3

Is there any material improvement/difference in BLE security controls/requirements in BLE 5.0 spec as compared to BLE 4.2 spec?

I skimmed through the BLE bits in the huge Bluetooth 5.0 core spec but that didn't help.

I am aware that there are significant security control improvements/additions in BLE 4.2 vs its predecessors BLE 4.0/4.1.

1

You'll find that most of these attacks still work in both BLE 4.2 and BLE 5.0 -- https://security.stackexchange.com/a/100444/140

As the last link in the comments alludes to, some BLE 5.0 is implemented in both firmware and hardware while others don't have the firmware capability to push a formerly-4.x device to 5.0.

It also notes that Bluetooth is commonly-imperfectly implemented.

  • 1
    I don't believe that is correct. For e.g. ble 4.2 introduced "le secure connection" pairing methods which mitigate attacks on link layer pairing through crackle. Crackle works on legacy pairing methods like just works and passkey. I need to know if Ble 5.0 has further improvements from 4.2 or is it primarily the same from a security point of view – ricky pan Jan 5 '18 at 10:01
  • You have all of the answers including that one within the links. Yes, 4.2 uses Passkey Entry protocol but can also use OOB. However, there are non-theoretical attacks (besides Crackle) against OOB and all of 4.2 (see this link -- pomcor.com/2015/06/03/has-bluetooth-become-secure -- and comments therein). 5.0 only appears to add more bandwidth and new battery-usage types -- not security-related. I could be wrong, but that's my analysis so far. – atdre Jan 5 '18 at 11:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.