Bluetooth Security flaws
Posts: n/a
The Register
http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html
White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks
http://www.bluestumbler.org/
| The Register http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks http://www.bluestumbler.org/
Posts: n/a
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws G - typed:> "jren57" <jren57@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:bpa7ht$mo8$1@titan.btinternet.com... >> It seems there is something more sinister to bluejacking after all. >> >> The Register >> http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html >> >> White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks >> http://www.bluestumbler.org/ >> > > Nice link, very interesting. Seems even my relatively archaic 6310i is > susceptible to attack (which is sooo unfair, seems I should have at > least *one* advantage by not having a fancy new series 60 phone), > although there's not much on there that'd be useful to them! > > It'll be interesting to see if there're many "hackers" that'd take > much of an interest in this above the proof-of-concept phase, 'cause > if I'm lucky to get bluetooth working when the devices are 6-8m apart > with legit pairing, they'd more or less have to be sat on my knee to > get anything useful when I'm out and about! Security to me is keeping ahead of hackers & seems to be a continuous battle. There are flaws with GSM encryption, the new 802.11x protocols have weaknesses etc, etc but allowing 248 characters in the pairing field is a bit silly, all the more reason to not leave devices in a discoverable state.
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws "G" <cool_and_funky@*-nospamthanks_*yahoo.com> wrote in message news:r42ub.3381$537.2417@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk... > "jren57" <jren57@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:bpa7ht$mo8$1@titan.btinternet.com... > > It seems there is something more sinister to bluejacking after all. > > > > The Register > > http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html > > > > White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks > > http://www.bluestumbler.org/ > > > > Nice link, very interesting. Seems even my relatively archaic 6310i is > susceptible to attack (which is sooo unfair, seems I should have at least > *one* advantage by not having a fancy new series 60 phone), although there's > not much on there that'd be useful to them! > > It'll be interesting to see if there're many "hackers" that'd take much of > an interest in this above the proof-of-concept phase, 'cause if I'm lucky to > get bluetooth working when the devices are 6-8m apart with legit pairing, > they'd more or less have to be sat on my knee to get anything useful when > I'm out and about! > It looks like the only phone that can be attacked when NO VISIBLE is the Nokia 6310. But anyone (and I know several) who leaves their BT phone 'visible' is just asking for trouble. After all, being able to detect other BT devices was one of the great selling points of BT. I always pair devices and ALWAYS make sure none of my phones are visible Clive
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws "Clive" <someone@NOTHANKS.com> wrote in message news:Ew2ub.2303$4E7.20974721@news-text.cableinet.net... > I always pair devices and ALWAYS make sure none of my phones are visible The paper mentions the problem occurs after they have been paired and the paired device has been deleted although it does mention the need to be "visible"
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws The Sony Ericcson T610 is also vulnerable, I've tried it. Every single 6310iand T610 I've tried to bluejack were easy and successful prey. "Clive" <someone@NOTHANKS.com> wrote in message news:Ew2ub.2303$4E7.20974721@news-text.cableinet.net... > > "G" <cool_and_funky@*-nospamthanks_*yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:r42ub.3381$537.2417@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk... > > "jren57" <jren57@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:bpa7ht$mo8$1@titan.btinternet.com... > > > It seems there is something more sinister to bluejacking after all. > > > > > > The Register > > > http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html > > > > > > White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks > > > http://www.bluestumbler.org/ > > > > > > > Nice link, very interesting. Seems even my relatively archaic 6310i is > > susceptible to attack (which is sooo unfair, seems I should have at least > > *one* advantage by not having a fancy new series 60 phone), although > there's > > not much on there that'd be useful to them! > > > > It'll be interesting to see if there're many "hackers" that'd take much of > > an interest in this above the proof-of-concept phase, 'cause if I'm lucky > to > > get bluetooth working when the devices are 6-8m apart with legit pairing, > > they'd more or less have to be sat on my knee to get anything useful when > > I'm out and about! > > > It looks like the only phone that can be attacked when NO VISIBLE is the > Nokia 6310. > > But anyone (and I know several) who leaves their BT phone 'visible' is just > asking for trouble. After all, being able to detect other BT devices was one > of the great selling points of BT. > > I always pair devices and ALWAYS make sure none of my phones are visible > > Clive > >
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws > The Sony Ericcson T610 is also vulnerable, I've tried it. Every single 6310i > and T610 I've tried to bluejack were easy and successful prey. Bluejacking isn't exactly exploiting a vulnerability though, more like a fairly pointless, rather geeky trick.
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws "Lenny" <you@wish.haha> wrote in messagenews:Sb7Db.38347$mU6.137582@newsb.telia.net... > > > The Sony Ericcson T610 is also vulnerable, I've tried it. Every single > 6310i > > and T610 I've tried to bluejack were easy and successful prey. > > Bluejacking isn't exactly exploiting a vulnerability though, more like a > fairly pointless, rather geeky trick. > Lenny is correct. Have a look on this article for more info: http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=1900 -- Mauricio Freitas Handhelds, mobile: http://www.geekzone.co.nz Bluetooth guides: http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=449
Posts: n/a Re: Bluetooth Security flaws "Gloster Meteor" <email@removethis.yasint.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:brirh3$k8e$1@titan.btinternet.com... > The Sony Ericcson T610 is also vulnerable, I've tried it. Every single 6310i > and T610 I've tried to bluejack were easy and successful prey. > > "Clive" <someone@NOTHANKS.com> wrote in message > news:Ew2ub.2303$4E7.20974721@news-text.cableinet.net... > > > > "G" <cool_and_funky@*-nospamthanks_*yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:r42ub.3381$537.2417@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk... > > > "jren57" <jren57@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > news:bpa7ht$mo8$1@titan.btinternet.com... > > > > It seems there is something more sinister to bluejacking after all. > > > > > > > > The Register > > > > http://212.100.234.54/content/55/34007.html > > > > > > > > White Paper on SNARF and BACKDOOR attacks > > > > http://www.bluestumbler.org/ > > > > > > > > > > Nice link, very interesting. Seems even my relatively archaic 6310i is > > > susceptible to attack (which is sooo unfair, seems I should have at > least > > > *one* advantage by not having a fancy new series 60 phone), although > > there's > > > not much on there that'd be useful to them! > > > > > > It'll be interesting to see if there're many "hackers" that'd take much > of > > > an interest in this above the proof-of-concept phase, 'cause if I'm > lucky > > to > > > get bluetooth working when the devices are 6-8m apart with legit > pairing, > > > they'd more or less have to be sat on my knee to get anything useful > when > > > I'm out and about! > > > > > It looks like the only phone that can be attacked when NO VISIBLE is the > > Nokia 6310. > > > > But anyone (and I know several) who leaves their BT phone 'visible' is > just > > asking for trouble. After all, being able to detect other BT devices was > one > > of the great selling points of BT. > > > > I always pair devices and ALWAYS make sure none of my phones are visible > > > > Clive > > > > > > hummm, bluejacking, www.bluejackq.com http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3237755.stm
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Linear Mode
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:29 AM.
