Hi Archie,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:48 AM Archie Pusaka <apusaka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Luiz,
>
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 01:15, Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> <luiz.dentz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Archie,
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:56 AM Archie Pusaka <apusaka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Archie Pusaka <apusaka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > When receiving connection, we only check whether the link has been
> > > encrypted, but not the encryption key size of the link.
> > >
> > > This patch adds check for encryption key size, and reject L2CAP
> > > connection which size is below the specified threshold (default 7)
> > > with security block.
> > >
> > > Here is some btmon trace.
> > > @ MGMT Event: New Link Key (0x0009) plen 26 {0x0001} [hci0] 5.847722
> > > Store hint: No (0x00)
> > > BR/EDR Address: 38:00:25:F7:F1:B0 (OUI 38-00-25)
> > > Key type: Unauthenticated Combination key from P-192 (0x04)
> > > Link key: 7bf2f68c81305d63a6b0ee2c5a7a34bc
> > > PIN length: 0
> > > > HCI Event: Encryption Change (0x08) plen 4 #29 [hci0] 5.871537
> > > Status: Success (0x00)
> > > Handle: 256
> > > Encryption: Enabled with E0 (0x01)
> > > < HCI Command: Read Encryp... (0x05|0x0008) plen 2 #30 [hci0] 5.871609
> > > Handle: 256
> > > > HCI Event: Command Complete (0x0e) plen 7 #31 [hci0] 5.872524
> > > Read Encryption Key Size (0x05|0x0008) ncmd 1
> > > Status: Success (0x00)
> > > Handle: 256
> > > Key size: 3
> > >
> > > ////// WITHOUT PATCH //////
> > > > ACL Data RX: Handle 256 flags 0x02 dlen 12 #42 [hci0] 5.895023
> > > L2CAP: Connection Request (0x02) ident 3 len 4
> > > PSM: 4097 (0x1001)
> > > Source CID: 64
> > > < ACL Data TX: Handle 256 flags 0x00 dlen 16 #43 [hci0] 5.895213
> > > L2CAP: Connection Response (0x03) ident 3 len 8
> > > Destination CID: 64
> > > Source CID: 64
> > > Result: Connection successful (0x0000)
> > > Status: No further information available (0x0000)
> > >
> > > ////// WITH PATCH //////
> > > > ACL Data RX: Handle 256 flags 0x02 dlen 12 #42 [hci0] 4.887024
> > > L2CAP: Connection Request (0x02) ident 3 len 4
> > > PSM: 4097 (0x1001)
> > > Source CID: 64
> > > < ACL Data TX: Handle 256 flags 0x00 dlen 16 #43 [hci0] 4.887127
> > > L2CAP: Connection Response (0x03) ident 3 len 8
> > > Destination CID: 0
> > > Source CID: 64
> > > Result: Connection refused - security block (0x0003)
> > > Status: No further information available (0x0000)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Archie Pusaka <apusaka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Alain Michaud <alainm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Btw, it looks like the patch sent by Alex Lu with the title
> > > [PATCH] Bluetooth: Fix the vulnerable issue on enc key size
> > > also solves the exact same issue.
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > * Add btmon trace to the commit message
> > >
> > > net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c | 3 ++-
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > > index ade83e224567..b4fc0ad38aaa 100644
> > > --- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > > +++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > > @@ -4101,7 +4101,8 @@ static struct l2cap_chan *l2cap_connect(struct l2cap_conn *conn,
> > >
> > > /* Check if the ACL is secure enough (if not SDP) */
> > > if (psm != cpu_to_le16(L2CAP_PSM_SDP) &&
> > > - !hci_conn_check_link_mode(conn->hcon)) {
> > > + (!hci_conn_check_link_mode(conn->hcon) ||
> > > + !l2cap_check_enc_key_size(conn->hcon))) {
> >
> > I wonder if we couldn't incorporate the check of key size into
> > hci_conn_check_link_mode, like I said in the first patch checking the
> > enc key size should not be specific to L2CAP.
>
> Yes, I could move the check into hci_conn_check_link_mode.
> At first look, this function is also called by AMP which I am not
> familiar with. In addition, I found this patch which moves this check
> outside hci_conn, so I have my doubts there.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bluetooth/bluetooth-next.git/commit/?id=693cd8ce3f882524a5d06f7800dd8492411877b3
Right, I think we can have it as part of the hci_conn_check_link_mode,
that said it is perhaps better to have it as
hci_conn_check_enc_key_size instead as it is not L2CAP expecific.
Other than that it looks good to me.
> >
> > > conn->disc_reason = HCI_ERROR_AUTH_FAILURE;
> > > result = L2CAP_CR_SEC_BLOCK;
> > > goto response;
> > > --
> > > 2.28.0.681.g6f77f65b4e-goog
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
>
> Thanks,
> Archie
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
