.

Here's a great example;

Motorola sold a communications system to my state, making the 
same claims
you make for bluetooth. It carries Police, Fire, EMS and 
government voice
and data traffic. It is used for dispatching, Mobile Data 
Terminals and
control of MOSCAD devices such as traffic lights.

But that doesn't sound anything like Bluetooth. Bluetooth is meant for personal area networks, whereas the network you 
describe is a wide area mobile phone network with data capabilities.

It was finished several years late, 200% over budget, and has never
achieved more than 95% reliability.

Worse, it would cost about $100 to disable this multi-million dollar
system.

It uses a small number of frequencies in the 800Mhz band for digital
frequency hopping. The frequencies are fixed, and the PSN is 
so weak you
can break it in realtime.

Indeed. I assume the technology was proprietary? When it comes to Bluetooth, I think the cipher and underlying 
encryption infrastructure is sound (as sound as WLANs were before they were deployed :)

TONI HEINONEN, CISSP
   TELEWARE OY
   Telephone  +358 (9) 3434 9123  *  Fax  +358 (9) 3431 321
   Wireless  +358 40 836 1815
   Kauppakartanonkatu 7, 00930 Helsinki, Finland
   toni.heinonen () teleware fi  *  www.teleware.fi


Current thread: